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 http:// www.regulations.gov. The following link will take you directly to the docket: http://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 http://www.regulations.gov. The 
following link will take you directly to the docket: http://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