### 24334 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 83 / Wednesday, April 30, 2014 / Rules and Regulations

category of actions that do not individually or cumulatively have a significant effect on the human environment. This rule involves a special local regulation issued in conjunction with a regatta or marine parade. An environmental analysis checklist and a Categorical Exclusion Determination were completed for this event in previous years. Since this event has remained materially unchanged from the time of the prior determinations, a new environmental analysis checklist and Categorical Exclusion Determination were not completed for 2014. The previously completed environmental analysis checklist and Categorical Exclusion Determination can be found in docket folder for USCG–2013–0052 at www.regulations.gov. This rule is categorically excluded from further review under paragraph 34(h) of Figure 2–1 of the Commandant Instruction. List of Subjects in 33 CFR Part 100

Marine safety, Navigation (water), Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Waterways.

For the reasons discussed in the preamble, the Coast Guard amends 33 CFR part 100 as follows:

**PART 100—SAFETY OF LIFE ON NAVIGABLE WATERS** 

■ 1. The authority citation for part 100 continues to read as follows:

Authority: 33 U.S.C. 1233.

■ 2. Add a temporary § 100.T07–0110 to read as follows:

**§ 100.T07–0110 Special Local Regulations; Low Country Splash, Wando River, Cooper**  **River, and Charleston Harbor, Charleston, SC.** 

(a) Regulated Areas. The following regulated area is established as a special local regulation. All waters within a moving zone, beginning at Daniel Island Pier in approximate position 32 ° 51 ′ 20′′ N, 079 ° 54 ′06 ′′ W, South along the coast of Daniel Island, across the Wando River to Hobcaw Yacht Club, in approximate position 32 ° 49 ′ 20′′ N, 079 ° 53 ′49′′ W, South along the coast of Mt. Pleasant, S.C., to Charleston Harbor Resort Marina, in approximate position
32 ° 47 ′ 20′′ N, 079 ° 54 ′ 39′′ W. There will be a temporary Channel Closer from 0730 to 0815 on May 24, 2014 between Wando River Terminal Buoy 3 (LLNR 3305), and Wando River Terminal Buoy 5 (LLNR 3315). The zone will at all times extend 75 yards both in front of the lead safety vessel preceding the first race participants; 75 yards behind the safety vessel trailing the last race participants; and at all times extending 100 yards on either side of participating race and safety vessels. Information regarding the identity of the lead safety vessel and the last safety vessel will be provided 2 days prior to the race via broadcast notice to mariners and marine safety information bulletins.

(b) Definition. The term ‘‘designated representative’’ means Coast Guard Patrol Commanders, including Coast Guard coxswains, petty officers, and other officers operating Coast Guard vessels, and Federal, state, and local officers designated by or assisting the Captain of the Port Charleston in the enforcement of the regulated areas.

(c) Regulations. (1) All persons and vessels are prohibited from entering, transiting through, anchoring in, or remaining within the regulated areas unless otherwise authorized by the Captain of the Port Charleston or a designated representative.

(2) Persons and vessels desiring to enter, transit through, anchor in, or remain within the regulated areas may contact the Captain of the Port Charleston by telephone at 843–740– 7050, or a designated representative via VHF radio on channel 16 to seek authorization. If authorization to enter, transit through, anchor in, or remain within the regulated areas is granted by the Captain of the Port Charleston or a designated representative, all persons and vessels receiving such permission must comply with the instructions of the Captain of the Port Charleston or a designated representative.

(3) The Coast Guard will provide notice of the regulated areas through advanced notice via broadcast notice to mariners and by on-scene designated representatives.

(d) Effective Date. This rule is effective on May 24, 2014, and will be enforced from 7:00 a.m. to 9:00 a.m.

Dated: April 14, 2014. R.R. Rodriguez, Captain, U. S. Coast Guard, Captain of the Port Charleston.
[FR Doc. 2014–09853 Filed 4–29–14; 8:45 am]

**BILLING CODE 9110–04–P LIBRARY OF CONGRESS** 

**Copyright Office**

**37 CFR Part 201**

**[Docket No. 2012–1]**

**Copyright Office Fees: Registration, Recordation, and Related Services;**  **Special Services; Licensing Division Services; FOIA Services; Correction** 

**AGENCY :**  U.S. Copyright Office, Library of Congress.

**ACTION :**  Final rule; correction.

**SUMMARY :**  On March 24, 2014, the United States Copyright Office published a final rule concerning fees for Office services. The fee for a particular service did not change, but was inadvertently omitted from the schedule of fees in the final rule. The office hereby corrects that omission.

**DATES :**  Effective on May 1, 2014.

**FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT :**  Jacqueline C. Charlesworth, General Counsel and Associate Register ofCopyrights or Chris Weston, AttorneyAdvisor, Office of the General Counsel, at the U.S. Copyright Office, Copyright GC/I&R, P.O. Box 70400, Washington, DC 20024. Telephone: (202) 707–8350.

**SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION :**  On March 24, 2014, the Copyright Office published a final rule in the Federal Register (79 FR 15910) replacing the current Copyright Office fee schedule with a new one to take effect on May 1, 2014. Among other things, this rule revised 37 CFR 201.3(c)(9) so that the fee for ‘‘Registration of a correction or amplification to a claim’’ increased from $100 to $130. Although the existing fee schedule applies the referenced fee to both Forms CA and DC, the fee increase applies only to Form CA; Form DC was inadvertently omitted from the schedule. This correction continues the fee for Form DC of $100, adding it to the new schedule as set forth in § 201.3(c)(9).

Accordingly, in the final rule FR Doc. 2014–6293 published on March 24, 2014 (79 FR 15910), the Office makes the following correction. On page 15918, in the ‘‘Registration, recordation, and related services’’ table, § 201.3(c)(9) is corrected to read as follows:

**§ 201.3 Fees for registration, recordation, and related services, special services, and**  **services performed by the Licensing Division.** 
* * * * *

(c) * * *


### 24335 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 83 / Wednesday, April 30, 2014 / Rules and Regulations

1 Petition of the United States Postal Service for the Initiation of a Proceeding to Eliminate the Requirement for an Alternative Format CRA Report, November 15, 2013, at 1 (Petition).

2 Order No. 1891, Notice of Petition for the Initiation of a Proceeding to Eliminate the Alternative Format CRA Report, November 21, 2013 (Notice).

3 The Petition also requested a waiver of the requirement to file the FY 2013 Alternate CRA Report if the Commission anticipated that it might not be able to complete the rulemaking prior to the time by which preparation of the FY 2013 ACR was to be finalized. On December 18, 2013, the Commission granted the waiver request in order to fully evaluate amendment of Rule 3050.14 and any comments of interested persons. Order No. 1913, Order Granting Waiver of Filing FY 2013 Alternate CRA, December 18, 2013. 4 Initial Comments of the Public Representative, January 7, 2014 (PR Comments). The order establishing this rulemaking provided for comments by interested parties no later than January 9, 2014 and reply comments no later than January 23, 2014. Notice at 4. No reply comments were filed. Registration, recordation and related services Fees ($)

* * * * *(9) Registration of a correction or amplification to a claim. (Form CA) ....................................... $130 (Form DC) ....................................... 100

* * * * *

* * * * *

Dated: April 21, 2014. Maria A. Pallante, Register of Copyrights. Approved By: James H. Billington, Librarian of Congress.
[FR Doc. 2014–09822 Filed 4–29–14; 8:45 am]

**BILLING CODE 1410–30–P**

**POSTAL REGULATORY COMMISSION**

**39 CFR Part 3050**

**[Docket No. RM2014–2; Order No. 2061]**

**Periodic Reporting**

**AGENCY :**  Postal Regulatory Commission.

**ACTION :**  Final rule.

**SUMMARY :**  The Commission is eliminating a requirement that the Postal Service prepare the annual cost and revenue analysis report in an alternative format. The reason for the change is that the alternative format’s usefulness as an analytical tool has been overtaken by developments since passage of postal reform legislation in 2006. Adoption of this change means the Postal Service will prepare and submit only one version of this report.

**DATES :**  Effective May 30, 2014.

**FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT :**  David A. Trissell, General Counsel, at
202–789–6820.

**SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION :**  Regulatory History
73 FR 53324, September 15, 2008 74 FR 20834 May 5, 2009 78 FR 70904 November 27, 2013

Table of Contents

I. Introduction II. Proposal III. Ordering Paragraphs

I. Introduction

On November 21, 2013, the Commission established this rulemaking docket to evaluate the Postal Service’s petition 1 to eliminate that part of 39 CFR 3050.14 requiring the production and submission of an Alternate CRA (Cost and Revenue Analysis Report) as part of the Postal Service’s Annual Compliance Report (ACR). 2

Rule 3050.14 establishes the format for the CRA which reports costs, revenues, volumes, contribution, and other information reflecting the classification structure in the Mail Classification Schedule (MCS). 39 CFR 3050.14. The rule also requires an alternative, more disaggregated format (Alternate CRA) capable of reflecting the classification structure in effect prior to the adoption of the Postal Accountability and Enhancement Act (PAEA). Id. The Postal Service proposes striking the second sentence of rule
3050.14.

This order grants the Petition and, accordingly, amends rule 3050.14. 3 II. Proposal A. Postal Service Proposal

In support of its proposal, the Postal Service states that since passage of the PAEA, mail classifications have been combined and data systems no longer gather data for many of the Alternate CRA categories. Current data systemscannot always track data by the prePAEA categories, particularly cost data for many categories in the Alternate CRA. For example, the currentmethodology does not separate FirstClass Package Service into Single-Piece and Presort parcels. Revenue, Pieces, and Weight (RPW) volumes are used and unit costs are assumed to be identical, which is not intuitive and not supported by actual data. Petition at 3.

According to the Postal Service, methods to estimate the data for the Alternate CRA were developed by disaggregating existing mail categories in order to reassemble the pre-PAEA classification results in estimation methodologies that vary by category. Id. As a result, the aggregation of cost data may not always match those developed via different estimation techniques, and data for some categories may not exist at all. Id. at 3–4. The Postal Service further states that public and non-public versions of the Alternate CRA were filed initially, but as more parts of products have shifted to competitive products, of necessity only a non-public version has been filed. Id. at 2. Otherwise, a comparison of the market dominant information in the CRA with that in the Alternate CRA would make it possible to derive information about competitive products. For instance, the revenue, costs, and volume of First-Class Package Service and Lightweight Parcel Select in the Alternate CRA could be discerned when returned to and combined with existing data for First-Class Mail and Standard Mail. Also, the Alternate CRA has separate lines for negotiated service agreements (NSAs) that isolate the NSA data for First-Class Package Service. Id.

The Postal Service points out that the Alternate CRA provided a bridge for maintaining trend data through the transition so that no pre-PAEA categories were omitted and the integrity of the data reporting was maintained. Id. at 4. The Postal Service asserts that usefulness of the Alternate CRA is questionable because the information reported is the result of ratio analysis and guesstimates. Id. The Postal Service argues that the report is no longer relevant. Id.

The Postal Service also claims that the burden to produce the Alternate CRA is substantial and dependent on completion of all other ACR work. Id. at 4–5. The Postal Service is concerned that the relatively weak quality of the Alternate CRA material may reflect upon the quality of other ACR material. Id. at 5. B. Public Representative Comments

Only the Public Representative filed
comments. 4 The Public Representative points out that the CRA involves separating the Postal Service’s accrued costs reported in its general ledger into cost segments which are further segregated into cost pools and distributed to products based on factors derived from data collection systems. PR Comments at 2–3. The Public Representative asserts that the Commission has noted the Alternate CRA format provided a helpful reference point as product lists were frequently refined in the first few years after passage of the PAEA. Id. at 3. As products are combined or morphed into new products, the link between