[Federal Register Volume 85, Number 140 (Tuesday, July 21, 2020)]
[Notices]
[Pages 44135-44137]
[FR Doc No: 2020-15690]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-89320; File No. SR-MRX-2020-14]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; Nasdaq MRX, LLC; Notice of Filing
and Immediate Effectiveness of Proposed Rule Change To Amend Its
Pricing Schedule at Options 7, Section 5, Other Options Fees and
Rebates, in Connection With the Pricing for Orders Entered Into the
Exchanges Price Improvement Mechanism

July 15, 2020.
    Pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934
(``Act''),\1\ and Rule 19b-4 thereunder,\2\ notice is hereby given that
on July 1, 2020, Nasdaq MRX, LLC (``MRX'' or ``Exchange'') filed with
the Securities and Exchange Commission (``Commission'') the proposed
rule change as described in Items I and II below, which Items have been
prepared by the Exchange. The Commission is publishing this notice to
solicit comments on the proposed rule change from interested persons.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1).
    \2\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

I. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement of the Terms of Substance
of the Proposed Rule Change

    The Exchange proposes to amend its Pricing Schedule at Options 7,
Section 5, Other Options Fees and Rebates, in connection with the
pricing for orders entered into the Exchange's Price Improvement
Mechanism (``PIM'').\3\ The Exchange also proposes an amendment to
Options 7, Section 1, General Provisions.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ PIM is a process by which an Electronic Access Member
(``EAM'') can provide price improvement opportunities for a
transaction wherein the EAM seeks to facilitate an order it
represents as agent, and/or a transaction wherein the EAM solicited
interest to execute against an order it represents as agent. See
Options 3, Section 13.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The text of the proposed rule change is available on the Exchange's
website at https://listingcenter.nasdaq.com/rulebook/mrx/rules, at the
principal office of the Exchange, and at the Commission's Public
Reference Room.

II. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement of the Purpose of, and
Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule Change

    In its filing with the Commission, the Exchange included statements
concerning the purpose of and basis for the proposed rule change and
discussed any comments it received on the proposed rule change. The
text of these statements may be examined at the places specified in
Item IV below. The Exchange has prepared summaries, set forth in
sections A, B, and C below, of the most significant aspects of such
statements.

A. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement of the Purpose of, and
Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule Change

1. Purpose
    The Exchange proposes to amend its Pricing Schedule at Options 7,
Section 5, Other Options Fees and Rebates. Specifically, the Exchange
proposes to amend Options 7, Section 5E, PIM Pricing for Regular and
Complex Orders, to lower the Fees for PIM Contra-Side Orders, in both
Penny Symbols and Non-Penny Symbols, for all market participants. The
Exchange also proposes to eliminate note 1 within Options 7, Section
5E. Finally, the Exchange proposes to amend Options 7, Section 1,
General Provisions. These changes will be described in greater detail
below.
Options 7, Section 5E
    For regular and complex PIM orders, the Exchange currently charges
a PIM originating fee in Penny and Non-Penny Symbols of $0.20 per
contract for Non-Priority Customers \4\ and $0.00 per contract for
Priority Customers.\5\ The Exchange also charges all market
participants a PIM contra-side fee in Penny and Non-Penny Symbols of
$0.05 per contract. Members that execute an average daily volume
(``ADV'') of 10,000 PIM originating contracts or greater within a month
are eligible for a reduced PIM contra-side fee of $0.02 per contract
(in lieu of $0.05 per contract). In addition, the Exchange presently
charges PIM response fees of $0.50 per contract in Penny Symbols and
$1.10 per contract in Non-Penny Symbols.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ Non-Priority Customers consist of Market Makers (including
Market Maker orders sent to the Exchange by EAMs), Non-Nasdaq MRX
Market Makers (FarMM), Firm Proprietary/Broker-Dealers, and
Professional Customers.
    \5\ A ``Priority Customer'' is a person or entity that is not a
broker/dealer in securities, and does not place more than 390 orders
in listed options per day on average during a calendar month for its
own beneficial account(s), as defined in Nasdaq MRX Options 1,
Section 1(a)(36).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange proposes to lower the current regular and complex Fees
for PIM Contra-Side Orders, for both Penny Symbols and Non-Penny
Symbols, from $0.05 per contract to $0.02 per contract, for all market
participants.\6\ In

connection with lowering this fee, the Exchange proposes to eliminate
note 1 within Options 7, Section 5E, which today provides, ``Members
that execute an ADV of 10,000 PIM originating contracts or greater
within a month will be assessed a fee of $0.02 per contract on the
contra-side of a PIM auction (in lieu of $0.05 per contract).'' This
incentive is no longer necessary as all market participants would be
entitled to receive the lower regular and complex Fee for PIM Contra-
Side Orders of $0.02 per contract for both Penny Symbols and Non-Penny
Symbols.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ Today, Market Makers, Non-Nasdaq MRX Market Makers (FarMM),
Firm Proprietary/Broker Dealers, Professional Customers and Priority
Customers are assessed the same regular and complex Fee for PIM
Contra-Side Orders, for both Penny Symbols and Non-Penny Symbols of
$0.05 per contract. These market participants have the opportunity
to lower that fee to $0.02 per contract, pursuant to note 1 of
Options 7, Section 5E, provided they execute the requisite volume.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Options 7, Section 1
    The Exchange proposes an amendment to Options 7, Section 1, General
Provisions. The Exchange proposes to replace the term ``Penny Pilot
Program'' with ``Penny Interval Program.'' On April 1, 2020 the
Commission approved the amendment to the OLPP to make permanent the
Pilot Program (the ``OLPP Program'').\7\ The Exchange recently filed a
proposal to amend MRX Options 3, Section 3 to conform the rule to
Section 3.1 of the Plan for the Purpose of Developing and Implementing
Procedures Designed to Facilitate the Listing and Trading of
Standardized Options (the ``OLPP'').\8\ The Exchange's proposal amended
MRX Options 3, Section 3 to refer to a Penny Interval Program instead
of a Penny Pilot Program. This proposed change to Options 7, Section 1
conforms the name of the program.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 88532 (April 1,
2020), 85 FR 19545 (April 7, 2020) (File No. 4-443) (``Approval
Order'').
    \8\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 89163 (June 26,
2020) (SR-MRX-2020-13).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

2. Statutory Basis
    The Exchange believes that its proposal is consistent with Section
6(b) of the Act,\9\ in general, and furthers the objectives of Sections
6(b)(4) and 6(b)(5) of the Act,\10\ in particular, in that it provides
for the equitable allocation of reasonable dues, fees, and other
charges among members and issuers and other persons using any facility,
and is not designed to permit unfair discrimination between customers,
issuers, brokers, or dealers.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \9\ 15 U.S.C. 78 f(b).
    \10\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(4) and (5).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange's proposed changes to its Pricing Schedule are
reasonable in several respects. As a threshold matter, the Exchange is
subject to significant competitive forces in the market for options
securities transaction services that constrain its pricing
determinations in that market. The fact that this market is competitive
has long been recognized by the courts. In NetCoalition v. Securities
and Exchange Commission, the D.C. Circuit stated as follows: ``[n]o one
disputes that competition for order flow is `fierce.' . . . As the SEC
explained, `[i]n the U.S. national market system, buyers and sellers of
securities, and the broker-dealers that act as their order-routing
agents, have a wide range of choices of where to route orders for
execution'; [and] `no exchange can afford to take its market share
percentages for granted' because `no exchange possesses a monopoly,
regulatory or otherwise, in the execution of order flow from broker
dealers'. . . .'' \11\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \11\ NetCoalition v. SEC, 615 F.3d 525, 539 (D.C. Cir. 2010)
(quoting Securities Exchange Act Release No. 59039 (December 2,
2008), 73 FR 74770, 74782-83 (December 9, 2008) (SR-NYSEArca-2006-
21)).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Commission and the courts have repeatedly expressed their
preference for competition over regulatory intervention in determining
prices, products, and services in the securities markets. In Regulation
NMS, while adopting a series of steps to improve the current market
model, the Commission highlighted the importance of market forces in
determining prices and SRO revenues and, also, recognized that current
regulation of the market system ``has been remarkably successful in
promoting market competition in its broader forms that are most
important to investors and listed companies.'' \12\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \12\ Securities Exchange Act Release No. 51808 (June 9, 2005),
70 FR 37496, 37499 (June 29, 2005) (``Regulation NMS Adopting
Release'').
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Numerous indicia demonstrate the competitive nature of this market.
For example, clear substitutes to the Exchange exist in the market for
options security transaction services. The Exchange is only one of
sixteen options exchanges to which market participants may direct their
order flow. Within this environment, market participants can freely and
often do shift their order flow among the Exchange and competing venues
in response to changes in their respective pricing schedules. As such,
the proposal represents a reasonable attempt by the Exchange to
increase its liquidity and market share relative to its competitors.
Options 7, Section 5E
    The Exchange's proposal to lower the current regular and complex
Fees for PIM Contra-Side Orders, for both Penny Symbols and Non-Penny
Symbols, from $0.05 per contract to $0.02 per contract for all market
participants, and eliminate note 1 \13\ within Options 7, Section 5E is
reasonable.\14\ Lowering the regular and complex Fees for PIM Contra-
Side Orders, for both Penny Symbols and Non-Penny Symbols, from $0.05
to $0.02 per contract, will incentivize Members to execute a greater
number of PIM contracts on the Exchange. All market participants will
benefit from a greater number of PIM contracts in that they will be
able to interact with that order flow either by responding directly to
a PIM or by submitting unrelated orders in the Order Book.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \13\ Options 7, Section 5E at note 1 provides, ``Members that
execute an ADV of 10,000 PIM originating contracts or greater within
a month will be assessed a fee of $0.02 per contract on the contra-
side of a PIM auction (in lieu of $0.05 per contract).''
    \14\ Today, Market Makers, Non-Nasdaq MRX Market Makers (FarMM),
Firm Proprietary/Broker Dealer, Professional Customer and Priority
Customers are assessed the same regular and complex Fee for PIM
Contra-Side Orders, for both Penny Symbols and Non-Penny Symbols of
$0.05 per contract.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange's proposal to lower the current regular and complex
Fees for PIM Contra-Side Orders, for both Penny Symbols and Non-Penny
Symbols, from $0.05 per contract to $0.02 per contract for all market
participants, and eliminate note 1 within Options 7, Section 5E is
equitable and not unfairly discriminatory. All market participants will
be uniformly assessed a regular and complex Fee for PIM Contra-Side
Orders, for both Penny Symbols and Non-Penny Symbols, of $0.02 per
contract.
Options 7, Section 1
    The Exchange's proposal to amend Options 7, Section 1 to replace
the term ``Penny Pilot Program'' with ``Penny Interval Program'' is
reasonable, equitable and not unfairly discriminatory. This amendment
seeks to conform the name of the program which governs the listing of
certain standardized options.

B. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement on Burden on Competition

    The Exchange does not believe that the proposed rule change will
impose any burden on competition not necessary or appropriate in
furtherance of the purposes of the Act.
    In terms of inter-market competition, the Exchange notes that it
operates in a highly competitive market in which market participants
can readily favor competing venues if they deem fee levels at a
particular venue to be excessive, or rebate opportunities

available at other venues to be more favorable. In such an environment,
the Exchange must continually adjust its fees to remain competitive
with other options exchanges. Because competitors are free to modify
their own fees in response, and because market participants may readily
adjust their order routing practices, the Exchange believes that the
degree to which fee changes in this market may impose any burden on
competition is extremely limited.
    Moreover, as noted above, price competition between exchanges is
fierce, with liquidity and market share moving freely between exchanges
in reaction to fee and rebate changes. In sum, if the changes proposed
herein are unattractive to market participants, it is likely that the
Exchange will lose market share as a result. Accordingly, the Exchange
does not believe that the proposed changes will impair the ability of
Members or competing order execution venues to maintain their
competitive standing in the financial markets.
Options 7, Section 5E
    In terms of intra-market competition, the Exchange does not believe
that its proposal will place any category of Exchange market
participant at a competitive disadvantage. The proposed change is
designed to incentivize market participants to direct PIM order flow to
the Exchange. Specifically, the Exchange's proposal to lower the
current regular and complex Fees for PIM Contra-Side Orders, for both
Penny Symbols and Non-Penny Symbols, from $0.05 per contract to $0.02
per contract for all market participants, and eliminate note 1 within
Options 7, Section 5E does not impose an undue burden on competition.
All market participants would be uniformly assessed a regular and
complex Fee for PIM Contra-Side Orders, for both Penny Symbols and Non-
Penny Symbols, of $0.02 per contract.
Options 7, Section 1
    The Exchange's proposal to amend Options 7, Section 1 to replace
the term ``Penny Pilot Program'' with ``Penny Interval Program'' does
not impose an undue burden on competition. This amendment seeks to
conform the name of the program which governs the listing of certain
standardized options.

C. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement on Comments on the Proposed
Rule Change Received From Members, Participants, or Others

    No written comments were either solicited or received.

III. Date of Effectiveness of the Proposed Rule Change and Timing for
Commission Action

    The foregoing rule change has become effective pursuant to Section
19(b)(3)(A)(ii) of the Act \15\ and Rule 19b-4(f)(2) \16\ thereunder.
At any time within 60 days of the filing of the proposed rule change,
the Commission summarily may temporarily suspend such rule change if it
appears to the Commission that such action is: (i) Necessary or
appropriate in the public interest; (ii) for the protection of
investors; or (iii) otherwise in furtherance of the purposes of the
Act. If the Commission takes such action, the Commission shall
institute proceedings to determine whether the proposed rule should be
approved or disapproved.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \15\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A)(ii).
    \16\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(2).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

IV. Solicitation of Comments

    Interested persons are invited to submit written data, views, and
arguments concerning the foregoing, including whether the proposed rule
change is consistent with the Act. Comments may be submitted by any of
the following methods:

Electronic Comments

     Use the Commission's internet comment form (http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml); or
     Send an email to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Please include
File Number SR-MRX-2020-14 on the subject line.

Paper Comments

     Send paper comments in triplicate to Secretary, Securities
and Exchange Commission, 100 F Street NE, Washington, DC 20549-1090.

All submissions should refer to File Number SR-MRX-2020-14. This file
number should be included on the subject line if email is used. To help
the Commission process and review your comments more efficiently,
please use only one method. The Commission will post all comments on
the Commission's internet website (http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml).
Copies of the submission, all subsequent amendments, all written
statements with respect to the proposed rule change that are filed with
the Commission, and all written communications relating to the proposed
rule change between the Commission and any person, other than those
that may be withheld from the public in accordance with the provisions
of 5 U.S.C. 552, will be available for website viewing and printing in
the Commission's Public Reference Room, 100 F Street NE, Washington, DC
20549, on official business days between the hours of 10:00 a.m. and
3:00 p.m. Copies of the filing also will be available for inspection
and copying at the principal office of the Exchange. All comments
received will be posted without change. Persons submitting comments are
cautioned that we do not redact or edit personal identifying
information from comment submissions. You should submit only
information that you wish to make available publicly. All submissions
should refer to File Number SR-MRX-2020-14 and should be submitted on
or before August 11, 2020.

    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets,
pursuant to delegated authority.\17\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \17\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

J. Matthew DeLesDernier,
Assistant Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2020-15690 Filed 7-20-20; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 83, Number 150 (Friday, August 3, 2018)]
[Notices]
[Pages 38180-38181]
[FR Doc No: 2018-16614]

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

DEPARTMENT OF LABOR

Occupational Safety and Health Administration

[Docket No. OSHA-2012-0010]

1,2-Dibromo-3-Chloropropane (DBCP) Standard; Extension of the
Office of Management and Budget's (OMB) Approval of Information
Collection (Paperwork) Requirements

AGENCY: Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA), Labor.

ACTION: Request for public comments.

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

SUMMARY: OSHA is soliciting public comments concerning the proposal to
extend the Office of Management and Budget's (OMB) approval of the
information collection requirements specified by the 1,2-Dibromo-3-
Chloropropane (DBCP) Standard.

DATES: Comments must be submitted (postmarked, sent, or received) by
October 2, 2018.

ADDRESSES: Electronically: You may submit comments and attachments
electronically at http://www.regulations.gov, which is the Federal
eRulemaking Portal. Follow the instructions online for submitting
comments.
    Facsimile: If your comments, including attachments, are not longer
than 10 pages you may fax them to the OSHA Docket Office at (202) 693-
1648.
    Mail, hand delivery, express mail, messenger, or courier service:
When using this method, you must submit a copy of your comments and
attachments to the OSHA Docket Office, Docket No. OSHA-2012-0010,
Occupational Safety and Health Administration, U.S. Department of
Labor, Room N-3653, 200 Constitution Avenue NW, Washington, DC 20210.
Deliveries (hand, express mail, messenger, and courier service) are
accepted during the Docket Office's normal business hours, 10:00 a.m.
to 3:00 p.m., ET.
    Instructions: All submissions must include the agency name and the
OSHA docket number (OSHA-2012-0010) for the Information Collection
Request (ICR). All comments, including any personal information you
provide, are placed in the public docket without change, and may be
made available online at http://www.regulations.gov. For further
information on submitting comments see the ``Public Participation''
heading in the section of this notice titled SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION.
    Docket: To read or download comments or other material in the
docket, go to http://www.regulations.gov or the OSHA Docket Office at
the above address. All documents in the docket (including this Federal
Register notice) are listed in the http://www.regulations.gov index;
however, some information (e.g., copyrighted material) is not publicly
available to read or download from the website. All submissions,
including copyrighted material, are available for inspection and
copying at the OSHA Docket Office. You may also contact Christie Garner
at the number below to obtain a copy of the ICR. FOR FURTHER
INFORMATION CONTACT: Tom Mockler or Christie Garner, Directorate of
Standards and Guidance, OSHA, U.S. Department of Labor, telephone:
(202) 693-2222.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Background

    The Department of Labor, as part of its continuing effort to reduce
paperwork and respondent (i.e., employer) burden, conducts a
preclearance consultation program to provide the public with an
opportunity to comment on proposed and continuing information
collection requirements in accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act
of 1995 (PRA) (44 U.S.C. 3506(c)(2)(A)). This program ensures that
information is in the desired format, reporting burden (time and costs)
is minimal, collection instruments are clearly understood, and OSHA's
estimate of the information collection burden is accurate. The
Occupational Safety and Health Act of

1970 (OSH Act) (29 U.S.C. 651 et seq.) authorizes information
collection by employers as necessary or appropriate for enforcement of
the OSH Act, or for developing information regarding the causes and
prevention of occupational injuries, illnesses, and accidents (29
U.S.C. 657). The OSH Act also requires that OSHA obtain such
information with minimum burden upon employers, especially those
operating small businesses, and to reduce to the maximum extent
feasible unnecessary duplication of efforts in obtaining information
(29 U.S.C. 657).
    The information collection requirements in the DBCP Standard
provide protection for workers from the adverse health effects
associated with exposure to DBCP. In this regard, the DBCP Standard
requires employers to: Monitor workers' exposure to DBCP; monitor
worker health; and provide workers with information about their
exposures and the health effects of exposure to DBCP.

II. Special Issues for Comment

    OSHA has a particular interest in comments on the following issues:
     Whether the proposed information collection requirements
are necessary for the proper performance of the agency's functions,
including whether the information is useful;
     the accuracy of OSHA's estimate of the burden (time and
costs) of the information collection requirements, including the
validity of the methodology and assumptions used;
     the quality, utility, and clarity of the information
collected; and
     ways to minimize the burden on employers who must comply;
for example, by using automated or other technological information
collection and transmission techniques.

III. Proposed Actions

    After extensive research, OSHA found no U.S. employer who currently
produces DBCP or DBCP-based end-use products, most likely because the
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) registration suspension for this
substance remains in effect; therefore, no cost or time burdens accrue
to employers under the Standard. The agency requests OMB approval of
the information collection provisions as a one hour burden under the
paperwork requirements if EPA lifts the suspension or technology
develops new applications for DBCP.
    Type of Review: Extension of a currently approved collection.
    Title: 1, 2-Dibromo-3-Chloropropane (DBCP) Standard (29 CFR
1910.1044).
    OMB Control Number: 1218-0101.
    Affected Public: Businesses or other for-profits.
    Frequency: On occasion.
    Average Time per Response: 0.
    Estimated Total Burden Hours: 1.
    Estimated Cost (Operation and Maintenance): $0.

IV. Public Participation--Submission of Comments on This Notice and
Internet Access to Comments and Submissions

    You may submit comments in response to this document as follows:
(1) Electronically at http://www.regulations.gov, which is the Federal
eRulemaking Portal; (2) by facsimile (fax); or (3) by hard copy. All
comments, attachments, and other material must identify the agency name
and the OSHA docket number for the ICR (Docket No. OSHA-2012-0010). You
may supplement electronic submissions by uploading document files
electronically. If you wish to mail additional materials in reference
to an electronic or facsimile submission, you must submit them to the
OSHA Docket Office (see the section of this notice titled ADDRESSES).
The additional materials must clearly identify electronic comments by
your name, date, and the docket number so the agency can attach them to
your comments.
    Because of security procedures, the use of regular mail may cause a
significant delay in the receipt of comments. For information about
security procedures concerning the delivery of materials by hand,
express delivery, messenger, or courier service, please contact the
OSHA Docket Office at<PHONE_NUMBER>, TTY<PHONE_NUMBER>).
    Comments and submissions are posted without change at http://www.regulations.gov. Therefore, OSHA cautions commenters about
submitting personal information such as their social security number
and date of birth. Although all submissions are listed in the http://www.regulations.gov index, some information (e.g., copyrighted
material) is not publicly available to read or download from this
website. All submissions, including copyrighted material, are available
for inspection and copying at the OSHA Docket Office.
    Information on using the http://www.regulations.gov website to
submit comments and access the docket is available at the website's
``User Tips'' link. Contact the OSHA Docket Office for information
about materials not available from the website, and for assistance in
using the internet to locate docket submissions.

V. Authority and Signature

    Loren Sweatt, Deputy Assistant Secretary of Labor for Occupational
Safety and Health, directed the preparation of this notice. The
authority for this notice is the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44
U.S.C. 3506 et seq.) and Secretary of Labor's Order No. 1-2012 (77 FR
3912).

    Signed at Washington, DC, on July 30, 2018.
Loren Sweatt,
Deputy Assistant Secretary of Labor for Occupational Safety and Health.
[FR Doc. 2018-16614 Filed 8-2-18; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 4510-26-P


[Federal Register Volume 82, Number 126 (Monday, July 3, 2017)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 30745-30747]
[FR Doc No: 2017-13977]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Coast Guard

33 CFR Part 165

[Docket Number USCG-2017-0331]
RIN 1625-AA00

Safety Zone; Thunder on the Outer Harbor; Buffalo Outer Harbor,
Buffalo, NY

AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS.

ACTION: Temporary final rule.

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

SUMMARY: The Coast Guard is establishing a temporary safety zone on the
Buffalo Outer Harbor, Buffalo, NY. This safety zone is intended to
restrict vessels from a portion of the Buffalo Outer Harbor during the
Thunder on the Outer Harbor boat races. This temporary safety zone is
necessary to protect mariners and vessels from the navigational hazards
associated with high speed boat races.

DATES: This rule is effective from 9:45 a.m. on July 22, 2017 until
4:15 p.m. on July 23, 2017.

ADDRESSES: To view documents mentioned in this preamble as being
available in the docket, go to http://www.regulations.gov, type USCG-
2017-0331 in the ``SEARCH'' box and click ``SEARCH.'' Click on Open
Docket Folder on the line associated with this rule.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: If you have questions on this rule,
call or email LT Michael Collet, Chief of Waterways Management, U.S.
Coast Guard Sector Buffalo; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>, email
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Table of Abbreviations

CFR Code of Federal Regulations
DHS Department of Homeland Security
FR Federal Register
NPRM Notice of proposed rulemaking
Sec.  Section
U.S.C. United States Code

II. Background Information and Regulatory History

    On May 11, 2017, the Coast Guard published a Notice of Proposed
Rulemaking (NPRM) titled Thunder on the Outer Harbor; Buffalo Outer
Harbor, Buffalo, NY Sec.  165.T09-0331. There we stated why we issued
the NPRM, and invited comments on our proposed regulatory action
related to this high speed boat race. The comment period ended June 16,
2017; we received no comments.
    We are issuing this rule, and under 5 U.S.C. 553(d)(3), the Coast
Guard finds that good cause exists for making it effective less than 30
days after publication in the Federal Register because doing so would
be impracticable and contrary to the public interest. Delaying the
effective date would be contrary to the rule's objectives of ensuring
safety of life on the navigable waters and protection of persons and
vessels near the event. The event has been publicized in the local
media and previously in the Federal Register through issuance of the
NPRM; the public does not need time to make preparations for this rule
to go into effect.

III. Legal Authority and Need for Rule

    The Coast Guard is issuing this rule under authority in 33 U.S.C.
1231. The Captain of the Port Buffalo (COTP) has determined that a high
speed boat races present significant risks to public safety and
property. Such hazards include vessels reaching high speeds in a
relatively small area and large wake. This rule is needed to protect
personnel, vessels, and the marine environment in the navigable waters
within the safety zone while the boat races are taking place.

IV. Discussion of the Rule

    This rule establishes a safety zone on June 22 and June 23, 2017,
from 9:45 a.m. until 4:15 p.m. daily. The safety zone will encompass
all waters of the Buffalo Outer Harbor, Buffalo, NY starting at
position 42[deg]52'21'' N. and 078[deg]53'14'' W. then West to
42[deg]52'15'' N. and 078[deg]53'32'' W. then South to

42[deg]51'41'' N. and 078[deg]53'02'' W. then East to 42[deg]51'46'' N.
and 078[deg]52'45'' W. (NAD 83) then returning to the point of origin.
    Entry into, transiting, or anchoring within the safety zone is
prohibited unless authorized by the Captain of the Port Buffalo or his
designated on-scene representative. The Captain of the Port or his
designated on-scene representative may be contacted via VHF Channel 16.

V. Regulatory Analyses

    We developed this rule after considering numerous statutes and
Executive Orders related to rulemaking. Below we summarize our analyses
based on a number of these statutes and Executive Orders, and we
discuss First Amendment rights of protestors.

A. Regulatory Planning and Review

    Executive Orders 12866 and 13563 direct agencies to assess the
costs and benefits of available regulatory alternatives and, if
regulation is necessary, to select regulatory approaches that maximize
net benefits. Executive Order 13563 emphasizes the importance of
quantifying both costs and benefits, of reducing costs, of harmonizing
rules, and of promoting flexibility. This rule has not been designated
a ``significant regulatory action,'' under Executive Order 12866.
Accordingly, it has not been reviewed by the Office of Management and
Budget.
    We conclude that this rule is not a significant regulatory action
because we anticipate that it will have minimal impact on the economy,
will not interfere with other agencies, will not adversely alter the
budget of any grant or loan recipients, and will not raise any novel
legal or policy issues. The safety zone created by this rule will be
relatively small and is designed to minimize its impact on navigable
waters. Furthermore, the safety zone has been designed to allow vessels
to transit around it. In addition, the safety zone will have built in
times to allow vessels to travel through when races are not being held.
Thus, restrictions on vessel movement within that particular area are
expected to be minimal. Under certain conditions, moreover, vessels may
still transit through the safety zone when permitted by the Captain of
the Port.

B. Impact on Small Entities

    The Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980, 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.
    While some owners or operators of vessels intending to transit the
safety zone may be small entities, for the reasons stated in section
V.A above, this rule will not have a significant economic impact on any
vessel owner or operator.
    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 would 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.
    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 would 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.
    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.

C. 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).

D. Federalism and Indian Tribal Governments

    A rule has implications for federalism under Executive Order 13132,
Federalism, if it has a substantial direct effect 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. We have analyzed this rule under that Order and have
determined that it is consistent with the fundamental federalism
principles and preemption requirements described in Executive Order
13132.
    Also, 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. If
you believe this rule has implications for federalism or Indian tribes,
please contact the person listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT
section above.

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

F. 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 (42 U.S.C. 4321-4370f), and have determined that it
is one of a category of actions that do not individually or
cumulatively have a significant effect on the human environment. This
rule establishes a safety zone. It is categorically excluded under
section 2.B.2, figure 2-1, paragraph 34(g) of the Instruction, which
pertains to establishment of safety zones. A Record of Environmental
Consideration (REC) supporting this determination is available in the
docket where indicated

in the ADDRESSES section of this preamble.

G. 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.

List of Subjects in 33 CFR Part 165

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

    For the reasons discussed in the preamble, the Coast Guard amends
33 CFR part 165 as follows:

PART 165-REGULATED NAVIGATION AREAS AND LIMITED ACCESS AREAS

0
1. The authority citation for part 165 continues to read as follows:

    Authority:  33 U.S.C. 1231; 50 U.S.C. 191; 33 CFR 1.05-1, 6.04-
1, 6.04-6, and 160.5; Department of Homeland Security Delegation No.
0170.1.

0
2. Add Sec.  165.T09-0331 to read as follows:

Sec.  165.T09-0331  Safety Zone; Thunder on the Outer Harbor; Buffalo
Outer Harbor, Buffalo, NY.

    (a) Location. This zone will encompass all waters of the Buffalo
Outer Harbor, Buffalo, NY encompassed by all waters of the Outer
Harbor, Buffalo, NY starting at position 42[deg]52'21'' N. and
078[deg]53'14'' W. then West to 42[deg]52'15'' N. and 078[deg]53'32''
W. then South to 42[deg]51'41'' N. and 078[deg]53'02'' W. then East to
42[deg]51'46'' N. and 078[deg]52'45'' W. (NAD 83) then returning to the
point of origin.
    (b) Enforcement period. This rule will be enforced from 9:45 a.m.
until 4:15 p.m. on July 22, 2017, and July 23, 2017.
    (c) Regulations. (1) In accordance with the general regulations in
Sec.  165.23, entry into, transiting, or anchoring within this safety
zone is prohibited unless authorized by the Captain of the Port Buffalo
or his designated on-scene representative.
    (2) This safety zone is closed to all vessel traffic, except as may
be permitted by the Captain of the Port Buffalo or his designated on-
scene representative.
    (3) The ``on-scene representative'' of the Captain of the Port
Buffalo is any Coast Guard commissioned, warrant or petty officer who
has been designated by the Captain of the Port Buffalo to act on his
behalf.
    (4) Vessel operators desiring to enter or operate within the safety
zone must contact the Captain of the Port Buffalo or his on-scene
representative to obtain permission to do so. The Captain of the Port
Buffalo or his on-scene representative may be contacted via VHF Channel
16. Vessel operators given permission to enter or operate in the safety
zone must comply with all directions given to them by the Captain of
the Port Buffalo, or his on-scene representative.

    Dated: June 28, 2017.
J.S. Dufresne,
Captain, U.S. Coast Guard, Captain of the Port Buffalo.
[FR Doc. 2017-13977 Filed 6-30-17; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 9110-04-P