Anchorage; Ashley River Anchorage, Ashley River, Charleston, SC
Federal Register, Volume 79 Issue 88 (Wednesday, May 7, 2014)
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
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
-
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.
-
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.
-
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.
-
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 32deg46'40'' N longitude 79deg57'27'' W; thence continuing north-northeasterly to latitude 32deg46'44'' N longitude 79deg57'25'' W; thence continuing southeasterly to latitude 32deg46'40'' N longitude 79deg57'22'' W; thence continuing southeasterly to latitude 32deg46'27'' N longitude 79deg57'03'' W; thence continuing west-southwesterly to latitude 32deg46'25'' N longitude 79deg57'09'' W; thence continuing northwesterly to the beginning point at latitude 32deg46'40'' N longitude 79deg57'27'' W.
-
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 32deg46'40'' N longitude 79deg57'27'' W; thence continuing north-
Page 26198
northeasterly to latitude 32deg46'44'' N longitude 79deg57'25'' W; thence continuing southeasterly to latitude 32deg46'40'' N longitude 79deg57'22'' W; thence continuing southeasterly to latitude 32deg46'27'' N longitude 79deg57'03'' W; thence continuing west-
southwesterly to latitude 32deg46'25'' N longitude 79deg57'09'' W; thence continuing northwesterly to the beginning point at latitude 32deg46'40'' N longitude 79deg57'27'' 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
