Anchorage; Ashley River Anchorage, Ashley River, Charleston, SC, 26195-26198 [2014-10377]

Download as PDF Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 88 / Wednesday, May 7, 2014 / Proposed Rules administrator if the plan provides a notice in accordance with the model certificate authorized by the Secretary, appropriately modified and supplemented as necessary, consistent with guidance issued by the Secretary. Use of the model notice is not mandatory. The model notice reflects the requirements of this section as they would apply to single-employer group health plans and must be modified if used to provide notice with respect to other types of group health plans, such as multiemployer plans or plans established and maintained by employee organizations for their members. In order to use the model notice, administrators must appropriately add relevant information where indicated in the model notice, select among alternative language, and supplement the model notice to reflect applicable plan provisions. Items of information that are not applicable to a particular plan may be deleted. Use of the model notice, appropriately modified and supplemented, will be deemed to satisfy the notice content requirements of paragraph (b)(4) of this section. * * * * * Signed this 1st day of May, 2014. Phyllis C. Borzi, Assistant Secretary, Employee Benefits Security Administration, Department of Labor. [FR Doc. 2014–10416 Filed 5–2–14; 11:15 am] BILLING CODE 4510–29–P DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY Coast Guard 33 CFR Part 100 [Docket No. USCG–2014–0108] RIN 1625–AA08 Special Local Regulations for Marine Events, Choptank River; Between Cambridge, MD and Trappe, MD Coast Guard, DHS. Proposed rule; withdrawal. AGENCY: ACTION: The Coast Guard is withdrawing its proposed rule concerning amendments to the regattas and marine parades regulations. The rulemaking was intended to establish special local regulations during the swim segment of the ‘‘Choptank Bridge Swim,’’ a marine event to be held on the waters of Choptank River between Cambridge, MD and Trappe, MD on May 10, 2014. The Coast Guard was notified mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS SUMMARY: VerDate Mar<15>2010 16:17 May 06, 2014 Jkt 232001 on April 9, 2014 that the event had been cancelled. DATES: The proposed rule is withdrawn on May 7, 2014. ADDRESSES: The docket for this withdrawn rulemaking is available for inspection at the Docket Management Facility (M–30), U.S. Department of Transportation, West Building Ground Floor, Room W12–140, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except federal holidays. You may also find this docket on the Internet by going to http:// www.regulations.gov, inserting USCG 2014–0108 in the ‘‘Keyword’’ box, and then clicking ‘‘Search.’’ FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: If you have questions about this notice, call or email Mr. Ronald Houck, Waterways Management Division, Sector Baltimore, MD, U.S. Coast Guard; telephone 410–576–2674, email Ronald.L.Houck@uscg.mil. If you have questions on viewing material in the docket, call Cheryl Collins, Program Manager, Docket Operations, telephone 202–366–9826. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Background On March 18, 2014, we published a notice of proposed rulemaking entitled ‘‘Special Local Regulations for Marine Events, Choptank River; Between Cambridge, MD and Trappe, MD’’ in the Federal Register (79 FR 15068). The rulemaking concerned the Coast Guard’s proposal to establish temporary special local regulations on specified waters of Choptank River between Cambridge, MD and Trappe, MD, effective from 9 a.m. to 3 p.m. on May 20, 2014. The regulated area included all waters of the Choptank River, from shoreline to shoreline, within and area bounded on the east by a line drawn from latitude 38°35′13″ N, longitude 076°02′33″ W, thence south to latitude 38°33′50″ N, longitude 076°02′07″ W, and bounded on the west by a line drawn from latitude 38°35′37″ N, longitude 076°03′09″ W, thence south to latitude 38°34′25″ N, longitude 076°04′05″ W, located at Cambridge, MD. The regulations were needed to temporarily restrict vessel traffic during the event to provide for the safety of participants, spectators and other transiting vessels. Withdrawal The Coast Guard is withdrawing this rulemaking because the event has been cancelled. Authority We issue this notice of withdrawal under the authority of 33 U.S.C. 1233. PO 00000 Frm 00006 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 26195 Dated: April 16, 2014. M.M. Dean, Commander, U.S. Coast Guard, Acting Captain of the Port Baltimore. [FR Doc. 2014–10381 Filed 5–6–14; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 9110–04–P DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY Coast Guard 33 CFR Part 110 [Docket Number USCG–2013–0819] RIN 1625–AA01 Anchorage; Ashley River Anchorage, Ashley River, Charleston, SC Coast Guard, DHS. Notice of proposed rulemaking. AGENCY: ACTION: The Coast Guard proposes to modify the special anchorage area located on the Ashley River, in Charleston, SC. The change is necessary to accommodate the expansion of the Charleston City Marina and meet the requirements of 33 CFR 109.10. The change will ensure that there is sufficient space to accommodate vessels desiring to anchor in the area, while allowing a sufficient buffer between the federal channel and special anchorage. DATES: Comments and related material must be received by the Coast Guard on or before June 6, 2014. Requests for public meetings must be received by the Coast Guard on or before June 6, 2014. ADDRESSES: You may submit comments identified by docket number using any one of the following methods: (1) Federal eRulemaking Portal: http://www.regulations.gov. (2) Fax: 202–493–2251. (3) Mail or Delivery: Docket Management Facility (M–30), U.S. Department of Transportation, West Building Ground Floor, Room W12–140, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., Washington, DC 20590–0001. Deliveries accepted between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except federal holidays. The telephone number is 202– 366–9329. See the ‘‘Public Participation and Request for Comments’’ portion of the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section below for further instructions on submitting comments. To avoid duplication, please use only one of these three methods. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: If you have questions on this rule, call or email Chief Warrant Officer Christopher Ruleman, Sector Charleston Office of Waterways Management, Coast Guard; SUMMARY: E:\FR\FM\07MYP1.SGM 07MYP1 26196 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 88 / Wednesday, May 7, 2014 / Proposed Rules telephone (843)–740–3184, email Christopher.L.Ruleman@uscg.mil. If you have questions on viewing or submitting material to the docket, call Cheryl Collins, Program Manager, Docket Operations, telephone (202) 366–9826. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Table of Acronyms DHS Department of Homeland Security FR Federal Register NPRM Notice of Proposed Rulemaking mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS A. Public Participation and Request for Comments We encourage you to participate in this rulemaking by submitting comments and related materials. All comments received will be posted without change to http:// www.regulations.gov and will include any personal information you have provided. 1. Submitting Comments If you submit a comment, please include the docket number for this rulemaking, indicate the specific section of this document to which each comment applies, and provide a reason for each suggestion or recommendation. You may submit your comments and material online at http:// www.regulations.gov, or by fax, mail, or hand delivery, but please use only one of these means. If you submit a comment online, it will be considered received by the Coast Guard when you successfully transmit the comment. If you fax, hand deliver, or mail your comment, it will be considered as having been received by the Coast Guard when it is received at the Docket Management Facility. We recommend that you include your name and a mailing address, an email address, or a telephone number in the body of your document so that we can contact you if we have questions regarding your submission. To submit your comment online, go to http://www.regulations.gov, type the docket number USCG–2013–0819 in the ‘‘SEARCH’’ box and click ‘‘SEARCH.’’ Click on ‘‘Submit a Comment’’ on the line associated with this rulemaking. If you submit your comments by mail or hand delivery, submit them in an unbound format, no larger than 81⁄2 by 11 inches, suitable for copying and electronic filing. If you submit comments by mail and would like to know that they reached the Facility, please enclose a stamped, self-addressed postcard or envelope. We will consider all comments and material received during the comment period and may change the rule based on your comments. VerDate Mar<15>2010 16:17 May 06, 2014 Jkt 232001 2. Viewing Comments and Documents To view comments, as well as documents mentioned in this preamble as being available in the docket, go to http://www.regulations.gov, type the docket number USCG–2013–0819 in the ‘‘SEARCH’’ box and click ‘‘SEARCH.’’ Click on Open Docket Folder on the line associated with this rulemaking. You may also visit the Docket Management Facility in Room W12–140 on the ground floor of the Department of Transportation West Building, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., Washington, DC 20590, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays. 3. Privacy Act Anyone can search the electronic form of comments received into any of our dockets by the name of the individual submitting the comment (or signing the comment, if submitted on behalf of an association, business, labor union, etc.). You may review a Privacy Act notice regarding our public dockets in the January 17, 2008, issue of the Federal Register (73 FR 3316). 4. Public Meeting We do not now plan to hold a public meeting. But you may submit a request for one, using one of the methods specified under ADDRESSES. Please explain why you believe a public meeting would be beneficial. If we determine that one would aid this rulemaking, we will hold one at a time and place announced by a later notice in the Federal Register. B. Regulatory History and Information On April 18, 2011 the Coast Guard Seventh District published a final rule establishing a special anchorage area on the Ashley River in Charleston, South Carolina in the Federal Register (76 FR 21636). The anchorage area established is contained in 33 CFR 110.72d. C. Basis and Purpose The legal basis for this rule is: 33 U.S.C. 471, 1221 through 1236, 2071; 33 CFR 1.05–1; and Department of Homeland Security Delegation No. 0170.1, which collectively authorize the Coast Guard to define anchorage grounds. The purpose of the proposed rule is to relocate and reestablish the Ashley River Anchorage to accommodate the approved expansion plans of the Charleston City Marina. The City Marina Company received a permit for the expansion of their marina in August, 2012. The expansion will force the relocation of the centerline of the federal channel in the vicinity of the PO 00000 Frm 00007 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 marina. The new channel will impede on the current special anchorage area. The special anchorage area will need to be modified to prevent potential navigational hazards caused by the proximity of vessels transiting the channel to vessels anchored in the special anchorage area. This proposed rule would also maintain the current size of the Anchorage, ensuring no reduction in space for vessels needing to anchor. D. Discussion of Proposed Rule The proposed rule would alter the bounds of the Ashley River anchorage, while not reducing its size. The new special anchorage area will encompass all waters of the Ashley River enclosed by a line beginning at latitude 32°46′40″ N longitude 79°57′27″ W; thence continuing north-northeasterly to latitude 32°46′44″ N longitude 79°57′25″ W; thence continuing southeasterly to latitude 32°46′40″ N longitude 79°57′22″ W; thence continuing southeasterly to latitude 32°46′27″ N longitude 79°57′03″ W; thence continuing westsouthwesterly to latitude 32°46′25″ N longitude 79°57′09″ W; thence continuing northwesterly to the beginning point at latitude 32°46′40″ N longitude 79°57′27″ W. E. Regulatory Analyses We developed this proposed rule after considering numerous statutes and executive orders related to rulemaking. Below we summarize our analyses based on a number of these statutes or executive orders. 1. Regulatory Planning and Review This proposed 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. The impacts on routine navigation are expected to be minimal because the proposed anchorage area would not unnecessarily restrict traffic as they are located outside of the established navigation channel. Vessels would be able to maneuver in, around, and through the anchorage. The proposed anchorage maintains the same width as the existing anchorage and associated special conditions ensure that navigational concerns are addressed. E:\FR\FM\07MYP1.SGM 07MYP1 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 88 / Wednesday, May 7, 2014 / Proposed Rules 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. The Coast Guard certifies under 5 U.S.C. 605(b) that this proposed rule will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities. This proposed rule may affect the following entities, some of which may be small entities: The owners or operators of vessels wishing to anchor in or transit the special anchorage area established by this rule. The rule would not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities because the size of the current special anchorage area will not be reduced and it will remain in the same vicinity as the current anchorage. If you think that your business, organization, or governmental jurisdiction qualifies as a small entity and that this rule would have a significant economic impact on it, please submit a comment (see ADDRESSES) explaining why you think it qualifies and how and to what degree this rule would economically affect it. mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS 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 proposed 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 section above. The Coast Guard will not retaliate against small entities that question or complain about this proposed rule or any policy or action of the Coast Guard. 4. Collection of Information This proposed 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 VerDate Mar<15>2010 16:17 May 06, 2014 Jkt 232001 26197 various levels of government. We have analyzed this proposed rule under that Order and determined that this rule does not have implications for federalism. 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. 6. Protest Activities 12. Energy Effects The Coast Guard respects the First Amendment rights of protesters. Protesters are asked to contact the person listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section to coordinate protest activities so that your message can be received without jeopardizing the safety or security of people, places or vessels. This proposed rule is not a ‘‘significant energy action’’ under Executive Order 13211, Actions Concerning Regulations That Significantly Affect Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use. 7. 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 proposed rule would not result in such an expenditure, we do discuss the effects of this rule elsewhere in this preamble. 8. Taking of Private Property This proposed rule would 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. 9. Civil Justice Reform This proposed rule meets applicable standards in sections 3(a) and 3(b)(2) of Executive Order 12988, Civil Justice Reform, to minimize litigation, eliminate ambiguity, and reduce burden. 10. Protection of Children From Environmental Health Risks We have analyzed this proposed rule under Executive Order 13045, Protection of Children from Environmental Health Risks and Safety Risks. This rule is not an economically significant rule and would not create an environmental risk to health or risk to safety that might disproportionately affect children. 13. Technical Standards This proposed rule does not use technical standards. Therefore, we did not consider the use of voluntary consensus standards. 14. Environment We have analyzed this proposed 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 made a preliminary determination that this action is one of a category of actions that do not individually or cumulatively have a significant effect on the human environment. A preliminary environmental analysis checklist supporting this determination is available in the docket where indicated under ADDRESSES. This proposed rule involves changing the location and size of a anchorage area as described in figure 2–1, paragraph (34)(f), of the Commandant Instruction. We seek any comments or information that may lead to the discovery of a significant environmental impact from this proposed rule. List of Subjects in 33 CFR Part 110 Anchorage grounds. For the reasons discussed in the preamble, the Coast Guard proposes to amend 33 CFR part 110 as follows: PART 110—Anchorage Regulations 1. The authority citation for part 110 continues to read as follows: ■ Authority: 33 U.S.C. 471, 1221 through 1236, 2030, 2035, 2071; 33 CFR 1.05–1; Department of Homeland Security Delegation No. 0170.1. 2. Revise § 110.72d to read as follows: 11. Indian Tribal Governments ■ This proposed rule does not have tribal implications under Executive Order 13175, Consultation and Coordination with Indian Tribal Governments, because it would not have a substantial direct effect on one or § 110.72d PO 00000 Frm 00008 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 Ashley River, SC. All waters on the southwest portion of the Ashley River encompassed within the following points: beginning at latitude 32°46′40″ N longitude 79°57′27″ W; thence continuing north- E:\FR\FM\07MYP1.SGM 07MYP1 26198 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 88 / Wednesday, May 7, 2014 / Proposed Rules northeasterly to latitude 32°46′44″ N longitude 79°57′25″ W; thence continuing southeasterly to latitude 32°46′40″ N longitude 79°57′22″ W; thence continuing southeasterly to latitude 32°46′27″ N longitude 79°57′03″ W; thence continuing westsouthwesterly to latitude 32°46′25″ N longitude 79°57′09″ W; thence continuing northwesterly to the beginning point at latitude 32°46′40″ N longitude 79°57′27″ W. All coordinates are North American Datum 1983. Dated: April 10, 2014. J.H. Korn, Rear Admiral, U.S. Coast Guard, Commander, Coast Guard Seventh District. miles) southwest of the community. The reference coordinates are 46–18–20 NL and 118–00–03 WL. Comments must be filed on or before May 26, 2014, and reply comments on or before June 10, 2014. DATES: Secretary, Federal Communications Commission, 445 12th Street SW., Washington, DC 20554. In addition to filing comments with the FCC, interested parties should serve the petitioner as follows: Brett E. Miller, 8200 Stockdale Highway, M–10, #164, Bakersfield, California 93311. ADDRESSES: FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: [FR Doc. 2014–10377 Filed 5–6–14; 8:45 am] Rolanda F. Smith, Media Bureau, (202) 418–2700. BILLING CODE 9110–04–P SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION 47 CFR Part 73 [MB Docket No. 14–53; RM–11714; DA 14– 459] Radio Broadcasting Services; Dayton, Washington Federal Communications Commission. ACTION: Proposed rule. AGENCY: This document requests comments on a Petition for Rule Making filed by Brett E. Miller, proposing the allotment of Channel 272A at Dayton, Washington, as the community’s second local service. A staff engineering analysis confirms that Channel 272A can be allotted to Dayton consistent with the minimum distance separation requirements of the Commission’s Rules with a site restriction 3.1 kilometers (1.9 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS SUMMARY: VerDate Mar<15>2010 16:17 May 06, 2014 Jkt 232001 This is a synopsis of the Commission’s Notice of Proposed Rule Making, MB Docket No. 14–53, adopted April 3, 2014, and released April 4, 2014. The full text of this Commission decision is available for inspection and copying during normal business hours in the FCC’s Reference Information Center at Portals II, CY–A257, 445 12th Street SW., Washington, DC 20554. This document may also be purchased from the Commission’s duplicating contractors, Best Copy and Printing, Inc., 445 12th Street SW., Room CY–B402, Washington, DC 20554, telephone 1– 800–378–3160 or via email www.BCPIWEB.com. This document does not contain proposed information collection requirements subject to the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, Public Law 104–13. In addition, therefore, it does not contain any proposed information collection burden ‘‘for small business concerns with fewer than 25 employees,’’ pursuant to the Small Business Paperwork Relief Act of PO 00000 Frm 00009 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 9990 2002, Public Law 107–198, see 44 U.S.C. 3506(c)(4). Provisions of the Regulatory Flexibility Act of l980 do not apply to this proceeding. Members of the public should note that from the time a Notice of Proposed Rule Making is issued until the matter is no longer subject to Commission consideration or court review, all ex parte contacts are prohibited in Commission proceedings, such as this one, which involve channel allotments. See 47 CFR 1.1204(b) for rules governing permissible ex parte contacts. For information regarding proper filing procedures for comments, see 47 CFR 1.415 and 1.420. List of Subjects in 47 CFR Part 73 Radio, Radio broadcasting. Federal Communications Commission. Nazifa Sawez, Assistant Chief, Audio Division, Media Bureau. For the reasons discussed in the preamble, the Federal Communications Commission proposes to amend 47 CFR part 73 as follows: PART 73—RADIO BROADCAST SERVICES 1. The authority citation for part 73 continues to read as follows: ■ Authority: 47 U.S.C. 154, 303, 334, 336 and 339. § 73.202 [Amended] 2. Section 73.202(b), the Table of FM Allotments under Washington, is amended by adding Dayton, Channel 272A. ■ [FR Doc. 2014–10496 Filed 5–6–14; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6712–01–P E:\FR\FM\07MYP1.SGM 07MYP1

Agencies

[Federal Register Volume 79, Number 88 (Wednesday, May 7, 2014)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 26195-26198]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2014-10377]


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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Coast Guard

33 CFR Part 110

[Docket Number USCG-2013-0819]
RIN 1625-AA01


Anchorage; Ashley River Anchorage, Ashley River, Charleston, SC

AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS.

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking.

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

SUMMARY: The Coast Guard proposes to modify the special anchorage area 
located on the Ashley River, in Charleston, SC. The change is necessary 
to accommodate the expansion of the Charleston City Marina and meet the 
requirements of 33 CFR 109.10. The change will ensure that there is 
sufficient space to accommodate vessels desiring to anchor in the area, 
while allowing a sufficient buffer between the federal channel and 
special anchorage.

DATES: Comments and related material must be received by the Coast 
Guard on or before June 6, 2014. Requests for public meetings must be 
received by the Coast Guard on or before June 6, 2014.

ADDRESSES: You may submit comments identified by docket number using 
any one of the following methods:
    (1) Federal eRulemaking Portal: http://www.regulations.gov.
    (2) Fax: 202-493-2251.
    (3) Mail or Delivery: Docket Management Facility (M-30), U.S. 
Department of Transportation, West Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140, 
1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., Washington, DC 20590-0001. Deliveries 
accepted between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except 
federal holidays. The telephone number is 202-366-9329.
    See the ``Public Participation and Request for Comments'' portion 
of the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section below for further instructions 
on submitting comments. To avoid duplication, please use only one of 
these three methods.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: If you have questions on this rule, 
call or email Chief Warrant Officer Christopher Ruleman, Sector 
Charleston Office of Waterways Management, Coast Guard;

[[Page 26196]]

telephone (843)-740-3184, email Christopher.L.Ruleman@uscg.mil. If you 
have questions on viewing or submitting material to the docket, call 
Cheryl Collins, Program Manager, Docket Operations, telephone (202) 
366-9826.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Table of Acronyms

DHS Department of Homeland Security
FR Federal Register
NPRM Notice of Proposed Rulemaking

A. Public Participation and Request for Comments

    We encourage you to participate in this rulemaking by submitting 
comments and related materials. All comments received will be posted 
without change to http://www.regulations.gov and will include any 
personal information you have provided.

1. Submitting Comments

    If you submit a comment, please include the docket number for this 
rulemaking, indicate the specific section of this document to which 
each comment applies, and provide a reason for each suggestion or 
recommendation. You may submit your comments and material online at 
http://www.regulations.gov, or by fax, mail, or hand delivery, but 
please use only one of these means. If you submit a comment online, it 
will be considered received by the Coast Guard when you successfully 
transmit the comment. If you fax, hand deliver, or mail your comment, 
it will be considered as having been received by the Coast Guard when 
it is received at the Docket Management Facility. We recommend that you 
include your name and a mailing address, an email address, or a 
telephone number in the body of your document so that we can contact 
you if we have questions regarding your submission.
    To submit your comment online, go to http://www.regulations.gov, 
type the docket number USCG-2013-0819 in the ``SEARCH'' box and click 
``SEARCH.'' Click on ``Submit a Comment'' on the line associated with 
this rulemaking.
    If you submit your comments by mail or hand delivery, submit them 
in an unbound format, no larger than 8\1/2\ by 11 inches, suitable for 
copying and electronic filing. If you submit comments by mail and would 
like to know that they reached the Facility, please enclose a stamped, 
self-addressed postcard or envelope. We will consider all comments and 
material received during the comment period and may change the rule 
based on your comments.

2. Viewing Comments and Documents

    To view comments, as well as documents mentioned in this preamble 
as being available in the docket, go to http://www.regulations.gov, 
type the docket number USCG-2013-0819 in the ``SEARCH'' box and click 
``SEARCH.'' Click on Open Docket Folder on the line associated with 
this rulemaking. You may also visit the Docket Management Facility in 
Room W12-140 on the ground floor of the Department of Transportation 
West Building, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., Washington, DC 20590, 
between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal 
holidays.

3. Privacy Act

    Anyone can search the electronic form of comments received into any 
of our dockets by the name of the individual submitting the comment (or 
signing the comment, if submitted on behalf of an association, 
business, labor union, etc.). You may review a Privacy Act notice 
regarding our public dockets in the January 17, 2008, issue of the 
Federal Register (73 FR 3316).

4. Public Meeting

    We do not now plan to hold a public meeting. But you may submit a 
request for one, using one of the methods specified under ADDRESSES. 
Please explain why you believe a public meeting would be beneficial. If 
we determine that one would aid this rulemaking, we will hold one at a 
time and place announced by a later notice in the Federal Register.

B. Regulatory History and Information

    On April 18, 2011 the Coast Guard Seventh District published a 
final rule establishing a special anchorage area on the Ashley River in 
Charleston, South Carolina in the Federal Register (76 FR 21636). The 
anchorage area established is contained in 33 CFR 110.72d.

C. Basis and Purpose

    The legal basis for this rule is: 33 U.S.C. 471, 1221 through 1236, 
2071; 33 CFR 1.05-1; and Department of Homeland Security Delegation No. 
0170.1, which collectively authorize the Coast Guard to define 
anchorage grounds.
    The purpose of the proposed rule is to relocate and reestablish the 
Ashley River Anchorage to accommodate the approved expansion plans of 
the Charleston City Marina. The City Marina Company received a permit 
for the expansion of their marina in August, 2012. The expansion will 
force the relocation of the centerline of the federal channel in the 
vicinity of the marina. The new channel will impede on the current 
special anchorage area. The special anchorage area will need to be 
modified to prevent potential navigational hazards caused by the 
proximity of vessels transiting the channel to vessels anchored in the 
special anchorage area. This proposed rule would also maintain the 
current size of the Anchorage, ensuring no reduction in space for 
vessels needing to anchor.

D. Discussion of Proposed Rule

    The proposed rule would alter the bounds of the Ashley River 
anchorage, while not reducing its size. The new special anchorage area 
will encompass all waters of the Ashley River enclosed by a line 
beginning at latitude 32[deg]46'40'' N longitude 79[deg]57'27'' W; 
thence continuing north-northeasterly to latitude 32[deg]46'44'' N 
longitude 79[deg]57'25'' W; thence continuing southeasterly to latitude 
32[deg]46'40'' N longitude 79[deg]57'22'' W; thence continuing 
southeasterly to latitude 32[deg]46'27'' N longitude 79[deg]57'03'' W; 
thence continuing west-southwesterly to latitude 32[deg]46'25'' N 
longitude 79[deg]57'09'' W; thence continuing northwesterly to the 
beginning point at latitude 32[deg]46'40'' N longitude 79[deg]57'27'' 
W.

E. Regulatory Analyses

    We developed this proposed rule after considering numerous statutes 
and executive orders related to rulemaking. Below we summarize our 
analyses based on a number of these statutes or executive orders.

1. Regulatory Planning and Review

    This proposed 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. The impacts on routine 
navigation are expected to be minimal because the proposed anchorage 
area would not unnecessarily restrict traffic as they are located 
outside of the established navigation channel. Vessels would be able to 
maneuver in, around, and through the anchorage. The proposed anchorage 
maintains the same width as the existing anchorage and associated 
special conditions ensure that navigational concerns are addressed.

[[Page 26197]]

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. The Coast Guard certifies under 5 U.S.C. 605(b) that this 
proposed rule will not have a significant economic impact on a 
substantial number of small entities.
    This proposed rule may affect the following entities, some of which 
may be small entities: The owners or operators of vessels wishing to 
anchor in or transit the special anchorage area established by this 
rule. The rule would not have a significant economic impact on a 
substantial number of small entities because the size of the current 
special anchorage area will not be reduced and it will remain in the 
same vicinity as the current anchorage. If you think that your 
business, organization, or governmental jurisdiction qualifies as a 
small entity and that this rule would have a significant economic 
impact on it, please submit a comment (see ADDRESSES) explaining why 
you think it qualifies and how and to what degree this rule would 
economically affect it.

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 proposed 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 
section above. The Coast Guard will not retaliate against small 
entities that question or complain about this proposed rule or any 
policy or action of the Coast Guard.

4. Collection of Information

    This proposed 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 proposed rule under that Order and 
determined that this rule does not have implications for federalism.

6. Protest Activities

    The Coast Guard respects the First Amendment rights of protesters. 
Protesters are asked to contact the person listed in the FOR FURTHER 
INFORMATION CONTACT section to coordinate protest activities so that 
your message can be received without jeopardizing the safety or 
security of people, places or vessels.

7. 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 proposed rule would not 
result in such an expenditure, we do discuss the effects of this rule 
elsewhere in this preamble.

8. Taking of Private Property

    This proposed rule would 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.

9. Civil Justice Reform

    This proposed rule meets applicable standards in sections 3(a) and 
3(b)(2) of Executive Order 12988, Civil Justice Reform, to minimize 
litigation, eliminate ambiguity, and reduce burden.

10. Protection of Children From Environmental Health Risks

    We have analyzed this proposed rule under Executive Order 13045, 
Protection of Children from Environmental Health Risks and Safety 
Risks. This rule is not an economically significant rule and would not 
create an environmental risk to health or risk to safety that might 
disproportionately affect children.

11. Indian Tribal Governments

    This proposed rule does not have tribal implications under 
Executive Order 13175, Consultation and Coordination with Indian Tribal 
Governments, because it would not have a substantial direct effect on 
one or more Indian tribes, on the relationship between the Federal 
Government and Indian tribes, or on the distribution of power and 
responsibilities between the Federal Government and Indian tribes.

12. Energy Effects

    This proposed rule is not a ``significant energy action'' under 
Executive Order 13211, Actions Concerning Regulations That 
Significantly Affect Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use.

13. Technical Standards

    This proposed rule does not use technical standards. Therefore, we 
did not consider the use of voluntary consensus standards.

14. Environment

    We have analyzed this proposed 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 made a preliminary determination that this action is one of a 
category of actions that do not individually or cumulatively have a 
significant effect on the human environment. A preliminary 
environmental analysis checklist supporting this determination is 
available in the docket where indicated under ADDRESSES. This proposed 
rule involves changing the location and size of a anchorage area as 
described in figure 2-1, paragraph (34)(f), of the Commandant 
Instruction. We seek any comments or information that may lead to the 
discovery of a significant environmental impact from this proposed 
rule.

List of Subjects in 33 CFR Part 110

    Anchorage grounds.

    For the reasons discussed in the preamble, the Coast Guard proposes 
to amend 33 CFR part 110 as follows:

PART 110--Anchorage Regulations

0
1. The authority citation for part 110 continues to read as follows:

    Authority: 33 U.S.C. 471, 1221 through 1236, 2030, 2035, 2071; 
33 CFR 1.05-1; Department of Homeland Security Delegation No. 
0170.1.

0
2. Revise Sec.  110.72d to read as follows:


Sec.  110.72d  Ashley River, SC.

    All waters on the southwest portion of the Ashley River encompassed 
within the following points: beginning at latitude 32[deg]46'40'' N 
longitude 79[deg]57'27'' W; thence continuing north-

[[Page 26198]]

northeasterly to latitude 32[deg]46'44'' N longitude 79[deg]57'25'' W; 
thence continuing southeasterly to latitude 32[deg]46'40'' N longitude 
79[deg]57'22'' W; thence continuing southeasterly to latitude 
32[deg]46'27'' N longitude 79[deg]57'03'' W; thence continuing west-
southwesterly to latitude 32[deg]46'25'' N longitude 79[deg]57'09'' W; 
thence continuing northwesterly to the beginning point at latitude 
32[deg]46'40'' N longitude 79[deg]57'27'' W. All coordinates are North 
American Datum 1983.

    Dated: April 10, 2014.
J.H. Korn,
Rear Admiral, U.S. Coast Guard, Commander, Coast Guard Seventh 
District.
[FR Doc. 2014-10377 Filed 5-6-14; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 9110-04-P