Document ID: USCG-2013-0819-0002
Agency: uscg
Document Type: Rule
Title: FR:  Anchorage Regulations: Ashley River Anchorage, Ashley River, Charleston, SC (Federal Register Publication)
Posted Date: 2014-10-20T04:00Z

[Federal Register Volume 79, Number 202 (Monday, October 20, 2014)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 62568-62570]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2014-24910]

=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

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: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: The Coast Guard is modifying the special anchorage area 
located on the Ashley River, in Charleston, SC. This change is 
necessary to accommodate the expansion of the Charleston City Marina 
and to meet special anchorage area requirements. This 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: This rule is effective November 19, 2014.

[[Page 62569]]

ADDRESSES: Documents mentioned in this preamble are part of docket 
USCG-2013-0819. 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 rule, 
call or email Chief Warrant Officer Christopher Ruleman, Sector 
Charleston Waterways Management, U.S. Coast Guard; telephone (843) 740-
3184, email christopher.l.ruleman@uscg.mil. If you have questions on 
viewing 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. Regulatory History and Information

    On May 7, 2014, we published a notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) 
entitled Anchorage; Ashley River Anchorage, Ashley River, Charleston, 
SC, in the Federal Register (79 FR 26195). We received no comments on 
the proposed rule. No public meeting was requested, and none was held.

B. 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 this 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. Consistent with requirements in 33 CFR 109.10, the 
special anchorage area must 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 rule 
maintains the current size of the anchorage, ensuring no reduction in 
space for vessels needing to anchor.

C. Discussion of Comments, Changes and the Final Rule

    The Coast Guard did not receive any comments to the proposed rule, 
and no changes were made to the regulatory text.

D. Regulatory Analyses

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

1. Regulatory Planning and Review

    This 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 anchorage area will 
not unnecessarily restrict traffic as it is located outside of the 
established navigation channel. Vessels will be able to maneuver in, 
around, and through the anchorage. The anchorage maintains the same 
amount of anchorage area as the existing anchorage and associated 
special conditions ensure that navigational concerns are addressed.

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 rule 
will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of 
small entities.

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 rule. If the rule does 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.
    Small businesses may send comments on the actions of Federal 
employees who enforce, or otherwise determine compliance with, Federal 
regulations to the Small Business and Agriculture Regulatory 
Enforcement Ombudsman and the Regional Small Business Regulatory 
Fairness Boards. The Ombudsman evaluates these actions annually and 
rates each agency's responsiveness to small business. If you wish to 
comment on actions by employees of the Coast Guard, call 1-888-REG-FAIR 
(1-888-734-3247). The Coast Guard will not retaliate against small 
entities that question or complain about this rule or any policy or 
action of the Coast Guard.

4. Collection of Information

    This 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 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 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 rule

[[Page 62570]]

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

8. Taking of Private Property

    This rule will 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 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

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

11. Indian Tribal Governments

    This rule does not have tribal implications under Executive Order 
13175, Consultation and Coordination with Indian Tribal Governments, 
because it does 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 action 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 rule does not use technical standards. Therefore, we did not 
consider the use of voluntary consensus standards.

14. Environment

    We have analyzed this 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 
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. An environmental analysis checklist supporting this 
determination is available in the docket where indicated under 
ADDRESSES. This 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 
rule.

List of Subjects in 33 CFR Part 110

    Anchorage grounds.

    For the reasons discussed in the preamble, the Coast Guard amends 
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, 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-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: September 11, 2014.
J.H. Korn,
Rear Admiral, U.S. Coast Guard, Commander, Coast Guard Seventh 
District.
[FR Doc. 2014-24910 Filed 10-17-14; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 9110-04-P