27000 Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 107 / Friday, June 5, 2009 / Proposed Rules 

§ 103.11 Meaning of terms. 

* * * * * 

(n) * * * 

(9) An introducing broker in 

commodities; 

(10) A mutual fund. 

* * * * * 

(ccc) Mutual fund means an 

‘‘investment company’’ (as the term is 

defined in section 3 of the Investment 

Company Act (15 U.S.C. 80a–3)) that is 

an ‘‘open-end company’’ (as that term is 

defined in section 5 of the Investment 

Company Act (15 U.S.C. 80a–5)) 

registered or required to register with 

the Securities and Exchange 

Commission under section 8 of the 

Investment Company Act (15 U.S.C. 

80a–8). 

Subpart C—Records Required To Be 

Maintained 

3. Amend § 103.33 by revising 

paragraphs (e)(6)(i)(I) and (f)(6)(i)(I) and 

by adding paragraphs (e)(6)(i)(J) and 

(f)(6)(i)(J) to read as follows: 

§ 103.33 Records to be made and retained 

by financial institutions. 

* * * * * 

(e) * * * 

(6) * * * 

(i) * * * 

(I) A Federal, State or local 

government agency or instrumentality; 

or 

(J) A mutual fund; and 

* * * * * 

(f) * * * 

(6) * * * 

(i) * * * 

(I) A Federal, State or local 

government agency or instrumentality; 

or 

(J) A mutual fund; and 

* * * * * 

Dated: June 1, 2009. 

William F. Baity, 

Acting Director, Financial Crimes 

Enforcement Network. 

[FR Doc. E9–13136 Filed 6–4–09; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4810–02–P 

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND 

SECURITY 

Coast Guard 

33 CFR Part 110 

[Docket No. USCG–2008–0852] 

RIN 1625–AA01 

Disestablishing Special Anchorage 

Area 2; Ashley River, Charleston, SC 

AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS. 

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking. 

SUMMARY: The Coast Guard proposes to 

disestablish the Ashley River Anchorage 

2 in Charleston, South Carolina. The 

removal of the anchorage would 

accommodate an expansion to the 

Ripley Light Yacht Club. 

DATES: Comments and related material 

must be received by the Coast Guard on 

or before August 4, 2009. Requests for 

public meetings must be received by the 

Coast Guard on or before July 6, 2009. 

ADDRESSES: You may submit comments 

identified by docket number USCG– 

2008–0852 using any one of the 

following methods: 

(1) Federal eRulemaking Portal: 

http://www.regulations.gov. 

(2) Fax: 202–493–2251. 

(3) Mail: 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. 

(4) Hand delivery: Same as mail 

address above, between 9 a.m. and 5 

p.m., Monday through Friday, except 

Federal holidays. The telephone number 

is 202–366–9329. 

To avoid duplication, please use only 

one of these four methods. See the 

‘‘Public Participation and Request for 

Comments’’ portion of the 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section 

below for instructions on submitting 

comments. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: If 

you have questions on this proposed 

rule, call or e-mail Lieutenant Julie 

Miller, Sector Charleston Office of 

Waterways Management, at (843) 720– 

3273 or Julie.E.Miller@uscg.mil. If you 

have questions on viewing or submitting 

material to the docket, call Renee V. 

Wright, Program Manager, Docket 

Operations, telephone 202–366–9826. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

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. 

Submitting Comments 

If you submit a comment, please 

include the docket number for this 

rulemaking (USCG–2008–0852), 

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 (via 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 via http:// 

www.regulations.gov, 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 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 e-mail 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, select the 

Advanced Docket Search option on the 

right side of the screen, insert ‘‘USCG– 

2008–0852’’ in the Docket ID box, press 

Enter, and then click on the balloon 

shape in the Actions column. 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. 

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, select the 

Advanced Docket Search option on the 

right side of the screen, insert USCG– 

2008–0852 in the Docket ID box, press 

Enter, and then click on the item in the 

Docket ID column. 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. We have an 

agreement with the Department of 

Transportation to use the Docket 

Management Facility. 

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 


erowe on PROD1PC63 with PROPOSALS-1
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 107 / Friday, June 5, 2009 / Proposed Rules 27001 

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). 

Public Meeting 

We do not now plan to hold a public 

meeting. But, you may submit a request 

for a public meeting on or before July 6, 

2009, using one of the four methods 

specified under ADDRESSES. Please 

explain why you believe a public 

meeting would be beneficial. If we 

determine that a public meeting would 

aid this rulemaking, we will hold one at 

a time and place announced by a later 

notice in the Federal Register. 

Background and Purpose 

Ashley River Properties and the 

Ripley Light Yacht Club submitted a 

permit with the Army Corps of 

Engineers to construct additional boat 

slips at the Ripley Light Yacht Club; 

however, the expansion would extend 

into an area currently designated as the 

Ashley River Anchorage 2. Removal of 

the anchorage would allow for the 

expansion to continue. The marina 

plans to add additional floating dock 

space to accommodate approximately 

200 additional pleasure craft. Ripley 

Light Yacht Club intends to reserve a 

portion of the new boat slips for 

transient recreational boaters. The 

remaining anchorage, currently 

designated Ashley River Anchorage 1, 

remains a viable and convenient 

location for recreational vessel 

anchorage. 

Discussion of Proposed Rule 

The proposed rule would disestablish 

the Ashley River Anchorage 2 set forth 

in 33 CFR 110.72d(b). The planned 

expansion of the Ripley Light Yacht 

Club extends into Ashley River 

Anchorage 2. In order to complete the 

expansion project, the anchorage must 

be disestablished. 

The proposed rule also would update 

the name of the marina used in 

describing the remaining anchorage. 

Regulatory Analyses 

We developed this proposed rule after 

considering numerous statutes and 

executive orders related to rulemaking. 

Below we summarize our analyses 

based on 13 of these statutes or 

executive orders. 

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, and does not 

require an assessment of potential costs 

and benefits under section 6(a)(3) of that 

Order. The Office of Management and 

Budget has not reviewed it under that 

Order. 

We expect the economic impact of 

this rule to be so minimal that a full 

Regulatory Evaluation is unnecessary. 

The limited geographic area impacted 

by this disestablishment will not restrict 

the movement or routine operation of a 

large number of commercial or 

recreational vessels in the Ashley River. 

Furthermore, a second and larger 

anchorage already exists nearby. 

Small Entities 

Under the Regulatory Flexibility Act 

(5 U.S.C. 601–612), we have considered 

whether this proposed rule would have 

a significant economic impact on a 

substantial number of small entities. 

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 

would not have a significant economic 

impact on a substantial number of small 

entities. This proposed rule would affect 

the following entities, some of which 

might be small entities: the owners or 

operators of recreational vessels 

intending to anchor in the Charleston 

harbor. This rule would not have a 

significant impact on a substantial 

number of small entities because the 

current anchorage is small and cannot 

accommodate many vessels, there is 

another nearby location in which small 

vessels can anchor, and the marina 

expansion will accommodate at least as 

many transient vessels as could fit in 

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. 

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 so that 

they can better evaluate its effects on 

them and participate in the rulemaking. 

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 Lieutenant 

Julie Miller, listed in the FOR FURTHER

INFORMATION CONTACT section. 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. 

Collection of Information 

This proposed rule would call for no 

new collection of information under the 

Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 

U.S.C. 3501–3520.). 

Federalism 

A rule has implications for federalism 

under Executive Order 13132, 

Federalism, if it has a substantial direct 

effect on State or local governments and 

would either preempt State law or 

impose a substantial direct cost of 

compliance on them. We have analyzed 

this proposed rule under that Order and 

have determined that it does not have 

implications for federalism 

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 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. 

Taking of Private Property 

This proposed rule would not effect a 

taking of private property or otherwise 

have taking implications under 

Executive Order 12630, Governmental 

Actions and Interference with 

Constitutionally Protected Property 

Rights. 

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. 

Protection of Children 

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. 


erowe on PROD1PC63 with PROPOSALS-1
27002 Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 107 / Friday, June 5, 2009 / Proposed Rules 

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. 

Energy Effects 

We have analyzed this proposed rule 

under Executive Order 13211, Actions 

Concerning Regulations That 

Significantly Affect Energy Supply, 

Distribution, or Use. We have 

determined that it is not a ‘‘significant 

energy action’’ under that order because 

it is not a ‘‘significant regulatory action’’ 

under Executive Order 12866 and is not 

likely to have a significant adverse effect 

on the supply, distribution, or use of 

energy. The Administrator of the Office 

of Information and Regulatory Affairs 

has not designated it as a significant 

energy action. Therefore, it does not 

require a Statement of Energy Effects 

under Executive Order 13211. 

Technical Standards 

The National Technology Transfer 

and Advancement Act (NTTAA) (15 

U.S.C. 272 note) directs agencies to use 

voluntary consensus standards in their 

regulatory activities unless the agency 

provides Congress, through the Office of 

Management and Budget, with an 

explanation of why using these 

standards would be inconsistent with 

applicable law or otherwise impractical. 

Voluntary consensus standards are 

technical standards (e.g., specifications 

of materials, performance, design, or 

operation; test methods; sampling 

procedures; and related management 

systems practices) that are developed or 

adopted by voluntary consensus 

standards bodies. 

This proposed rule does not use 

technical standards. Therefore, we did 

not consider the use of voluntary 

consensus standards. 

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 

under the Instruction that this action is 

one of a category of actions that do not 

individually or cumulatively have a 

significant effect on the human 

environment. This proposed rule 

involves the disestablishment of a 

special anchorage area, which is 

categorically excluded under section 

2.B.2 Figure 2–1, paragraph 34(f), of the 

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 section 110.72d to read as 

follows: 

§ 110.72d Ashley River Anchorage Area, 

SC. 

The following location is a special 

anchorage area: The waters lying within 

an area across the Ashley River Channel 

from the Charleston City Marina 

bounded by the southwest side of the 

channel beginning at latitude 

32°46′42.7′′ N, longitude 079°57′19.3′′ 

W; thence to latitude 32°46′38.0′′ N, 

longitude 079°57′24.0′′ W; thence to 

latitude 32°46′32.0′′ N, longitude 

079°57′15.5′′ W; thence to latitude 

32°46′29.0′′ N, longitude 079°57′00.9′′ 

W; thence back to the beginning 

following the southwest boundary of the 

Ashley River Channel. All coordinates 

referenced use datum: NAD 1983. 

Dated: May 6, 2009. 

R.S. Branham, 

Rear Admiral, U.S. Coast Guard, Commander, 

Seventh Coast Guard District. 

[FR Doc. E9–13108 Filed 6–4–09; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Part 51 

[EPA–HQ–OAR–2008–0348; FRL–8913–7] 

RIN 2060–AO58 

Methods for Measurement of Filterable 

PM10 and PM2.5 and Measurement of 

Condensable Particulate Matter 

Emissions From Stationary Sources 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA). 

ACTION: Proposed rule; announcement of 

reopening of comment period. 

SUMMARY: EPA is reopening the 

comment period for the proposed rule 

entitled ‘‘Methods for Measurement of 

Filterable PM10 and PM2.5 and 

Measurement of Condensable 

Particulate Matter Emissions From 

Stationary Sources’’ that was proposed 

in the Federal Register on March 25, 

2009. The 60-day comment period in 

the proposed rule ended on May 26, 

2009. The reopened comment period 

will close on June 26, 2009. EPA is 

reopening the comment period because 

of a request we received in a timely 

manner. 

DATES: Comments: The comment period 

for the proposed rule published March 

25, 2009 (74 FR 12970), is reopened. 

Comments must be received on or 

before June 26, 2009. 

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, 

identified by Docket ID Number EPA– 

HQ–OAR–2008–0348, by one of the 

following methods: 

• http://www.regulations.gov. Follow 

the on-line instructions for submitting 

comments. 

• E-mail: Send your comments via 

electronic mail to 

a-and-r-docket@epa.gov. 

• Fax: (202) 566–9744. 

• Mail: Methods for Measurement of 

Filterable PM10 and PM2.5 and 

Measurement of Condensable 

Particulate Matter Emissions from 

Stationary Sources, Environmental 

Protection Agency, Mailcode 2822T, 

1200 Pennsylvania Ave., NW., 

Washington, DC 20460. Please include a 

total of two copies. 

• Hand Delivery: EPA Docket Center 

EPA Headquarter Library, Room 3334, 

EPA West Building, 1301 Constitution 

Ave., NW., Washington, DC 20460. Such 

deliveries are accepted only during the 

Docket’s normal hours of operation, and 

special arrangements should be made 

for deliveries of boxed information. 

Instructions: Direct your comments to 

Docket ID No. EPA–HQ–OAR–2008– 

0348. EPA’s policy is that all comments 


erowe on PROD1PC63 with PROPOSALS-1