Skip to Content


Anchorage; Ashley River Anchorage, Ashley River, Charleston, SC

Document Details

Information about this document as published in the Federal Register.

Enhanced Content

Relevant information about this document from provides additional context. This information is not part of the official Federal Register document.

Published Document

This document has been published in the Federal Register. Use the PDF linked in the document sidebar for the official electronic format.

Start Preamble


Coast Guard, DHS.


Final rule.


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.


This rule is effective November 19, 2014.

Start Printed Page 62569


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, 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.

Start Further Info


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 If you have questions on viewing the docket, call Cheryl Collins, Program Manager, Docket Operations, telephone 202-366-9826.

End Further Info End Preamble Start Supplemental 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 Start Printed Page 62570will 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.

Start List of Subjects

List of Subjects in 33 CFR Part 110

  • Anchorage grounds
End List of Subjects

For the reasons discussed in the preamble, the Coast Guard amends 33 CFR part 110 as follows:

Start Part


End Part Start Amendment Part

1. The authority citation for part 110 continues to read as follows:

End Amendment Part Start Authority

Authority: 33 U.S.C. 471, 1221 through 1236, 2071; 33 CFR 1.05-1; Department of Homeland Security Delegation No. 0170.1.

End Authority Start Amendment Part

2. Revise § 110.72d to read as follows:

End Amendment Part
Ashley River, SC.

All waters on the southwest portion of the Ashley River encompassed within the following points: Beginning at latitude 32°46′40″ N, longitude 79°57′27″ W; thence continuing north-northeasterly to latitude 32°46′44″ N, longitude 79°57′25″ W; thence continuing southeasterly to latitude 32°46′40″ N, longitude 79°57′22″ W; thence continuing southeasterly to latitude 32°46′27″ N, longitude 79°57′03″ W; thence continuing west-southwesterly to latitude 32°46′25″ N, longitude 79°57′09″ W; thence continuing northwesterly to the beginning point at latitude 32°46′40″ N, longitude 79°57′27″ W. All coordinates are North American Datum 1983.

Start Signature

Dated: September 11, 2014.

J.H. Korn,

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

End Signature End Supplemental Information

[FR Doc. 2014-24910 Filed 10-17-14; 8:45 am]