Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 189 / Monday, September 30, 2013 / Rules and Regulations 59817 

(1) The date that the municipal 

advisor’s permanent registration, 

submitted pursuant to the Act and the 

rules thereunder, is approved or 

disapproved by the Commission; 

(2) The date on which the municipal 

advisor’s temporary registration is 

rescinded by the Commission; 

(3) For a municipal advisor that has 

not applied for permanent registration 

with the Commission in accordance 

with the Act and the rules thereunder, 

forty-five days after the compliance date 

of such rules for the municipal advisor; 

or 

(4) On December 31, 2014. 

(f) This section will expire on 

December 31, 2014. 

* * * * * 

PART 249—FORMS, SECURITIES 

EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934 

■ 3. The authority citation for Part 249 

continues to read in part as follows: 

Authority: 15 U.S.C. 78a et seq. and 7201 

et seq.; 12 U.S.C. 5461 et seq.; and 18 U.S.C. 

1350, unless otherwise noted. 

* * * * * 

■ 4. Subpart N, consisting of 

§ 249.1300T, continues to read as 

follows: 

Subpart N—Forms for Registration of 

Municipal Advisors 

§ 249.1300T Form MA–T—For temporary 

registration as a municipal advisor, and for 

amendments to, and withdrawals from, 

temporary registration. 

The form shall be used for temporary 

registration as a municipal advisor, and 

for amendments to, and withdrawals 

from, temporary registration pursuant to 

Section 15B of the Exchange Act, (15 

U.S.C. 78o–4). 

[Note: The text of Form MA–T does 

not, and the amendments will not, 

appear in the Code of Federal 

Regulations.] 

Dated: September 23, 2013. 

By the Commission. 

Elizabeth M. Murphy, 

Secretary. 

[FR Doc. 2013–23519 Filed 9–27–13; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 8011–01–P 

DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE 

28 CFR Part 0 

[Docket No. USMS 110; AG Order] 

RIN 1105–AB42 

Revision to United States Marshals 

Service Fees for Services 

AGENCY: United States Marshals Service, 

Department of Justice. 

ACTION: Final rule. 

SUMMARY: This rule revises the United 

States Marshals Service fees to reflect 

current costs to the United States 

Marshals Service for service of process 

in federal court proceedings. A 

proposed rule with invitation to 

comment was published in the Federal 

Register on April 12, 2013, at 78 FR 

21862. Only one comment was received 

within the 60-day comment period and 

that comment supported adoption of the 

rule. Accordingly, the proposed rule is 

finalized without change. 

DATES: Effective October 30, 2013. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Joe 

Lazar, Associate General Counsel, 

United States Marshals Service, 2604 

Jefferson Davis Highway, Alexandria, 

VA 22301, telephone number (202) 307– 

9054 (not a toll-free number). 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Legal Authority for the United States 

Marshals Service To Charge Fees 

The Attorney General must establish 

fees to be taxed and collected for certain 

services rendered by the United States 

Marshals Service in connection with 

federal court proceedings 28 U.S.C. 

1921(b). These services include, but are 

not limited to, serving writs, subpoenas, 

or summonses, preparing notices or bills 

of sale, keeping attached property, and 

certain necessary travel. 28 U.S.C. 

1921(a). To the extent practicable, these 

fees shall reflect the actual and 

reasonable costs of the services 

provided. 28 U.S.C. 1921(b). 

The Attorney General initially 

established the fee schedule in 1991 

based on the actual costs, e.g., salaries, 

overhead, etc., of the services rendered 

and the hours expended at that time. 56 

FR 2436 (Jan. 23, 1991). Due to an 

increase in the salaries and benefits of 

United States Marshals Service 

personnel over time, the initial fee 

schedule was amended in 2000, see 65 

FR 47859 (Aug. 4, 2000), and again in 

2008, see 73 FR 69552 (Nov. 19, 2008). 

The current fee schedule is inadequate 

and no longer reflects the actual and 

reasonable costs of the services 

rendered. 

Federal Cost Accounting and Fee 

Setting Standards and Guidelines Being 

Used 

When developing fees for services, the 

United States Marshals Service adheres 

to the principles contained in Office of 

Management and Budget Circular No. 

A–25 Revised (‘‘Circular No. A–25’’). 

Circular No. A–25 states that, as a 

general policy, a ‘‘user charge . . . will 

be assessed against each identifiable 

recipient for special benefits derived 

from Federal activities beyond those 

received by the general public.’’ Id. § 6. 

The United States Marshals Service 

follows the guidance contained in 

Circular No. A–25 to the extent that it 

is not inconsistent with any federal 

statute. When a statute ‘‘prohibits the 

assessment of a user charge on a service 

or addresses an aspect of the user charge 

(e.g., who pays the charge; how much is 

the charge; where collections are 

deposited),’’ the statute takes 

precedence over Circular No. A–25. Id. 

§ 4(b). When a statute does not address 

issues of how to calculate fees or what 

costs to include in fee calculations, 

Circular No. A–25 instructs that its 

principles and guidance should be 

followed ‘‘to the extent permitted by 

law.’’ Id. According to Circular No. A– 

25, federal agencies generally should 

charge the full cost or the market price 

of providing services that provide a 

special benefit to identifiable recipients. 

Id. § 6. Circular No. A–25 defines full 

cost as including ‘‘all direct and indirect 

costs to any part of the Federal 

Government of providing a good, 

resource, or service.’’ These costs may 

include an ‘‘appropriate share’’ of: (a) 

‘‘[d]irect and indirect personnel costs, 

including salaries and fringe benefits 

such as medical insurance and 

retirement;’’ (b) ‘‘[p]hysical overhead, 

consulting, and other indirect costs 

including material and supply costs, 

utilities, insurance, travel, and rents or 

imputed rents on land, buildings, and 

equipment;’’ (c) ‘‘management and 

supervisory costs;’’ and (d) ‘‘costs of 

enforcement, collection, research, 

establishment of standards, and 

regulation.’’ Id. § 6(d)(1). 

Processes Used To Determine the 

Amount of the Fee Revision 

The Attorney General initially 

established the fee schedule in 1991 

based on the average salaries, benefits, 

and overhead of the Deputy U.S. 

Marshals who executed process on 

behalf of a requesting party. The fee 

schedule was revised in 2000 and again 

in 2008. The 2008 rates, which are still 

being charged, are set forth at 28 CFR 

0.114(a) as follows: 

(1) For process forwarded for service 

from one U.S. Marshals Service office or 

suboffice to another—$8 per item 

forwarded; 

(2) For process served by mail—$8 per 

item mailed; 

(3) For process served or executed 

personally—$55 per hour (or portion 

thereof) for each item served by one U.S. 

Marshals Service employee, agent, or 

contractor, plus travel costs and any 

other out-of-pocket expenses. For each 

additional U.S. Marshals Service 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with RULES

59818 Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 189 / Monday, September 30, 2013 / Rules and Regulations 

1The Law Enforcement Availability Pay Act of 

1994, Public Law 103–329, § 633, 108 Stat. 2425 

(1994) (codified at 5 U.S.C. 5545a), provides that 

law enforcement officers, such as Criminal 

Investigators (Deputy U.S. Marshals), who are 

required to work unscheduled hours in excess of 

each regular work day, are entitled to a 25% 

premium pay in addition to their base salary. 

2This amount does not include $986,000 in 

United States Marshals Service commissions 

collected for sales during FY 2012. This rule does 

not affect commissions, only the fees charged for 

service of process. 

employee, agent, or contractor who is 

needed to serve process—$55 per 

person per hour for each item served, 

plus travel costs and any other out-ofpocket expenses. 

(4) For copies at the request of any 

party—$.10 per page; 

(5) For preparing notice of sale, bill of 

sale, or U.S. Marshal deed—$20 per 

item; 

(6) For keeping and advertisement of 

property attached—actual expenses 

incurred in seizing, maintaining, and 

disposing of the property. 

In 2012, the United States Marshals 

Service conducted an analysis to 

determine whether, in light of the 

increase in salaries and expenses of its 

workforce over the previous time 

period, the existing fee schedule 

continued to reflect the costs of serving 

process. The following cost module was 

designed to reflect the average hourly 

cost of serving process in person on 

behalf of a requesting party. 

COST MODULE

Hourly Wage ................................. 32.97 

Law Enforcement Availability Pay 8.24 

Fringe Benefits ............................. 16.90 

Indirect Costs ................................ 7.41 

Total Personnel Costs ........... 65.52 

The ‘‘hourly wage’’ in this module 

reflects the hourly basic rate for law 

enforcement officers at Grade 12, Step 1, 

as set forth in the Office of Personnel 

Management’s 2012 Salary Table for the 

‘‘rest of the United States’’ (available at 

http://www.opm.gov/policy-dataoversight/pay-leave/salaries-wages/ 

2012/law-enforcement-officer/ 

rus_leo_h.pfd). The cost of Law 

Enforcement Availability Pay also was 

factored into the hourly wage of an 

average Criminal Investigator (Deputy 

U.S. Marshal).1 The fringe benefits rate 

reflected 41 percent of total wage costs. 

Finally, the indirect costs, which 

reflected the costs of administrative 

services, including management/ 

supervisory compensation and benefits, 

depreciation, utilities, supplies, and 

equipment, constituted approximately 

18 percent of the total wage and benefits 

costs. As a result of the cost module, the 

United States Marshals Service 

determined that the existing fee 

schedule no longer reflected the actual 

and reasonable costs of personally 

serving process. 

The total personnel costs of serving 

process were rounded to the nearest 

five-dollar increment. Thus, in order to 

recover the actual and reasonable costs 

of serving process, the United States 

Marshals Service will charge $65 per 

hour (or portion thereof) for each item 

served by one United States Marshals 

Service law enforcement officer. This 

represents a less than 20 percent 

increase ($10 per hour) from the existing 

fee for serving process revised in 2008. 

Only one comment was received on 

the proposed rule within the 60-day 

comment period and that comment 

supported adoption of the rule. 

Accordingly, the proposed rule is 

finalized without change. 

Regulatory Flexibility Act 

The Attorney General, in accordance 

with the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 

U.S.C. 605(b)), has reviewed this rule 

and, by approving it, certifies that this 

rule will not have a significant 

economic impact on a substantial 

number of small entities. Under the 

current fee structure, the United States 

Marshals Service collected 

approximately $1,245,000 in service of 

process fees in FY 2012.2 The 

implementation of this rule will provide 

the United States Marshals Service with 

an estimated additional $235,000 in 

revenue over the revenue that would be 

collected under the current fee 

structure. This revenue increase 

represents a recovery of costs based on 

an increase in salaries, expenses, and 

employee benefits over the previous 

four-year period. 

The economic impact on individual 

entities that utilize the services of the 

United States Marshals Service will be 

minimal. The service of process fees 

only will affect entities that pursue 

litigation in Federal court and, in most 

instances, seek to have the U.S. 

Marshals levy upon or seize property. 

The service of process fees will be 

increased by only $10 per hour from the 

previous rate increase more than four 

years ago. The fees will be consonant 

with similar fees already paid by these 

entities in state court litigation. 

Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 

1995 

This rule will not result in the 

expenditure by State, local, and tribal 

governments, in the aggregate, or by the 

private sector, of $100 million or more 

in any one year, and it will not 

significantly or uniquely affect small 

governments. Therefore, no actions were 

deemed necessary under the provisions 

of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act 

of 1995. 

Small Business Regulatory Enforcement 

Fairness Act of 1996 

This rule is not a major rule as 

defined by section 251 of the Small 

Business Regulatory Enforcement 

Fairness Act of 1996. 5 U.S.C. 804. This 

rule will not result in an annual effect 

on the economy of $100 million or 

more; a major increase in costs or prices; 

or significant adverse effects on 

competition, employment, investment, 

productivity, innovation, or on the 

ability of United States-based 

enterprises to compete with foreignbased enterprises in domestic and 

export markets. 

Executive Orders 12866 and 13563— 

Regulatory Review 

This regulation has been drafted and 

reviewed in accordance with section 

1(b) of Executive Order 12866 

(‘‘Regulatory Planning and Review’’), 

and with section 1(b) of Executive Order 

13563 (‘‘Improving Regulation and 

Regulatory Review’’). 

The Department of Justice has 

determined that this rule is not a 

‘‘significant regulatory action’’ under 

section 3(f) of Executive Order 12866, 

and accordingly this rule has not been 

reviewed by the Office of Management 

and Budget. 

Further, both Executive Orders 12866 

and 13563 direct agencies to assess all 

costs and benefits of available regulatory 

alternatives and, if regulation is 

necessary, to select regulatory 

approaches that maximize net benefits 

(including potential economic, 

environmental, public health and safety 

effects, distributive impacts, and 

equity). Executive Order 13563 

emphasizes the importance of 

quantifying both costs and benefits, of 

reducing costs, of harmonizing rules, 

and of promoting flexibility. The 

Department has assessed the costs and 

benefits of this regulation and believes 

that the regulatory approach selected 

maximizes net benefits. 

Executive Order 13132 

This rule will not have substantial 

direct effects 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. Therefore, in 

accordance with section 6 of Executive 

Order 13132, the Department of Justice 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with RULES

Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 189 / Monday, September 30, 2013 / Rules and Regulations 59819 

has determined that this rule does not 

have sufficient federalism implications 

to warrant the preparation of a 

federalism summary impact statement. 

Executive Order 12988 

This rule meets the applicable 

standards set forth in sections 3(a) and 

3(b)(2) of Executive Order 12988 

concerning civil justice reform. 

Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 

This rule does not contain collection 

of information requirements and would 

not be subject to the Paperwork 

Reduction Act of 1980, as amended (44 

U.S.C. 3501–20). 

List of Subjects in 28 CFR Part 0 

Authority delegations (Government 

agencies), Government employees, 

Organization and functions 

(Government agencies), Whistleblowing. 

Accordingly, Title 28, Part 0, Subpart 

T of the Code of Federal Regulations is 

amended as follows: 

PART 0—[AMENDED] 

■ 1. The authority citation for Part 0 

continues to read as follows: 

Authority: 5 U.S.C. 301; 28 U.S.C. 509, 

510, 515–519. 

§ 0.114 [Amended] 

■ 2. In § 0.114, paragraph (a)(3) is 

amended by removing the fee ‘‘$55’’ and 

adding the fee ‘‘$65’’ in its place 

wherever it occurs. 

Dated: September 23, 2013. 

Eric H. Holder, Jr., 

Attorney General. 

[FR Doc. 2013–23692 Filed 9–27–13; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4410–04–P 

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND 

SECURITY 

Coast Guard 

33 CFR Part 100 

[Docket Number USCG–2013–0101] 

RIN 1625–AA08 

Special Local Regulation; Clearwater 

Super Boat National Championship 

Race, Gulf of Mexico; Clearwater, FL 

AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS. 

ACTION: Temporary final rule. 

SUMMARY: The Coast Guard is 

establishing a special local regulation on 

the waters of the Gulf of Mexico in the 

vicinity of Clearwater, Florida during 

the Clearwater Super Boat National 

Championship Race. The race is 

scheduled to take place from 9:30 a.m. 

to 4 p.m. on September 29, 2013. 

Approximately 35 boats, ranging in 

length from 24 feet to 50 feet, traveling 

at speeds in excess of 100 miles per 

hour are expected to participate. 

Additionally, it is anticipated that 400 

spectator vessels will be present along 

the race course. The special local 

regulation is necessary to protect the 

safety of race participants, participant 

vessels, spectators, and the general 

public on the navigable waters of the 

United States during the event. The 

special local regulation will temporarily 

restrict vessel traffic in the waters of the 

Gulf of Mexico in the vicinity of 

Clearwater, Florida. The special local 

regulation will establish the following 

three areas: A race area, where all 

persons and vessels, except those 

persons and vessels participating in the 

high speed boat races, are prohibited 

from entering, transiting through, 

anchoring in, or remaining within; a 

buffer area, where all persons and 

vessels, except those vessels enforcing 

the buffer area, are prohibited from 

entering, transiting through, anchoring 

in, or remaining within; and a spectator 

area, where all vessels must be anchored 

or operate at No Wake Speed. 

DATES: This rule will be effective from 

9:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m. on September 29, 

2013. 

ADDRESSES: Documents mentioned in 

this preamble are part of docket USCG– 

2013–0101. To view documents 

mentioned in this preamble as being 

available in the docket, go to http://

www.regulations.gov, type the docket 

number 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. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: If 

you have questions on this temporary 

final rule, call or email Marine Science 

Technician First Class Hector I. Fuentes, 

Sector St. Petersburg Prevention 

Department, Coast Guard; telephone 

(813) 228–2191, email 

Hector.I.Fuentes@uscg.mil. If you have 

questions on viewing or submitting 

material to the docket, call Barbara 

Hairston, 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. Regulatory History and Information 

The Coast Guard is issuing this 

temporary final rule without prior 

notice and opportunity to comment 

pursuant to authority under section 4(a) 

of the Administrative Procedure Act 

(APA) (5 U.S.C. 553(b)). This provision 

authorizes an agency to issue a rule 

without prior notice and opportunity to 

comment when the agency for good 

cause finds that those procedures are 

‘‘impracticable, unnecessary, or contrary 

to the public interest.’’ Under 5 U.S.C. 

553(b)(B), the Coast Guard finds that 

good cause exists for not publishing a 

Notice of Proposed Rulemaking with 

respect to this rule because due to the 

extended time required to address the 

associated safety concerns of high speed 

boat races and the need to de-conflict 

other marine events being held in the 

area. Additional time was required to 

coordinate the necessary safety 

parameters and interagency 

participation required to adequately 

patrol the event. As a result, the Coast 

Guard did not have sufficient time to 

publish an NPRM and to receive public 

comments prior to the event. Any delay 

in the effective date of this rule may 

result in its failure to be in effect during 

the event in question and would be 

contrary to the public interest because 

immediate action is needed to minimize 

potential danger to the public during 

this event. 

For the same reason discussed above, 

under 5 U.S.C. 553(d)(3) the Coast 

Guard finds that good cause exists for 

making this rule effective less than 30 

days after publication in the Federal 

Register. 

B. Basis and Purpose 

The legal basis for the rule is the 

Coast Guard’s authority to establish 

special local regulations: 33 U.S.C. 

1233. The purpose of the rule is to 

provide for the safety of life on 

navigable waters of the United States 

during the Clearwater Super Boat 

National Championship Race. 

C. Discussion of Rule 

On September 29, 2013, Super Boat 

International Production, Inc. is 

sponsoring the Clearwater Super Boat 

National Championship Race, a series of 

high speed boat races. The races will be 

held on the waters of the Gulf of Mexico 

in Clearwater, Florida. Approximately 

35 high speed power boats are 

anticipated to participate in the races. It 

is anticipated that approximately 400 

spectator vessels will be present during 

the races. 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with RULES