Reorganization of Sector Baltimore and Hampton Roads; Conforming Amendments, 73438-73441 [2013-29102]
Download as PDF
73438
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 235 / Friday, December 6, 2013 / Rules and Regulations
MAXIMUM USAGE LEVELS PERMITTED
Food (as served)
Percent
Function
Beverages, alcoholic .........................................................
Breakfast cereals, § 170.3(n)(4) of this chapter ...............
20.0 ....................................
6.0 ......................................
Cakes, brownies, pastries, biscuits, muffins, and cookies
Grain-based bars (e.g., breakfast bars, granola bars,
rice cereal bars).
Soups and soup mixes, § 170.3(n)(40) of this chapter,
except for soups and soup mixes containing meat or
poultry that are subject to regulation by the U.S. Department of Agriculture under the Federal Meat Inspection Act or the Poultry Products Inspection Act.
Food categories listed in § 184.1330 of this chapter, except for meat, poultry, and foods for which standards
of identity established under section 401 of the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act preclude the use
of acacia.
3.0 ......................................
35.0 ....................................
Thickener, emulsifier, or stabilizer.
Dietary fiber; emulsifier and emulsifier salt; flavoring
agent and adjuvant; formulation aid; processing aid;
stabilizer and thickener; surface-finishing agent;
texturizer.
Do.
Do.
Dated: December 2, 2013.
Susan M. Bernard,
Director, Office of Regulations, Policy and
Social Sciences, Center for Food Safety and
Applied Nutrition.
BILLING CODE 4160–01–P
DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND
SECURITY
Coast Guard
33 CFR Parts 3, 100, and 165
[Docket No. USCG–2013–0251]
RIN 1625–ZA32
Reorganization of Sector Baltimore
and Hampton Roads; Conforming
Amendments
Coast Guard, DHS.
Final rule.
AGENCY:
The Coast Guard is amending
the Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) to
reflect changes it has made to the
boundaries of Sector Baltimore’s and
Sector Hampton Roads’ Marine
Inspection Zone and Captain of the Port
Zones. These conforming amendments
are necessary to ensure the CFR
accurately reflects these boundary
changes that were made November 22,
2013. These amendments are not
expected to have a substantive impact
on the public.
DATES: This rule is effective December 6,
2013.
ADDRESSES: Materials mentioned in this
preamble as being available in the
docket are part of docket [USCG–2013–
0251] and are available for inspection or
copying at the Docket Management
maindgalligan on DSK5TPTVN1PROD with RULES
16:51 Dec 05, 2013
Dietary fiber.
Table of Acronyms
SUMMARY:
VerDate Mar<15>2010
Levels prescribed in
§ 184.1330 of this chapter.
Do.
Facility (M–30), U.S. Department of
Transportation, West Building Ground
Floor, Room W12–140, 1200 New Jersey
Avenue SE., Washington, DC 20590,
between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday
through Friday, except Federal holidays.
You may also find this docket, USCG–
2013–0251, online at https://
www.regulations.gov. The following link
will take you directly to the docket:
https://www.regulations.gov/
#!docketDetail;D=USCG-2013-0251.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: If
you have questions on this rule, call or
email Mr. Troy Luna, Fifth Coast Guard
District, Coast Guard; telephone 757–
398–7766, email Troy.T.Luna@uscg.mil.
If you have questions on viewing the
docket, call Renee V. Wright, Program
Manager, Docket Operations, telephone
202–366–9826.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
[FR Doc. 2013–29073 Filed 12–5–13; 8:45 am]
ACTION:
2.5 ......................................
Jkt 232001
COTP Captain of the Port
DHS Department of Homeland Security
FR Federal Register
NPRM Notice of Proposed Rulemaking
§ Section
U.S.C. United States Code
A. Regulatory History
We did not publish a notice of
proposed rulemaking (NPRM) before
this final rule. The Coast Guard finds
that this rule is exempt from notice and
comment rulemaking requirements
under 5 U.S.C. 553(b)(A) because the
changes it makes are conforming
amendments involving agency
organization. The Coast Guard also finds
good cause exists under 5 U.S.C.
553(b)(B) for not publishing an NPRM
because the changes will have no
substantive effect on the public, and
notice and comment are therefore
PO 00000
Frm 00060
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
unnecessary. For the same reasons, the
Coast Guard finds good cause under 5
U.S.C. 553(d)(3) to make the rule
effective fewer than 30 days after
publication in the Federal Register.
B. Basis and Purpose
On November 22, 2013, the Coast
Guard reassigned Station Ocean City 1
to Sector Baltimore and redefined the
boundary lines separating Sector
Baltimore and Sector Hampton Roads.
See Operating Facility Change Order
(OFCO) No. 024–13 Change One which
is available in the docket for this rule.
Under 14 U.S.C. 93, the Commandant of
the Coast Guard has authority to change
the location of Coast Guard shore
establishments. The previous
organization of Sector Baltimore and
Sector Hampton Roads is described and
reflected in regulations, which also
contain contact details and other
references to Sector Baltimore and
Hampton Roads. These conforming
amendments update those regulations
so that they contain current information.
C. Background
During 2011, Sector Baltimore
requested that the Coast Guard Fifth
District examine the feasibility of
shifting Operational Control of Ocean
City and Worcester County, Maryland
from Sector Hampton Roads to Sector
Baltimore. The analysis reviewed
potential workload increases to offshore
Search and Rescue, and increased
activities for Prevention, Response and
Logistics Departments at Sector
Baltimore.
The Coast Guard has approved the
shift of Ocean City and Worcester
County, Maryland Operational Control
to Sector Baltimore. This move is
intended to improve field-level
E:\FR\FM\06DER1.SGM
06DER1
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 235 / Friday, December 6, 2013 / Rules and Regulations
operations in the region; improve allhazard response challenges; and provide
a single interface point for state and
local officials.
D. Discussion of Changes
This rule amends 33 CFR part 3 to
reflect the new boundaries of Sector
Baltimore and Sector Hampton Roads.
The revised § 3.25–10 reflects the
updated boundaries of Sector Hampton
Roads Marine Inspection Zone and
COTP Zone boundary lines resulting
from the shift of Ocean City and
Worcester County, Maryland to Sector
Baltimore. The revised § 3.25–15 reflects
the updated boundaries of Sector
Baltimore’s Marine Inspection Zone and
COTP Zone boundary lines resulting in
the addition of Ocean City and
Worcester County, Maryland.
This rule also amends 33 CFR
100.501, Special Local Regulations;
Marine Events in the Fifth Coast Guard
District. Specifically, it amends the
Table to § 100.501, by moving the Ocean
City Maryland Offshore Grand Prix
marine event listed in the Coast Guard
Sector Hampton Roads—COTP Zone
portion of the table to the Coast Guard
Sector Baltimore—COTP Zone portion
of the table.
Finally, this rule amends 33 CFR
165.506, Safety Zones; Fifth Coast
Guard District Fireworks Displays.
Specifically, it amends the Table to
§ 165.506 by moving three safety zone
entries—
• North Atlantic Ocean, Ocean City,
MD, Safety Zone;
• Isle of Wight Bay, Ocean City, MD,
Safety Zone; and
• Assawoman Bay, Fenwick Island—
Ocean City, MD, Safety Zone, from the
Coast Guard Sector Hampton Roads—
COTP Zone portion of the table to the
Coast Guard Sector Baltimore—COTP
Zone portion of the table.
maindgalligan on DSK5TPTVN1PROD with RULES
E. Regulatory Analyses
We developed this rule after
considering numerous statutes and
executive orders related to rulemaking.
Below we summarize our analyses
based on these statutes and executive
orders.
1. Regulatory Planning and Review
This rule is not a significant
regulatory action under section 3(f) of
Executive Order 12866, Regulatory
Planning and Review, as supplemented
by Executive Order 13563, Improving
Regulation and Regulatory Review, and
does not require an assessment of
potential costs and benefits under
section 6(a)(3) of Executive Order 12866
or under section 1 of Executive Order
13563. The Office of Management and
VerDate Mar<15>2010
16:51 Dec 05, 2013
Jkt 232001
Budget has not reviewed it under those
Orders. Because this rule involves
internal agency organization and nonsubstantive changes, it will not impose
any costs on the public.
2. Impact on Small Entities
The Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980
(RFA), 5 U.S.C. 601–612, as amended,
requires federal agencies to consider the
potential impact of regulations on small
entities during rulemaking. 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
NPRM and therefore is exempt from the
requirements of the Regulatory
Flexibility Act. Although this rule is
exempt, we have considered its
potential impact on small entities and
found that it will not have a significant
economic impact on a substantial
number of small entities.
3. 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. 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 the person
listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION
CONTACT, above.
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). The
Coast Guard will not retaliate against
small entities that question or complain
about this rule or any policy or action
of the Coast Guard.
4. Collection of Information
This rule will not call for a new
collection of information under the
Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44
U.S.C. 3501–3520).
5. Federalism
A rule has implications for federalism
under Executive Order 13132,
PO 00000
Frm 00061
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
73439
Federalism, if it has a substantial direct
effect 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. We have
analyzed this rule under that Order and
determined that this rule does not have
implications for federalism.
6. 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 (adjusted for inflation) or
more in any one year. Though this rule
will not result in such an expenditure,
we do discuss the effects of this rule
elsewhere in this preamble.
7. Taking of Private Property
This rule will not cause a taking of
private property or otherwise have
taking implications under Executive
Order 12630, Governmental Actions and
Interference with Constitutionally
Protected Property Rights.
8. 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.
9. Protection of Children
We have analyzed this rule under
Executive Order 13045, Protection of
Children from Environmental Health
Risks and Safety Risks. This rule is not
an economically significant rule and
does not create an environmental risk to
health or risk to safety that may
disproportionately affect children.
10. Indian Tribal Governments
This rule does not have tribal
implications under Executive Order
13175, Consultation and Coordination
with Indian Tribal Governments,
because it does 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.
11. Energy Effects
This action is not a ‘‘significant
energy action’’ under Executive Order
13211, Actions Concerning Regulations
That Significantly Affect Energy Supply,
Distribution, or Use.
E:\FR\FM\06DER1.SGM
06DER1
73440
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 235 / Friday, December 6, 2013 / Rules and Regulations
12. Technical Standards
This rule does not use technical
standards. Therefore, we did not
consider the use of voluntary consensus
standards.
13. Environment
We have analyzed this rule under
Department of Homeland Security
Management Directive 023–01 and
Commandant Instruction M16475.lD,
which guide the Coast Guard in
complying with the National
Environmental Policy Act of 1969
(NEPA) (42 U.S.C. 4321–4370f), and
have determined that this action is one
of a category of actions that do not
individually or cumulatively have a
significant effect on the human
environment. This rule involves shifting
operational control of Coast Guard
activities within Ocean City and
Worcester County, Maryland from
Sector Hampton Roads to Sector
Baltimore. This rule is categorically
excluded from further review under
paragraph 34(b) of Figure 2–1 of the
Commandant Instruction.
List of Subjects
33 CFR Part 3
Organization and functions
(Government agencies).
33 CFR Part 100
Marine safety, Navigation (water),
Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements, and Waterways.
33 CFR Part 165
Harbors, Marine safety, Navigation
(water), Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements, Security measures, and
Waterways.
For the reasons discussed in the
preamble, the Coast Guard amends 33
CFR parts 3, 100, and 165 as follows:
PART 3—COAST GUARD AREAS,
DISTRICTS, SECTORS, MARINE
INSPECTION ZONES, AND CAPTAIN
OF THE PORT ZONES
1. The authority citation for part 3 is
revised to read as follows:
■
Authority: 14 U.S.C. 92 & 93; Pub. L. 107–
296, 116 Stat. 2135; Department of Homeland
Security Delegation No. 0170.1, para. 2(23).
maindgalligan on DSK5TPTVN1PROD with RULES
■
2. Revise § 3.25–10 to read as follows:
§ 3.25–10 Sector Hampton Roads Marine
Inspection Zone and Captain of the Port
Zone.
Sector Hampton Roads’ office is
located in Portsmouth, VA. The
boundaries of Sector Hampton Roads’
Marine Inspection and Captain of the
Port Zone start at a point on the
VerDate Mar<15>2010
16:51 Dec 05, 2013
Jkt 232001
Virginia-Maryland boundary at a point
38° 01′36″ N latitude, 75°14′34″ W
longitude, thence south east to a point
37°19′14″ N latitude, 72°13′13″ W
longitude; thence east to the outermost
extent of the EEZ at a point 37°19′14″
N latitude, 71°02′54″ W longitude;
thence south along the outermost extent
of the EEZ to a point 36°33′00″ N
latitude, 71°29′34″ W longitude; thence
west to the Virginia-North Carolina
boundary at a point 36°33′00″ N
latitude, 75°52′00″ W longitude; thence
west along the Virginia-North Carolina
boundary to the intersection of VirginiaNorth Carolina-Tennessee at a point
36°35′17″ N latitude, 81°40′38″ W
longitude; thence north and west along
the Virginia-Tennessee boundary to the
intersection of Virginia-TennesseeKentucky at a point 36°36′03″ N
latitude, 83°40′31″ W longitude; thence
northeast along the Virginia State
boundary to the intersection of the
Virginia-West Virginia State boundaries
at a point 39°07′57″ N latitude,
77°49′42″ W longitude; thence
southwest along the Loudoun County,
VA boundary to the intersection with
Fauquier County, VA at a point
39°00′50″ N latitude, 77°57′43″ W
longitude; thence east along the
Loudoun County, VA boundary to the
intersection with Prince William
County, VA boundary at a point
38°56′33″ N latitude, 77°39′18″ W
longitude; thence south along the Prince
William and Fauquier County VA
boundaries to the intersection of
Fauquier, Prince William, and Stafford
County, VA at a point 38°33′24″ N
latitude, 77°31′54″ W longitude; thence
east along the Prince William and
Stafford County, VA boundaries to the
western bank of the Potomac River at a
point 38°30′13″ N latitude, 77°18′00″ W
longitude; thence south along the
Stafford County, VA boundary to a point
38°22′30″ N latitude, 77°18′14″ W
longitude; thence south and east along
the boundary between the southern
bank of the Potomac River and Stafford,
King George, Westmoreland, and
Northumberland Counties in Virginia to
a point 37°53′11″ N latitude, 76°14′15″
W longitude; thence east along the
Maryland-Virginia boundary as it
proceeds across the Chesapeake Bay and
Delmarva Peninsula to the point of
origin at 38°01′36″ N latitude, 75°14′34″
W longitude.
■ 3. Revise § 3.25–15 to read as follows:
§ 3.25–15 Sector Baltimore Marine
Inspection Zone and Captain of the Port
Zone.
Sector Baltimore’s office is located in
Baltimore, MD. The boundaries of
Sector Baltimore’s Marine Inspection
PO 00000
Frm 00062
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
Zone and Captain of the Port Zone start
at a point 38°01′36″ N latitude,
75°14′34″ W longitude; thence south
east to a point 37°19′14″ N latitude,
72°13′13″ W longitude; thence north
west to a point at 38°26′25″ N latitude,
74°26′46″ W longitude; thence west to
the intersection of the MarylandDelaware boundary and the coast at a
point 38°27′03″ N latitude, 75°02′ 55″ W
longitude; thence west to a point
38°27′15″ N latitude, 75°30′00″ W
longitude on the Delaware-Maryland
boundary; thence proceeding along the
Delaware-Maryland boundary west to a
point at 38°27′37″ N latitude, 75°41′35″
W longitude; thence proceeding north to
the Maryland-Delaware-Pennsylvania
boundary at a point 39°43′22″ N
latitude, 75°47′17″ W longitude; thence
west along the Pennsylvania-Maryland
boundary to the PennsylvaniaMaryland-West Virginia boundary at a
point 39°43′16″ N latitude, 79°28′36″ W
longitude; thence south and east along
the Maryland-West Virginia boundary to
the intersection of the MarylandVirginia-West Virginia boundaries at a
point 39°19′17″ N latitude, 77°43′08″ W
longitude; thence southwest along the
Loudoun County, VA boundary to the
intersection with Fauquier County, VA
at a point 39°00′50″ N latitude,
77°57′43″ W longitude; thence east
along the Loudoun County, VA
boundary to the intersection with Prince
William County, VA boundary at a point
38°56′33″ N latitude, 77°39′18″ W
longitude; thence south along the Prince
William and Fauquier County VA
boundaries to the intersection of
Fauquier, Prince William, and Stafford
County, VA at a point 38°33′24″ N
latitude, 77°31′54’’ W longitude; thence
south east to a point 38°20′30’’ N
latitude, 77°18′14’’ W longitude; thence
south and east along the boundary
between the southern bank of the
Potomac River and Stafford, King
George, Westmoreland, and
Northumberland Counties in Virginia to
a point 37°53′11″ N latitude, 76°14′15″
W longitude; thence east along the
Maryland-Virginia boundary as it
proceeds across the Chesapeake Bay and
Delmarva Peninsula to the point of
origin at 38°01′36″ N latitude, 75°14′34″
W longitude.
PART 100—SAFETY OF LIFE ON
NAVIGABLE WATERS
4. The authority citation for part 100
continues to read as follows:
■
Authority: 33 U.S.C. 1233.
§ 100.501
[Amended]
5. In § 100.501, amend the Table to
§ 100.501 by:
■
E:\FR\FM\06DER1.SGM
06DER1
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 235 / Friday, December 6, 2013 / Rules and Regulations
a. Redesignating entry (c.)4 as (b.)21,
and
■ b. Redesignating entries (c.)5 through
(c.)12, as (c.)4 through (c.)11,
respectively.
■
PART 165—REGULATED NAVIGATION
AREAS AND LIMITED ACCESS AREAS
6. The authority citation for part 165
continues to read as follows:
■
Authority: 33 U.S.C. 1231; 46 U.S.C.
Chapter 701, 3306, 3703; 50 U.S.C. 191, 195;
33 CFR 1.05–1, 6.04–1, 6.04–6, and 160.5;
Pub. L. 107–295, 116 Stat. 2064; Department
of Homeland Security Delegation No. 0170.1.
§ 165.506
[Amended]
7. In § 165.506, amend the Table to
§ 165.506 by:
■ a. Redesignating entries (c.)1, (c.)2,
and (c.)3, as (b.)23, (b.)24, and (b.)25,
respectively, and
■ b. Redesignating entries (c.)4 through
(c.)24, as (c.)1 through (c.)21,
respectively.
■
Dated: December 2, 2013.
Katia Cervoni,
Interim Chief, Office of Regulations and
Administrative Law, U.S. Coast Guard.
[FR Doc. 2013–29102 Filed 12–5–13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 9110–04–P
DEPARTMENT OF VETERANS
AFFAIRS
38 CFR Part 59
RIN 2900–AO60
Grants to States for Construction or
Acquisition of State Homes
Department of Veterans Affairs.
Final rule.
AGENCY:
ACTION:
This rule adopts as final,
without change, an interim final rule
amending the Department of Veterans
Affairs (VA) regulations governing
prioritization of State applications for
VA grants for the construction or
acquisition of State home facilities that
furnish domiciliary, nursing home, or
adult day health care to veterans. As
amended, the regulation gives
preference to State applications that
would use grant funds solely or
primarily (under certain circumstances)
to remedy cited life or safety
deficiencies. This rulemaking also
makes certain necessary technical
amendments to regulations governing
State home grants.
DATES: Effective Date: This final rule is
effective December 6, 2013.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Edward A. Litvin, Director, Capital
maindgalligan on DSK5TPTVN1PROD with RULES
SUMMARY:
VerDate Mar<15>2010
16:51 Dec 05, 2013
Jkt 232001
Asset Management and Support
(10NA5), Veterans Health
Administration, 810 Vermont Avenue
NW., Washington, DC 20420, (202) 632–
8571. (This is not a toll-free number.)
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: In an
interim final rule published in the
Federal Register on April 10, 2013, at
78 FR 21262, VA amended 38 CFR
59.50, which contains VA’s regulations
governing applications by States for
grant funds to support the acquisition,
construction, expansion, remodeling or
alteration by States of State home
facilities that furnish domiciliary,
nursing home, or adult day health care
to veterans, as authorized by 38 U.S.C.
8135. The interim final rule changed the
way that VA prioritizes the applications
for the construction grant funds each
fiscal year. As amended, the regulation
gives preference to State applications
that would use grant funds solely or
primarily (under certain circumstances)
to remedy cited life or safety
deficiencies. This rulemaking also
makes certain necessary technical
amendments. The interim final rule was
effective immediately upon publication
and provided a 60-day comment period,
which ended on June 10, 2013. VA
received no public comments and
therefore makes no changes to the
regulation.
Based on the rationale set forth in the
interim final rule, VA is adopting the
interim final rule as a final rule with no
changes.
Administrative Procedure Act
In accordance with 5 U.S.C. 553(b)(B)
and (d)(3), the Secretary of Veterans
Affairs concluded that there was good
cause to publish this rule without prior
opportunity for public comment and to
publish this rule with an immediate
effective date. The Secretary found that
it was contrary to the public interest to
delay this rule for the purpose of
soliciting advance public comment or to
have a delayed effective date because
this regulation will help VA ensure that
veterans’ lives and safety are protected
in State homes.
Effect of Rulemaking
Title 38 of the Code of Federal
Regulations, as revised by this final
rulemaking, represents VA’s
implementation of its legal authority on
this subject. Other than future
amendments to this regulation or
governing statutes, no contrary guidance
or procedures are authorized. All
existing or subsequent VA guidance
must be read to conform with this
rulemaking if possible or, if not
possible, such guidance is superseded
by this rulemaking.
PO 00000
Frm 00063
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
73441
Paperwork Reduction Act
This final rule contains no provisions
constituting a collection of information
under the Paperwork Reduction Act of
1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501–3521).
Regulatory Flexibility Act
The Secretary hereby certifies that
this final rule will not have a significant
economic impact on a substantial
number of small entities as they are
defined in the Regulatory Flexibility
Act, 5 U.S.C. 601–612. This final rule
will directly affect only States and will
not directly affect small entities.
Therefore, pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 605(b),
this rulemaking is exempt from the
initial and final regulatory flexibility
analysis requirements of 5 U.S.C. 603
and 604.
Executive Order 12866 and 13563
Executive Orders 12866 and 13563
direct agencies to assess the costs and
benefits of available regulatory
alternatives and, when regulation is
necessary, to select regulatory
approaches that maximize net benefits
(including potential economic,
environmental, public health and safety
effects, and other advantages;
distributive impacts; and equity).
Executive Order 13563 (Improving
Regulation and Regulatory Review)
emphasizes the importance of
quantifying both costs and benefits,
reducing costs, harmonizing rules, and
promoting flexibility. Executive Order
12866 (Regulatory Planning and
Review) defines a ‘‘significant
regulatory action,’’ requiring review by
the Office of Management and Budget
(OMB) unless OMB waives such review,
as ‘‘any regulatory action that is likely
to result in a rule that may: (1) Have an
annual effect on the economy of $100
million or more or adversely affect in a
material way the economy, a sector of
the economy, productivity, competition,
jobs, the environment, public health or
safety, or State, local, or tribal
governments or communities; (2) Create
a serious inconsistency or otherwise
interfere with an action taken or
planned by another agency; (3)
Materially alter the budgetary impact of
entitlements, grants, user fees, or loan
programs or the rights and obligations of
recipients thereof; or (4) Raise novel
legal or policy issues arising out of legal
mandates, the President’s priorities, or
the principles set forth in this Executive
Order.’’
VA has examined the economic,
interagency, budgetary, legal, and policy
implications of this regulatory action,
and it has been determined not to be a
significant regulatory action under
E:\FR\FM\06DER1.SGM
06DER1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 78, Number 235 (Friday, December 6, 2013)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 73438-73441]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2013-29102]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY
Coast Guard
33 CFR Parts 3, 100, and 165
[Docket No. USCG-2013-0251]
RIN 1625-ZA32
Reorganization of Sector Baltimore and Hampton Roads; Conforming
Amendments
AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS.
ACTION: Final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Coast Guard is amending the Code of Federal Regulations
(CFR) to reflect changes it has made to the boundaries of Sector
Baltimore's and Sector Hampton Roads' Marine Inspection Zone and
Captain of the Port Zones. These conforming amendments are necessary to
ensure the CFR accurately reflects these boundary changes that were
made November 22, 2013. These amendments are not expected to have a
substantive impact on the public.
DATES: This rule is effective December 6, 2013.
ADDRESSES: Materials mentioned in this preamble as being available in
the docket are part of docket [USCG-2013-0251] and are available for
inspection or copying at the Docket Management Facility (M-30), U.S.
Department of Transportation, West Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140,
1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., Washington, DC 20590, between 9 a.m. and 5
p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays. You may also find
this docket, USCG-2013-0251, online at https://www.regulations.gov. The
following link will take you directly to the docket: https://www.regulations.gov/#!docketDetail;D=USCG-2013-0251.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: If you have questions on this rule,
call or email Mr. Troy Luna, Fifth Coast Guard District, Coast Guard;
telephone 757-398-7766, email Troy.T.Luna@uscg.mil. If you have
questions on viewing the docket, call Renee V. Wright, Program Manager,
Docket Operations, telephone 202-366-9826.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Table of Acronyms
COTP Captain of the Port
DHS Department of Homeland Security
FR Federal Register
NPRM Notice of Proposed Rulemaking
Sec. Section
U.S.C. United States Code
A. Regulatory History
We did not publish a notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) before
this final rule. The Coast Guard finds that this rule is exempt from
notice and comment rulemaking requirements under 5 U.S.C. 553(b)(A)
because the changes it makes are conforming amendments involving agency
organization. The Coast Guard also finds good cause exists under 5
U.S.C. 553(b)(B) for not publishing an NPRM because the changes will
have no substantive effect on the public, and notice and comment are
therefore unnecessary. For the same reasons, the Coast Guard finds good
cause under 5 U.S.C. 553(d)(3) to make the rule effective fewer than 30
days after publication in the Federal Register.
B. Basis and Purpose
On November 22, 2013, the Coast Guard reassigned Station Ocean City
1 to Sector Baltimore and redefined the boundary lines separating
Sector Baltimore and Sector Hampton Roads. See Operating Facility
Change Order (OFCO) No. 024-13 Change One which is available in the
docket for this rule. Under 14 U.S.C. 93, the Commandant of the Coast
Guard has authority to change the location of Coast Guard shore
establishments. The previous organization of Sector Baltimore and
Sector Hampton Roads is described and reflected in regulations, which
also contain contact details and other references to Sector Baltimore
and Hampton Roads. These conforming amendments update those regulations
so that they contain current information.
C. Background
During 2011, Sector Baltimore requested that the Coast Guard Fifth
District examine the feasibility of shifting Operational Control of
Ocean City and Worcester County, Maryland from Sector Hampton Roads to
Sector Baltimore. The analysis reviewed potential workload increases to
offshore Search and Rescue, and increased activities for Prevention,
Response and Logistics Departments at Sector Baltimore.
The Coast Guard has approved the shift of Ocean City and Worcester
County, Maryland Operational Control to Sector Baltimore. This move is
intended to improve field-level
[[Page 73439]]
operations in the region; improve all-hazard response challenges; and
provide a single interface point for state and local officials.
D. Discussion of Changes
This rule amends 33 CFR part 3 to reflect the new boundaries of
Sector Baltimore and Sector Hampton Roads. The revised Sec. 3.25-10
reflects the updated boundaries of Sector Hampton Roads Marine
Inspection Zone and COTP Zone boundary lines resulting from the shift
of Ocean City and Worcester County, Maryland to Sector Baltimore. The
revised Sec. 3.25-15 reflects the updated boundaries of Sector
Baltimore's Marine Inspection Zone and COTP Zone boundary lines
resulting in the addition of Ocean City and Worcester County, Maryland.
This rule also amends 33 CFR 100.501, Special Local Regulations;
Marine Events in the Fifth Coast Guard District. Specifically, it
amends the Table to Sec. 100.501, by moving the Ocean City Maryland
Offshore Grand Prix marine event listed in the Coast Guard Sector
Hampton Roads--COTP Zone portion of the table to the Coast Guard Sector
Baltimore--COTP Zone portion of the table.
Finally, this rule amends 33 CFR 165.506, Safety Zones; Fifth Coast
Guard District Fireworks Displays. Specifically, it amends the Table to
Sec. 165.506 by moving three safety zone entries--
North Atlantic Ocean, Ocean City, MD, Safety Zone;
Isle of Wight Bay, Ocean City, MD, Safety Zone; and
Assawoman Bay, Fenwick Island--Ocean City, MD, Safety
Zone, from the Coast Guard Sector Hampton Roads--COTP Zone portion of
the table to the Coast Guard Sector Baltimore--COTP Zone portion of the
table.
E. Regulatory Analyses
We developed this rule after considering numerous statutes and
executive orders related to rulemaking. Below we summarize our analyses
based on these statutes and executive orders.
1. Regulatory Planning and Review
This rule is not a significant regulatory action under section 3(f)
of Executive Order 12866, Regulatory Planning and Review, as
supplemented by Executive Order 13563, Improving Regulation and
Regulatory Review, and does not require an assessment of potential
costs and benefits under section 6(a)(3) of Executive Order 12866 or
under section 1 of Executive Order 13563. The Office of Management and
Budget has not reviewed it under those Orders. Because this rule
involves internal agency organization and non-substantive changes, it
will not impose any costs on the public.
2. Impact on Small Entities
The Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980 (RFA), 5 U.S.C. 601-612, as
amended, requires federal agencies to consider the potential impact of
regulations on small entities during rulemaking. 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 NPRM and therefore is
exempt from the requirements of the Regulatory Flexibility Act.
Although this rule is exempt, we have considered its potential impact
on small entities and found that it will not have a significant
economic impact on a substantial number of small entities.
3. 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. 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 the person listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT,
above.
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). The Coast Guard will not retaliate against small
entities that question or complain about this rule or any policy or
action of the Coast Guard.
4. Collection of Information
This rule will not call for a new collection of information under
the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501-3520).
5. Federalism
A rule has implications for federalism under Executive Order 13132,
Federalism, if it has a substantial direct effect 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. We have analyzed this rule under that Order and determined
that this rule does not have implications for federalism.
6. 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 (adjusted for
inflation) or more in any one year. Though this rule will not result in
such an expenditure, we do discuss the effects of this rule elsewhere
in this preamble.
7. Taking of Private Property
This rule will not cause a taking of private property or otherwise
have taking implications under Executive Order 12630, Governmental
Actions and Interference with Constitutionally Protected Property
Rights.
8. 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.
9. Protection of Children
We have analyzed this rule under Executive Order 13045, Protection
of Children from Environmental Health Risks and Safety Risks. This rule
is not an economically significant rule and does not create an
environmental risk to health or risk to safety that may
disproportionately affect children.
10. Indian Tribal Governments
This rule does not have tribal implications under Executive Order
13175, Consultation and Coordination with Indian Tribal Governments,
because it does 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.
11. Energy Effects
This action is not a ``significant energy action'' under Executive
Order 13211, Actions Concerning Regulations That Significantly Affect
Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use.
[[Page 73440]]
12. Technical Standards
This rule does not use technical standards. Therefore, we did not
consider the use of voluntary consensus standards.
13. Environment
We have analyzed this rule under Department of Homeland Security
Management Directive 023-01 and Commandant Instruction M16475.lD, which
guide the Coast Guard in complying with the National Environmental
Policy Act of 1969 (NEPA) (42 U.S.C. 4321-4370f), and have determined
that this action is one of a category of actions that do not
individually or cumulatively have a significant effect on the human
environment. This rule involves shifting operational control of Coast
Guard activities within Ocean City and Worcester County, Maryland from
Sector Hampton Roads to Sector Baltimore. This rule is categorically
excluded from further review under paragraph 34(b) of Figure 2-1 of the
Commandant Instruction.
List of Subjects
33 CFR Part 3
Organization and functions (Government agencies).
33 CFR Part 100
Marine safety, Navigation (water), Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements, and Waterways.
33 CFR Part 165
Harbors, Marine safety, Navigation (water), Reporting and
recordkeeping requirements, Security measures, and Waterways.
For the reasons discussed in the preamble, the Coast Guard amends
33 CFR parts 3, 100, and 165 as follows:
PART 3--COAST GUARD AREAS, DISTRICTS, SECTORS, MARINE INSPECTION
ZONES, AND CAPTAIN OF THE PORT ZONES
0
1. The authority citation for part 3 is revised to read as follows:
Authority: 14 U.S.C. 92 & 93; Pub. L. 107-296, 116 Stat. 2135;
Department of Homeland Security Delegation No. 0170.1, para. 2(23).
0
2. Revise Sec. 3.25-10 to read as follows:
Sec. 3.25-10 Sector Hampton Roads Marine Inspection Zone and Captain
of the Port Zone.
Sector Hampton Roads' office is located in Portsmouth, VA. The
boundaries of Sector Hampton Roads' Marine Inspection and Captain of
the Port Zone start at a point on the Virginia-Maryland boundary at a
point 38[deg] 01'36'' N latitude, 75[deg]14'34'' W longitude, thence
south east to a point 37[deg]19'14'' N latitude, 72[deg]13'13'' W
longitude; thence east to the outermost extent of the EEZ at a point
37[deg]19'14'' N latitude, 71[deg]02'54'' W longitude; thence south
along the outermost extent of the EEZ to a point 36[deg]33'00'' N
latitude, 71[deg]29'34'' W longitude; thence west to the Virginia-North
Carolina boundary at a point 36[deg]33'00'' N latitude, 75[deg]52'00''
W longitude; thence west along the Virginia-North Carolina boundary to
the intersection of Virginia-North Carolina-Tennessee at a point
36[deg]35'17'' N latitude, 81[deg]40'38'' W longitude; thence north and
west along the Virginia-Tennessee boundary to the intersection of
Virginia-Tennessee-Kentucky at a point 36[deg]36'03'' N latitude,
83[deg]40'31'' W longitude; thence northeast along the Virginia State
boundary to the intersection of the Virginia-West Virginia State
boundaries at a point 39[deg]07'57'' N latitude, 77[deg]49'42'' W
longitude; thence southwest along the Loudoun County, VA boundary to
the intersection with Fauquier County, VA at a point 39[deg]00'50'' N
latitude, 77[deg]57'43'' W longitude; thence east along the Loudoun
County, VA boundary to the intersection with Prince William County, VA
boundary at a point 38[deg]56'33'' N latitude, 77[deg]39'18'' W
longitude; thence south along the Prince William and Fauquier County VA
boundaries to the intersection of Fauquier, Prince William, and
Stafford County, VA at a point 38[deg]33'24'' N latitude,
77[deg]31'54'' W longitude; thence east along the Prince William and
Stafford County, VA boundaries to the western bank of the Potomac River
at a point 38[deg]30'13'' N latitude, 77[deg]18'00'' W longitude;
thence south along the Stafford County, VA boundary to a point
38[deg]22'30'' N latitude, 77[deg]18'14'' W longitude; thence south and
east along the boundary between the southern bank of the Potomac River
and Stafford, King George, Westmoreland, and Northumberland Counties in
Virginia to a point 37[deg]53'11'' N latitude, 76[deg]14'15'' W
longitude; thence east along the Maryland-Virginia boundary as it
proceeds across the Chesapeake Bay and Delmarva Peninsula to the point
of origin at 38[deg]01'36'' N latitude, 75[deg]14'34'' W longitude.
0
3. Revise Sec. 3.25-15 to read as follows:
Sec. 3.25-15 Sector Baltimore Marine Inspection Zone and Captain of
the Port Zone.
Sector Baltimore's office is located in Baltimore, MD. The
boundaries of Sector Baltimore's Marine Inspection Zone and Captain of
the Port Zone start at a point 38[deg]01'36'' N latitude,
75[deg]14'34'' W longitude; thence south east to a point 37[deg]19'14''
N latitude, 72[deg]13'13'' W longitude; thence north west to a point at
38[deg]26'25'' N latitude, 74[deg]26'46'' W longitude; thence west to
the intersection of the Maryland-Delaware boundary and the coast at a
point 38[deg]27'03'' N latitude, 75[deg]02' 55'' W longitude; thence
west to a point 38[deg]27'15'' N latitude, 75[deg]30'00'' W longitude
on the Delaware-Maryland boundary; thence proceeding along the
Delaware-Maryland boundary west to a point at 38[deg]27'37'' N
latitude, 75[deg]41'35'' W longitude; thence proceeding north to the
Maryland-Delaware-Pennsylvania boundary at a point 39[deg]43'22'' N
latitude, 75[deg]47'17'' W longitude; thence west along the
Pennsylvania-Maryland boundary to the Pennsylvania-Maryland-West
Virginia boundary at a point 39[deg]43'16'' N latitude, 79[deg]28'36''
W longitude; thence south and east along the Maryland-West Virginia
boundary to the intersection of the Maryland-Virginia-West Virginia
boundaries at a point 39[deg]19'17'' N latitude, 77[deg]43'08'' W
longitude; thence southwest along the Loudoun County, VA boundary to
the intersection with Fauquier County, VA at a point 39[deg]00'50'' N
latitude, 77[deg]57'43'' W longitude; thence east along the Loudoun
County, VA boundary to the intersection with Prince William County, VA
boundary at a point 38[deg]56'33'' N latitude, 77[deg]39'18'' W
longitude; thence south along the Prince William and Fauquier County VA
boundaries to the intersection of Fauquier, Prince William, and
Stafford County, VA at a point 38[deg]33'24'' N latitude,
77[deg]31'54'' W longitude; thence south east to a point 38[deg]20'30''
N latitude, 77[deg]18'14'' W longitude; thence south and east along the
boundary between the southern bank of the Potomac River and Stafford,
King George, Westmoreland, and Northumberland Counties in Virginia to a
point 37[deg]53'11'' N latitude, 76[deg]14'15'' W longitude; thence
east along the Maryland-Virginia boundary as it proceeds across the
Chesapeake Bay and Delmarva Peninsula to the point of origin at
38[deg]01'36'' N latitude, 75[deg]14'34'' W longitude.
PART 100--SAFETY OF LIFE ON NAVIGABLE WATERS
0
4. The authority citation for part 100 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 33 U.S.C. 1233.
Sec. 100.501 [Amended]
0
5. In Sec. 100.501, amend the Table to Sec. 100.501 by:
[[Page 73441]]
0
a. Redesignating entry (c.)4 as (b.)21, and
0
b. Redesignating entries (c.)5 through (c.)12, as (c.)4 through (c.)11,
respectively.
PART 165--REGULATED NAVIGATION AREAS AND LIMITED ACCESS AREAS
0
6. The authority citation for part 165 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 33 U.S.C. 1231; 46 U.S.C. Chapter 701, 3306, 3703;
50 U.S.C. 191, 195; 33 CFR 1.05-1, 6.04-1, 6.04-6, and 160.5; Pub.
L. 107-295, 116 Stat. 2064; Department of Homeland Security
Delegation No. 0170.1.
Sec. 165.506 [Amended]
0
7. In Sec. 165.506, amend the Table to Sec. 165.506 by:
0
a. Redesignating entries (c.)1, (c.)2, and (c.)3, as (b.)23, (b.)24,
and (b.)25, respectively, and
0
b. Redesignating entries (c.)4 through (c.)24, as (c.)1 through (c.)21,
respectively.
Dated: December 2, 2013.
Katia Cervoni,
Interim Chief, Office of Regulations and Administrative Law, U.S. Coast
Guard.
[FR Doc. 2013-29102 Filed 12-5-13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 9110-04-P