[Federal Register Volume 81, Number 118 (Monday, June 20, 2016)]
[Notices]
[Pages 39972-39976]
[FR Doc No: 2016-14445]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-78061; File No. SR-BatsBZX-2016-22]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; Bats BZX Exchange, Inc.; Notice of
Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of a Proposed Rule Change Related to
Fees as They Apply to the Equity Options Platform

June 14, 2016.
    Pursuant to section 19(b)(1) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934
(the ``Act''),\1\ and Rule 19b-4 thereunder,\2\ notice is hereby given
that on June 1, 2016, Bats BZX Exchange, Inc. (the ``Exchange'' or
``BZX'') filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission
(``Commission'') the proposed rule change as described in Items I, II
and III below, which Items have been prepared by the Exchange. The
Exchange has designated the proposed rule change as one establishing or
changing a member due, fee, or other charge imposed by the Exchange
under section 19(b)(3)(A)(ii) of the Act \3\ and Rule 19b-4(f)(2)
thereunder,\4\ which renders the proposed rule change effective upon
filing with the Commission. 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.
    \3\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A)(ii).
    \4\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(2).

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

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

    The Exchange filed a proposal to amend the fee schedule applicable
to Members \5\ and non-members of the Exchange pursuant to BZX Rules
15.1(a) and (c).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ The term ``Member'' is defined as ``any registered broker or
dealer that has been admitted to membership in the Exchange.'' See
Exchange Rule 1.5(n).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The text of the proposed rule change is available at the Exchange's
Web site at www.batstrading.com, 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 parts 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 modify its fee schedule applicable to the
Exchange's equity options platform (``BZX Options'') to: (1) Modify the
standard fee for Customer \6\ orders that remove liquidity in Penny
Pilot Securities \7\; (2) modify and delete several tiers pursuant to
the Exchange's tiered pricing structure; and (3) modify the Exchange's
routing fees, as further described below.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ The term ``Customer'' applies to any transaction identified
by a Member for clearing in the Customer range at the Options
Clearing Corporation (``OCC''), excluding any transaction for a
Broker Dealer or a ``Professional'' as defined in Exchange Rule
16.1.
    \7\ The term ``Penny Pilot Security'' applies to those issues
that are quoted pursuant to Exchange Rule 21.5, Interpretation and
Policy .01.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Customer Orders That Remove Liquidity in Penny Pilot Securities
    The Exchange is proposing to modify the standard fee for Customer
orders that remove liquidity in Penny Pilot Securities. Such orders,
when executed on the Exchange, currently yield fee code PC and are
assessed a standard fee of $0.48 per contract. The Exchange is
proposing to increase the standard fee for Customer orders that remove
liquidity in Penny Pilot Securities from $0.48 to $0.49 per contract.
In addition to the modification to the Fee Codes and Associated Fees
table, the Exchange proposes to update the Standard Rates table of the
fee schedule to reflect this change.
Tiered Pricing Changes
    The Exchange currently offers multiple tiers that provide either a
reduced fee or an enhanced rebate for Members that reach certain volume
thresholds. The Exchange proposes various modifications to its tiered
pricing structure, as set forth below.
Customer Penny Pilot Add Tiers
    Customer orders that add liquidity on the Exchange in Penny Pilot
Securities yield fee code PY and receive a standard rebate of $0.25 per
contract. In addition, footnote 1 of the fee schedule currently sets
forth eight different types of Customer Penny Pilot Add Tiers, each
providing an enhanced rebate to a Member's Customer orders that yield
fee code PY upon satisfying monthly volume criteria required by the
respective tier.
    The Exchange proposes to amend Customer Add Volume Tier 5 to
increase the rebate provided and to reduce the qualification criteria
for the tier. Specifically, the Exchange proposes to modify Customer
Add Volume Tier 5 to provide a rebate of $0.53 per contract instead of
$0.52 per contract for all executions of orders that yield PY for
qualifying Members. In order to qualify for Customer Add Volume Tier 5,
the Exchange currently requires a Member to: (1) Have an ADAV \8\ in
Customer orders equal to or greater than 0.80% of average TCV; \9\ and
(2) have an ADAV in Market Maker \10\ orders equal to or greater than
0.40% of average TCV. In addition to the increase rebate for Customer
Add Volume Tier 5, the Exchange proposes to reduce the second prong of
the qualifying criteria to require a Member to have an ADAV in Market
Maker orders equal to or greater than 0.30% of average TCV.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \8\ ``ADAV'' means average daily volume calculated as the number
of contracts added per day.
    \9\ ``TCV'' means total consolidated volume calculated as the
volume reported by all exchanges to the consolidated transaction
reporting plan for the month for which the fees apply.
    \10\ The term ``Market Maker'' applies to any transaction
identified by a Member for clearing in the Market Maker range at the
OCC, where such Member is registered with the Exchange as a Market
Maker as defined in Rule 16.1(a)(37).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Pursuant to Customer Add Volume Tier 6, the Exchange currently
provides an enhanced rebate of $0.53 per contract for executions of
orders yielding fee code PY where a Member has an ADAV in Customer
orders equal to or greater than 1.60% of average TCV. The Exchange
proposes to reduce the qualifying criteria for Customer Add Volume Tier
6 and to provide a rebate of $0.53 for any Member with an ADAV in
Customer orders equal to or greater than 1.30% of average TCV.
    The Exchange notes that no changes are required to the Standard
Rates table of the fee schedule in connection with the changes to
footnote 1.
Firm, Broker Dealer and Joint Back Office Penny Pilot Add Volume Tiers
    Firm,\11\ Broker Dealer,\12\ and Joint Back Office \13\ orders that
add liquidity on the Exchange in Penny Pilot Securities yield fee code
PF and receive a standard rebate of $0.36 per contract. In addition,
footnote 2 of the fee schedule currently sets forth four different
types of Firm, Broker Dealer and Joint Back Office Penny Pilot Add
Volume Tiers, each providing an enhanced rebate to a Member's orders
that yield fee code PF upon satisfying monthly volume criteria required
by the respective tier.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \11\ The term ``Firm'' applies to any transaction identified by
a Member for clearing in the Firm range at the OCC, excluding any
Joint Back Office transaction.
    \12\ The term ``Broker Dealer'' applies to any order for the
account of a broker dealer, including a foreign broker dealer, that
clears in the Customer range at the OCC.
    \13\ The term ``Joint Back Office'' applies to any transaction
identified by a Member for clearing in the Firm range at the OCC
that is identified with an origin code as Joint Back Office. A Joint
Back Office participant is a Member that maintains a Joint Back
Office arrangement with a clearing broker-dealer.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange proposes to eliminate Firm, Broker Dealer, and Joint
Back Office Penny Pilot Add Volume Tiers 1 and 2 under footnote 2,
which currently provide Members with rebate of $0.40 per contract and
$0.42 per contract, respectively, for Firm, Broker Dealer, and Joint
Back Office orders that add liquidity in Penny Pilot Securities where
the Member meets applicable criteria. In connection with this change,
the Exchange proposes to rename Tier 3 under footnote 2 as Tier 1.
    In addition to the modifications to footnote 2, the Exchange
proposes to update the Standard Rates table of the fee schedule to
reflect these changes.

Non-Customer Penny Pilot Take Volume Tiers
    Non-Customer \14\ orders that remove liquidity from the Exchange in
Penny Pilot Securities yield fee code PP and are charged a standard fee
of $0.50 per contract. In addition, footnote 3 of the fee schedule
currently sets forth four different types of Non-Customer Penny Pilot
Take Volume Tiers, each providing a reduced fee to a Member's Non-
Customer orders that yield fee code PP upon satisfying monthly volume
criteria required by the respective tier.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \14\ The term ``Non-Customer'' applies to any transaction that
is not a Customer order.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange proposes to eliminate Non-Customer Take Volume Tier 1
under footnote 3, which currently results in a fee to Members of $0.49
per contract for Non-Customer orders that remove liquidity in Penny
Pilot Securities where the Member meets applicable criteria. In
connection with this change, the Exchange proposes to rename Tier 2
through 4 under footnote 3 as Tiers 1 through 3.
    The Exchange also proposes to amend current Non-Customer Take
Volume Tier 2 (to be re-numbered as Non-Customer Take Volume Tier 1) to
reduce the fee charged to qualifying Members under such tier as well as
to reduce the qualification criteria for the tier. Specifically, the
Exchange proposes to modify current Non-Customer Take Volume Tier 2 to
charge a fee of $0.44 per contract instead of $0.47 per contract for
all executions of orders that yield fee code PP for qualifying Members.
In order to qualify for current Non-Customer Take Volume Tier 2, the
Exchange currently requires a Member to: (1) Have an ADAV in Customer
orders equal to or greater than 0.80% of average TCV; and (2) have an
ADAV in Market Maker orders equal to or greater than 0.40% of average
TCV. In addition to the reduced fee for current Non-Customer Take
Volume Tier 2, the Exchange proposes to reduce the second prong of the
qualifying criteria to require a Member to have an ADAV in Market Maker
orders equal to or greater than 0.30% of average TCV.
    Pursuant to current Non-Customer Take Volume Tier 4 (to be re-
numbered as Non-Customer Take Volume Tier 3), the Exchange currently
charges a reduced fee of $0.46 per contract for executions of orders
yielding fee code PP where a Member has an ADAV in Customer orders
equal to or greater than 1.60% of average TCV. The Exchange proposes to
further reduce both the fee and qualifying criteria for current Non-
Customer Take Volume Tier 4 to instead charge a fee of $0.44 per
contract for any Member with an ADAV in Customer orders equal to or
greater than 1.30% of average TCV.
    In addition to the modifications to footnote 3, the Exchange
proposes to update the Standard Rates table of the fee schedule to
reflect these changes.
Non-Customer Non-Penny Pilot Take Volume Tier
    Non-Customer orders that remove liquidity from the Exchange in Non-
Penny Pilot Securities \15\ yield fee code NP and are charged a
standard fee of $0.99 per contract. In addition, footnote 13 of the fee
schedule currently sets forth a Non-Customer Non-Penny Pilot Take
Volume Tier that provides a reduced fee of $0.95 per contract to a
Member's Non-Customer orders that yield fee code NP upon satisfying
monthly volume criteria required by the tier. The Exchange proposes to
eliminate the Non-Customer Non-Penny Pilot Take Volume Tier. Thus, the
Exchange proposes to remove footnote 13 in its entirety as well as the
reference to footnote 13 appended to fee code NP.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \15\ The term ``Non-Penny Pilot Security'' applies to those
issues that are not Penny Pilot Securities quoted pursuant to
Exchange Rule 21.5, Interpretation and Policy .01.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In addition to the elimination of footnote 13, the Exchange
proposes to update the Standard Rates table of the fee schedule to
reflect this change.
Routing Fees
    The Exchange proposes to modify the fees charged for orders routed
away from the Exchange and executed at various away options
exchanges.\16\ The Exchange currently charges flat rate routing fees
for executions at away options exchanges that have been placed into
groups based on the approximate cost of routing to such venues. The
grouping of away options exchanges is based on the cost of transaction
fees assessed by each venue as well as costs to the Exchange for
routing (i.e., clearing fees, connectivity and other infrastructure
costs, membership fees, etc.) (collectively, ``Routing Costs''). To
address different fees at various other options exchanges, the Exchange
proposes to increase fees applicable to routing to certain away options
exchanges in Non-Penny Securities, as further described below.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \16\ Other options exchanges to which the Exchange routes
include: Bats EDGX Exchange, Inc. (``EDGX Options''), BOX Options
Exchange LLC (``BOX''), Chicago Board Options Exchange, Inc.
(``CBOE''), C2 Options Exchange, Inc. (``C2''), International
Securities Exchange, Inc. (``ISE''), ISE Gemini, LLC (``ISE
Gemini''), ISE Mercury, LLC (``ISE Mercury''), Miami International
Securities Exchange, LLC (``MIAX''), Nasdaq Options Market LLC
(``NOM''), Nasdaq OMX BX LLC (``BX Options''), Nasdaq OMX PHLX LLC
(``PHLX''), NYSE Arca, Inc. (``ARCA''), and NYSE MKT LLC (``AMEX'').
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    With respect to Non-Customer orders in Non-Penny Pilot Securities,
the Exchange appends fee code RO to all such orders routed to and
executed at other options exchanges. Pursuant to fee code RO, the
Exchange charges a fee of $1.20 per contract. The Exchange proposes to
increase this fee from $1.20 per contract to $1.25 per contract to
account for additional Routing Costs incurred by the Exchange.
    With respect to Customer orders in Non-Penny Pilot Securities the
Exchange applies one of two fee codes: (1) Fee code RP, which results
in a fee of $0.25 per contract and applies to all Customer orders
(including orders in Penny Pilot Securities) routed to and executed at
AMEX, BOX, BX Options, CBOE, EDGX Options, ISE Mercury, MIAX or PHLX;
or (2) fee code RR, which results in a fee of $0.90 per contract and
applies to all Customer orders in Non-Penny Pilot Securities routed to
and executed at ARCA, C2, ISE, ISE Gemini or NOM. The Exchange proposes
to increase the fee under fee code RR from $0.90 per contract to $1.00
per contract to account for additional Routing Costs incurred by the
Exchange. The Exchange does not propose any change to fee code RP.
    As set forth above, the Exchange's proposed approach to routing
fees is to set forth in a simple manner certain flat fees that
approximate the cost of routing to other options exchanges. The
Exchange then monitors the fees charged as compared to the costs of its
routing services, as well as monitoring for specific fee changes by
other options exchanges, and intends to adjust its flat routing fees
and/or groupings to ensure that the Exchange's fees do indeed result in
a rough approximation of overall Routing Costs, and are not
significantly higher or lower in any area. The increases are proposed
primarily in order to account for increased Routing Costs incurred by
the Exchange.
Implementation Date
    The Exchange proposes to implement these amendments to its fee
schedule immediately.
2. Statutory Basis
    The Exchange believes that the proposed rule change is consistent
with the requirements of the Act and the rules and regulations
thereunder that are applicable to a national securities exchange, and,
in particular, with the requirements of section 6 of the Act.\17\
Specifically, the Exchange believes that

the proposed rule change is consistent with section 6(b)(4) of the
Act,\18\ in that it provides for the equitable allocation of reasonable
dues, fees and other charges among members and other persons using any
facility or system which the Exchange operates or controls. The
Exchange notes that it operates in a highly competitive market in which
market participants can readily direct order flow to competing venues
if they deem fee levels to be excessive.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \17\ 15 U.S.C. 78f.
    \18\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(4).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange believes that its proposal to change the standard fee
charged for Customer orders that remove liquidity in Penny Pilot
Securities under fee code PC from $0.48 to $0.49 per contract is
reasonable, fair and equitable and non-discriminatory, because the
change will apply equally to all participants, and because, while the
change marks an increase in fees for Customer orders in Penny Pilot
Securities, such proposed fees remain consistent with pricing
previously offered by the Exchange as well as competitors of the
Exchange and does not represent a significant departure from the
Exchange's general pricing structure and will allow the Exchange to
earn additional revenue that can be used to offset the addition of new
pricing incentives, including those introduced as part of this
proposal.
    Further, the Exchange believes that the proposed modifications to
the tiered pricing structure are reasonable, fair and equitable, and
non-discriminatory. The Exchange operates in a highly competitive
market in which market participants may readily send order flow to many
competing venues if they deem fees at the Exchange to be excessive. The
proposed fee structure remains intended to attract order flow to the
Exchange by offering market participants a competitive pricing
structure. The Exchange believes it is reasonable to offer and
incrementally modify incentives intended to help to contribute to the
growth of the Exchange.
    Volume-based rebates such as those currently maintained on the
Exchange have been widely adopted by options exchanges and are
equitable because they are open to all Members on an equal basis and
provide additional benefits or discounts that are reasonably related to
the value of an exchange's market quality associated with higher levels
of market activity, such as higher levels of liquidity provision and/or
growth patterns, and introduction of higher volumes of orders into the
price and volume discovery processes.
    The proposed modifications to the criteria required to qualify for
current Customer Add Volume Tiers 5 and 6 and Non-Customer Take Volume
Tiers 2 and 4 are intended to incentivize additional Members to send
Customer orders and/or Market Maker orders to the Exchange in an effort
to qualify for the enhanced rebate or lower fee made available by the
tiers. Similarly, the increase to the rebate provided for Members that
qualify for Customer Add Volume Tier 5 and the reduction of the fees
charged to Members that qualify for Non-Customer Take Volume Tiers 2
and 4 are intended to incentivize additional Members to send Customer
orders and/or Market Maker orders to the Exchange. In order to offset
such changes, the Exchange is also eliminating certain other pricing
incentives currently offered by the Exchange. Particularly, the
Exchange has proposed to eliminate Non-Customer Take Volume Tier 1,
Firm, Broker Dealer, and Joint Back Office Penny Pilot Add Volume Tiers
1 and 2, and the Non-Customer Non-Penny Pilot Take Volume Tier.
Although these changes will result in fewer ways to qualify for
enhanced rebates or reduced fees, the Exchange believes such changes
are offset by the other changes described above, particularly the
reduction of certain criteria needed to qualify for remaining tiers.
    The proposed changes are broadly intended to incentivize
participants to increase their participation on the Exchange, which
will increase the liquidity and market quality on the Exchange. Thus,
the Exchange believes that the proposed tiers, as proposed to be
amended are reasonable, fair and equitable, and non-discriminatory, for
the reasons set forth above with respect to volume-based pricing
generally and because such changes will incentivize participants to
further contribute to market quality. The Exchange also believes that
the tiered pricing structure remains consistent with pricing previously
offered by the Exchange as well as other options exchanges and does not
represent a significant departure from such pricing structures.
    With respect to the proposed increases under the Exchange's routing
structure, the Exchange again notes that it operates in a highly
competitive market in which market participants can readily direct
order flow to competing venues or providers of routing services if they
deem fee levels to be excessive. As explained above, the Exchange seeks
to approximate the cost of routing to other options exchanges,
including other applicable costs to the Exchange for routing, in order
to provide a simplified and easy to understand pricing model. The
Exchange believes that a pricing model based on approximate Routing
Costs is a reasonable, fair and equitable approach to pricing.
Specifically, the Exchange believes that its proposal to modify fees is
fair, equitable and reasonable because the fees are generally an
approximation of the cost to the Exchange for routing orders to such
exchanges. The Exchange believes that its flat fee structure for orders
routed to various venues is a fair and equitable approach to pricing,
as it will provide certainty with respect to execution fees at groups
of away options exchanges. In order to achieve its flat fee structure,
taking all costs to the Exchange into account, the Exchange will in
some instances charge a higher premium to route to certain options
exchanges than to others. As a general matter, the Exchange believes
that the proposed fees will allow it to recoup and cover its costs of
providing routing services to such exchanges and to make some
additional profit in exchange for the services it provides. The
Exchange also believes that the proposed increase to the fee structure
for orders routed to and executed at these away options exchanges is
fair and equitable and not unreasonably discriminatory in that it
applies equally to all Members. Finally, the Exchange notes that it
intends to consistently evaluate its routing fees, including profit and
loss attributable to routing, as applicable, in connection with the
operation of a flat fee routing service, and would consider future
adjustments to the proposed pricing structure to the extent it was
recouping a significant profit or loss from routing to away options
exchanges.

(B) Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement on Burden on Competition

    The Exchange believes the proposed amendments to its fee schedule
would not impose any burden on competition that is not necessary or
appropriate in furtherance of the purposes of the Act. Rather, the
proposal is a competitive proposal that is seeking to sustain and
further the growth of the Exchange by updating a standard fee as well
as the Exchange's tiered pricing structure and updating the Exchange's
fees for routing orders to away options exchanges based on Routing
Costs.
    With respect to the increase to the standard Customer fee to remove
liquidity in Penny Pilot Securities, the Exchange does not believe that
the increase represents a significant departure from pricing previously
offered by the Exchange nor does the Exchange believe that the increase
results in any burden on competition.

Additionally, Members may opt to disfavor the Exchange's pricing if
they believe that alternatives offer them better value.
    With respect to the proposed tiered pricing changes, the Exchange
has structured the proposed fees and rebates to attract additional
volume to the Exchange. Particularly, the Exchange is proposing various
changes to tiers that will result in increased rebates provided or
reduced fees charged or that will make certain tiers more easily
attainable for more Members. In order to offset such changes, the
Exchange is also eliminating certain other pricing incentives currently
offered by the Exchange. Accordingly, the Exchange does not believe
that the proposed changes to the Exchange's tiered pricing structure
burdens competition, but instead, enhances competition as such changes
are all intended to increase the competitiveness of the Exchange. Also,
the Exchange believes that the price changes contribute to, rather than
burden competition, as such changes are broadly intended to incentivize
participants to increase their participation on the Exchange, which
will increase the liquidity and market quality on the Exchange, which
will then further enhance the Exchange's ability to compete with other
exchanges.
    With respect to the proposed changes to the routing fee structure,
the Exchange believes that the proposed fees are competitive in that
they will continue to provide a simple approach to routing pricing that
some Members may favor. Additionally, Members may opt to disfavor the
Exchange's pricing, including pricing for transactions on the Exchange
as well as routing fees, if they believe that alternatives offer them
better value. In particular, with respect to routing services, such
services are available to Members from other broker-dealers as well as
other options exchanges. The Exchange also notes that Members may
choose to mark their orders as ineligible for routing to avoid
incurring routing fees.\19\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \19\ See Exchange Rule 21.1(d)(7) (describing ``Book Only''
orders) and Exchange Rule 21.9(a)(1) (describing the Exchange's
routing process, which requires orders to be designated as available
for routing).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Based on the foregoing, the Exchange does not believe that any of
the proposed changes will impair the ability of Members or competing
venues to maintain their competitive standing in the financial markets.

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

    The Exchange has not solicited, and does not intend to solicit,
comments on this proposed rule change. The Exchange has not received
any written comments from members or other interested parties.

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) of the Act \20\ and paragraph (f) of Rule 19b-4
thereunder.\21\ 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
necessary or appropriate in the public interest, for the protection of
investors, or otherwise in furtherance of the purposes of the Act.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \20\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A).
    \21\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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-BatsBZX-2016-22 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-BatsBZX-2016-22. 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 Web site (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 Web site 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 such filing will also be available
for inspection and copying at the principal office of the Exchange. All
comments received will be posted without change; the Commission does
not edit personal identifying information from submissions. You should
submit only information that you wish to make available publicly. All
submissions should refer to File Number SR-BatsBZX-2016-22 and should
be submitted on or before July 11, 2016.

    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets,
pursuant to delegated authority.\22\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \22\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Robert W. Errett,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2016-14445 Filed 6-17-16; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 78, Number 31 (Thursday, February 14, 2013)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 10560-10562]
[FR Doc No: 2013-03464]

========================================================================
Proposed Rules
                                                Federal Register
________________________________________________________________________

This section of the FEDERAL REGISTER contains notices to the public of
the proposed issuance of rules and regulations. The purpose of these
notices is to give interested persons an opportunity to participate in
the rule making prior to the adoption of the final rules.

========================================================================

Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 31 / Thursday, February 14, 2013 /
Proposed Rules

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 71

[Docket No. FAA-2013-0016; Airspace Docket No. 12-ASO-33]
RIN 2120-AA66

Proposed Modification and Revocation of Air Traffic Service
Routes; Jackson, MS

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM).

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

SUMMARY: This action proposes to modify two jet routes and seven VOR
Federal airways; and remove two VOR Federal airways in the vicinity of
Jackson, MS. The FAA is proposing this action due to the scheduled
decommissioning of the Jackson, MS, VORTAC, and the commissioning of
the Magnolia, MS, VORTAC navigation aids.

DATES: Comments must be received on or before April 1, 2013.

ADDRESSES: Send comments on this proposal to the U.S. Department of
Transportation, Docket Operations, M-30, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE.,
West Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140, Washington, DC 20590-0001;
telephone:<PHONE_NUMBER>. You must identify FAA Docket No. FAA-2013-
0016 and Airspace Docket No. 12-ASO-33 at the beginning of your
comments. You may also submit comments through the Internet at http://www.regulations.gov.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Paul Gallant, Airspace Policy and ATC
Procedures Group, Office of Airspace Services, Federal Aviation
Administration, 800 Independence Avenue SW., Washington, DC 20591;
telephone:<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Comments Invited

    Interested parties are invited to participate in this proposed
rulemaking by submitting such written data, views, or arguments as they
may desire. Comments that provide the factual basis supporting the
views and suggestions presented are particularly helpful in developing
reasoned regulatory decisions on the proposal. Comments are
specifically invited on the overall regulatory, aeronautical, economic,
environmental, and energy-related aspects of the proposal.
    Communications should identify both docket numbers (FAA Docket No.
FAA-2013-0016 and Airspace Docket No. 12-ASO-33) and be submitted in
triplicate to the Docket Management Facility (see ADDRESSES section for
address and phone number). You may also submit comments through the
Internet at http://www.regulations.gov.
    Commenters wishing the FAA to acknowledge receipt of their comments
on this action must submit with those comments a self-addressed,
stamped postcard on which the following statement is made: ``Comments
to FAA Docket No. FAA-2013-0016 and Airspace Docket No. 12-ASO-33.''
The postcard will be date/time stamped and returned to the commenter.
    All communications received on or before the specified comment
closing date will be considered before taking action on the proposed
rule. The proposal contained in this action may be changed in light of
comments received. All comments submitted will be available for
examination in the public docket both before and after the comment
closing date. A report summarizing each substantive public contact with
FAA personnel concerned with this rulemaking will be filed in the
docket.

Availability of NPRM's

    An electronic copy of this document may be downloaded through the
Internet at http://www.regulations.gov.
    You may review the public docket containing the proposal, any
comments received and any final disposition in person in the Dockets
Office (see ADDRESSES section for address and phone number) between
9:00 a.m. and 5:00 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal
holidays. An informal docket may also be examined during normal
business hours at the office of the Eastern Service Center, Federal
Aviation Administration, Room 210, 1701 Columbia Ave., College Park, GA
30337.
    Persons interested in being placed on a mailing list for future
NPRM's should contact the FAA's Office of Rulemaking,<PHONE_NUMBER>,
for a copy of Advisory Circular No. 11-2A, Notice of Proposed
Rulemaking Distribution System, which describes the application
procedure.

Background

    The Jackson, MS, VORTAC will be permanently decommissioned in 2013.
The new Magnolia, MS, VORTAC is being constructed on the property of
Bruce Campbell Field Airport in Madison, MS, to replace the Jackson
VORTAC. The Magnolia VORTAC site is approximately 5.5 NM southeast of
the Jackson VORTAC location. The Magnolia VORTAC is scheduled for
commissioning concurrent with the shutdown of the Jackson VORTAC. This
proposal amends the affected route descriptions due to the VORTAC
changes.

The Proposal

    The FAA is proposing an amendment to Title 14, Code of Federal
Regulations (14 CFR) part 71 to modify two jet routes and seven VOR
Federal airways; and cancel two VOR Federal airways in the vicinity of
Jackson, MS. Specifically, the following changes are proposed:
    Jet Route J-4 would be amended by removing ``Jackson, MS'' from the
description and inserting ``Magnolia, MS'' in its place.
    Jet Route J-20 would be amended by removing ``Jackson, MS'' from
the description and inserting ``Magnolia, MS'' in its place. Also, the
J-20 description in FAA Order 7400.9 contains an editorial error
whereby ``Montgomery, AL'' is listed before ``Meridian, MS'' instead of
following it. This action would correct the description by moving
``Montgomery, AL'' to follow ``Meridian, MS'' to match its proper
geographic position along the route. It should be noted that this
editorial error appears only in the route description in Order 7400.9.
J-20 is correct in the NAS database and on IFR Enroute High Altitude
chart H-6.
    VOR Federal Airways V-9 and V-11 would be amended by removing
``Jackson, MS'' and inserting ``Magnolia, MS'' and by inserting radial
intersections using the new Magnolia VORTAC.
    VOR Federal Airway V-18 would be modified by removing ``Jackson,
MS'' and inserting ``Magnolia, MS'' in its

place and by correcting the spelling of ``Talladega'' in the route
description listed in FAA Order 7400.9.
    VOR Federal Airway V-74 would be modified so that the last route
segment proceeds from the Greenville, MS, VOR/DME direct to the new
Magnolia VORTAC instead of the Jackson VORTAC.
    VOR Federal Airway V-245 would amended by removing ``Jackson, MS''
and substituting ``Magnolia, MS,'' in the description.
    Currently, V-417 extends from Monroe, LA, to Charleston, SC. This
action would cancel the portion of V-417 that lies between Monroe, LA,
and Meridian, MS. Between those two points, V-417 serves as an
alternate airway to V-18. However, V-18 provides direct, more efficient
routing between Monroe and Meridian, while V-417 includes two doglegs
to the south of V-18, resulting in additional flying miles between
Monroe and Meridian. The V-417 segments between Monroe and Meridian
have been deemed obsolete and of little value to the National Airspace
System (NAS), therefore, V-417 would be amended to begin at Meridian
and proceed along the current route to Charleston.
    V-427 would be removed. V-427 currently extends between Monroe, LA
and Jackson, MS. Similar to V-417 (above) V-427 also serves as an
alternate airway to V-18, but to the north side of V-18. Since V-18
provides a direct and more efficient route between Monroe, LA, and the
Jackson, MS/Magnolia, MS, area, the FAA has determined that V-427 is
obsolete and of little value to the NAS.
    V-555 currently extends between Picayune, MS, and Sidon, MS, and
serves as an alternate route to the east of V-9, between McComb, MS,
and Sidon. Since V-9 provides direct, more efficient routing between
McComb and Sidon, the FAA is proposing to modify V-555 by removing the
segment between McComb and Sidon, which has been determined to be of
minimal value to the NAS. As a result, the modified V-555 would only
extend between Picayune and McComb.
    V-557 currently extends between McComb, MS and Sidon, MS and is an
alternate route to the west of V-9. However, V-9 provides direct, more
efficient routing between those points; therefore, the FAA has
determined that V-557 is of minimal value to the NAS, and would be
removed.
    The full descriptions of the proposed amended routes are listed in
``The Proposed Amendment'' section, below. Where new navigation aid
radials are established in a description, both True and Magnetic
degrees are shown. Otherwise, only True degrees are stated.
    Jet routes are published in paragraph 2004, and VOR Federal airways
are published in paragraph 6010, respectively, of FAA Order 7400.9W
dated August 8, 2012, and effective September 15, 2012, which is
incorporated by reference in 14 CFR 71.1. The jet routes and VOR
Federal airways listed in this document would be subsequently published
in the Order.
    The FAA has determined that this proposed regulation only involves
an established body of technical regulations for which frequent and
routine amendments are necessary to keep them operationally current.
Therefore, this proposed regulation: (1) Is not a ``significant
regulatory action'' under Executive Order 12866; (2) is not a
``significant rule'' under Department of Transportation (DOT)
Regulatory Policies and Procedures (44 FR 11034; February 26, 1979);
and (3) does not warrant preparation of a regulatory evaluation as the
anticipated impact is so minimal. Since this is a routine matter that
will only affect air traffic procedures and air navigation, it is
certified that this proposed rule, when promulgated, will not have a
significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities
under the criteria of the Regulatory Flexibility Act.
    The FAA's authority to issue rules regarding aviation safety is
found in Title 49 of the United States Code. Subtitle I, Section 106
describes the authority of the FAA Administrator. Subtitle VII,
Aviation Programs, describes in more detail the scope of the agency's
authority.
    This rulemaking is promulgated under the authority described in
Subtitle VII, Part A, Subpart I, Section 40103. Under that section, the
FAA is charged with prescribing regulations to assign the use of the
airspace necessary to ensure the safety of aircraft and the efficient
use of airspace. This regulation is within the scope of that authority
as it would modify the route structure as required to preserve the safe
and efficient flow of air traffic in the vicinity of Jackson, MS.

Environmental Review

    This proposal will be subject to an environmental analysis in
accordance with FAA Order 1050.1E, ``Environmental Impacts: Policies
and Procedures'' prior to any FAA final regulatory action.

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 71

    Airspace, Incorporation by reference, Navigation (air).

The Proposed Amendment

    In consideration of the foregoing, the Federal Aviation
Administration proposes to amend 14 CFR part 71 as follows:

PART 71--DESIGNATION OF CLASS A, B, C, D, AND E AIRSPACE AREAS; AIR
TRAFFIC SERVICE ROUTES; AND REPORTING POINTS

0
1. The authority citation for part 71 continues to read as follows:

    Authority: 49 U.S.C. 106(g), 40103, 40113, 40120; E.O. 10854, 24
FR 9565, 3 CFR, 1959-1963 Comp., p. 389.

Sec.  71.1  [Amended]

0
2. The incorporation by reference in 14 CFR 71.1 of FAA Order 7400.9W,
Airspace Designations and Reporting Points, Dated August 8, 2012 and
effective September 15, 2012, is amended as follows:

Paragraph 2004 Jet routes.

* * * * *

J-4 [Amended]

    From Los Angeles, CA, via INT Los Angeles 083[deg] and
Twentynine Palms, CA, 269[deg] radials; Twentynine Palms; Parker,
CA; Buckeye, AZ; San Simon, AZ; Newman, TX; Wink, TX; Abilene, TX;
Ranger, TX; Belcher, LA; Magnolia, MS; Meridian, MS; Montgomery, AL;
INT Montgomery 051[deg] and Colliers, SC, 268[deg] radials;
Colliers; Columbia, SC; Florence, SC; to Wilmington, NC.

J-20 [Amended]

    From Seattle, WA, via Yakima, WA; Pendleton, OR; Donnelly, ID;
Pocatello, ID; Rock Springs, WY; Falcon, CO; Hugo, CO; Lamar, CO;
Liberal, KS; INT Liberal 137[deg] and Will Rogers, OK, 284[deg]
radials; Will Rogers; Belcher, LA; Magnolia, MS; Meridian, MS;
Montgomery, AL; Seminole, FL; INT Seminole 129[deg] and Orlando, FL,
306[deg] radials; to Orlando.
* * * * *

Paragraph 6010 Domestic VOR Federal airways.

V-9 [Amended]

    From Leeville, LA; McComb, MS; INT McComb 004[deg]T/001[deg]M
and Magnolia, MS 194[deg]T/195[deg]M radials; Magnolia; Sidon, MS;
Marvell, AR; Gilmore, AR; Malden, MO; Farmington, MO; St. Louis, MO;
Spinner, IL; Pontiac, IL; INT Pontiac, IL 343[deg] and Rockford, IL,
169[deg] radials; Rockford; Janesville, WI; Madison, WI; Oshkosh,
WI; Green Bay, WI; Iron Mountain, MI; to Houghton, MI.

V-11 [Amended]

    From Brookley, AL; Greene County, MS; INT Greene County
315[deg]T/310[deg]M and Magnolia, MS 133[deg]T/134[deg]M radials;
Magnolia; Sidon, MS; Holly Springs, MS; Dyersburg, TN; Cunningham,
KY; Pocket City, IN; Brickyard, IN; Marion, IN; Fort Wayne, IN; to
INT Fort Wayne 038[deg] and Carleton, MI, 262[deg] radials.

V-18 [Amended]

    From Guthrie, TX, via INT Guthrie 156[deg] and Millsap, TX,
274[deg] radials; Millsap; Glen Rose, TX; Cedar Creek, TX; Quitman,
TX; Belcher, LA; Monroe, LA; Magnolia, MS; Meridian, MS; Crimson,
AL; Vulcan, AL; Talladega, AL; Atlanta, GA; Colliers, SC;
Charleston, SC.

V-74 [Amended]

    From Garden City, KS; Dodge City, KS; Anthony, KS; Pioneer, OK;
Tulsa, OK; Fort Smith, AR; 6 miles, 7 miles wide (4 miles north and
3 miles south of centerline) Little Rock, AR; Pine Bluff, AR;
Greenville, MS; Magnolia, MS.

V-245 [Amended]

    From Alexandria, LA, via Natchez, MS; Magnolia, MS; Bigbee, MS;
INT Bigbee 082[deg] and Crimson, AL, 304[deg] radials; to Crimson.

V-417 [Amended]

    From Meridian, MS, via Crimson, AL; Vulcan, AL; Rome, GA; INT
Rome 060[deg] and Electric City, SC, 274[deg] radials; INT Electric
City 274[deg] and Athens, GA, 340[deg] radials; Athens; Colliers,
SC; Allendale, SC; to Charleston, SC.

V-427 [Removed]

V-555 [Amended]

    From Picayune, MS; to McComb, MS.

V-557 [Removed]

    Issued in Washington, DC, on February 6, 2013.
Gary A. Norek,
Manager, Airspace Policy & ATC Procedures Group.
[FR Doc. 2013-03464 Filed 2-13-13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


[Federal Register Volume 85, Number 18 (Tuesday, January 28, 2020)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 4907-4910]
[FR Doc No: 2020-00607]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Coast Guard

33 CFR Part 165

[Docket Number USCG-2020-0001]
RIN 1625-AA00

Safety Zone; Delaware River Rock Blasting, Marcus Hook, PA

AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS.

ACTION: Interim final rule; request for comments.

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

SUMMARY: The Coast Guard is establishing three temporary safety zones
on the waters of the Delaware River in portions of Marcus Hook Range,
Tinicum Range and Anchorage 7 off Marcus Hook Range. The safety zones
will temporarily restrict vessel traffic from transiting or anchoring
in portions of the Delaware River while rock blasting, dredging, and
rock removal operations are being conducted to facilitate the Main
Channel Deepening project, and annual maintenance project for the
Delaware River. The safety zones are needed to protect personnel,
vessels, and the marine environment from hazards created by rock
blasting, dredging, and rock removal operations. Entry of vessels or
persons into these zones is prohibited unless specifically authorized
by the COTP or his designated representatives.

DATES: This interim rule is effective without actual notice from
January 28, 2020 through March 15, 2020. For the purposes of
enforcement, actual notice will be used from January 12, 2020, through
January 28, 2020.
    Comments and related material must be received by the Coast Guard
on or before February 12, 2020.

ADDRESSES: To view documents mentioned in this preamble as being
available in the docket, go to https://www.regulations.gov, type USCG-
2020-0001 in the ``SEARCH'' box and click ``SEARCH.'' Click on Open
Docket Folder on the line associated with this rule.
    You may submit comments identified by docket number USCG-2020-0001
using the Federal eRulemaking Portal at https://www.regulations.gov.
See the ``Public Participation and Request for Comments'' portion of
the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section for further instructions on
submitting comments.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: If you have questions on this rule,
call or email Petty Officer Edmund Ofalt, Waterways Management Branch,
U.S. Coast Guard Sector Delaware Bay; 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

    The Coast Guard is issuing this interim rule without prior notice
and opportunity to comment pursuant to authority under section 4(a) of
the Administrative Procedure Act (APA) (5 U.S.C. 553(b)). This
provision authorizes an agency to issue a rule without prior notice and
opportunity to comment when the agency for good cause finds that those
procedures are ``impracticable, unnecessary, or contrary to the public
interest.'' Under 5 U.S.C. 553(b)(B), the Coast Guard finds that good
cause exists for not publishing a notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM)
with respect to this rule because it is impracticable and contrary to
the public interest. There is insufficient time to allow for a
reasonable comment period prior to the start date for blasting and
dredging operations. The rule must be in force by January 12, 2020, to
serve its purpose of ensuring the safety of the general public from
hazards associated with rock blasting, dredging, and rock removal
operations.
    Under 5 U.S.C. 553(d)(3), the Coast Guard finds that good cause
exists for making this rule effective less than 30 days after
publication in the Federal Register. Delaying the effective date of
this rule would be impracticable and contrary to the public interest
because immediate action is needed to mitigate the potential safety
hazards associated with rock blasting, dredging, and rock removal
operations in these locations.
    We are soliciting comments on this rulemaking. If the Coast Guard
determines that changes to the rule are necessary we will publish a
subsequent

rulemaking document in the Federal Register.

III. Legal Authority and Need for Rule

    The Coast Guard is issuing this rule under authority in 46 U.S.C.
70034 (previously 33 U.S.C. 1231). The COTP has determined that there
are potential hazards associated with the rock blasting and dredging
operations. The purpose of this rulemaking is to ensure the safety of
personnel, vessels, and the marine environment within the vicinity of
rock blasting, dredging, and rock removal operations.

IV. Discussion of the Rule

    This rule establishes three safety zones from January 12, 2020,
through March 15, 2020. The safety zones are necessary to facilitate
the main channel deepening and annual maintenance of the Delaware River
from Marcus Hook Range to Tinicum Range, and Anchorage 7 off Marcus
Hook Range (as described in 33 CFR 110.157(a)(8)). Rock drilling,
hammering, removal, and dredging operations will most likely be
conducted with the drill boat APACHE, dredge NEW YORK, and dredge
ESSEX, though other dredges may be used, along with associated dredge
pipeline and boosters. The pipeline consists of a combination of
floating hoses immediately behind the dredge ESSEX and submerged
pipeline leading to upland disposal areas. Due to the hazards related
to rock drilling, hammering, removal, and dredging operations, the
associated pipeline and the location of submerged pipeline, safety
zones are being established in the following areas:
    (1) Safety zone one includes all navigable waters within 250 yards
of the dredge displaying lights and shapes for vessels restricted in
ability to maneuver as described in 33 CFR 83.27 and all related dredge
equipment when the dredge is operating in New Castle Range, Marcus Hook
Range, Deepwater Point Range, and Anchorage 7. This safety zone is
being established for the duration of the maintenance project. Vessels
requesting to transit the safety zone must contact the dredge on VHF
channel 13 or 16 at least 1 hour prior to arrival to arrange safe
passage. At least one side of the main navigational channel will be
kept clear for safe passage of vessels in the vicinity of the safety
zone. At no time will the entire main navigational channel be closed to
vessel traffic. Vessels should avoid meetings in these areas where one
side of the main navigational channel is open and proceed per this rule
and the Rules of the Road (33 CFR subchapter E).
    (2) Safety zone two includes all the waters of Anchorage 7 off
Marcus Hook Range, as described in 33 CFR 110.157(a)(8). Vessels
wishing to anchor in Anchorage 7 off Marcus Hook Range must obtain
permission from the COTP at least 24 hours in advance by calling (215)
271-4807. The COTP will permit only one vessel to anchor at a time on a
``first-come, first-served'' basis. Vessels will only be allowed to
anchor for a 12 hour period. Vessels that require an examination by the
Public Health Service, Customs, or Immigration authorities will be
directed to an anchorage by the COTP for the required inspection.
Vessels are encouraged to use Anchorage 9 near the entrance to Mantua
Creek, Anchorage 10 at Naval Base, Philadelphia, and Anchorage 6 off
Deepwater Point Range as alternative anchorages.
    (3) Safety zone three covers all navigable waters in the Delaware
River within 500 yards of vessels and machinery being used to conduct
rock blasting, dredging, and rock removal operations between Marcus
Hook Range and Tinicum Range.
    Entry into, transiting, or anchoring within safety zone one is
prohibited unless vessels obtain permission from the COTP or make
satisfactory passing arrangements with the operating dredge per this
rule and the Rules of the Road (33 CFR subchapter E). Though the dredge
ESSEX, and the dredge NEW YORK are the primary dredges to be used in
these operations, the COTP may update the information and the dredges
being utilized with these dredging operations via Marine Safety
Information Bulletin and Broadcast Notice to Mariners.
    Safety zone three will be enforced in an area and in a manner that
does not conflict with transiting commercial and recreational traffic,
except for the short periods of time when explosive detonations are
being conducted and shortly thereafter, when the channel is being
surveyed to ensure the navigational channel is clear for vessels to
transit. It is expected that these detonations will not occur more than
three times a day. At all other times, at least one side of the main
navigational channel will be open for vessels to transit. This rule
describes communications for notifying waterway users of upcoming
detonations and provides means for waterway users to request entry into
the safety zone.
    The COTP will activate and terminate the safety zones individually
once all submerged pipeline has been recovered and dredging operations
are completed in each respective area. Notice of the activation and the
termination of the safety zones will be made in accordance with 33 CFR
165.7.

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 13771 directs agencies to control
regulatory costs through a budgeting process. This rule has not been
designated a ``significant regulatory action,'' under Executive Order
12866. Accordingly, this rule has not been reviewed by the Office of
Management and Budget (OMB), and pursuant to OMB guidance it is exempt
from the requirements of Executive Order 13771.
    This regulatory action determination is based on the size,
location, duration, and traffic management of the safety zone. The
safety zone will be enforced in an area and in a manner that does not
conflict with transiting commercial and recreational traffic, except
for the short periods of time when explosive detonations are being
conducted. It is anticipated that the blasting detonations will not
occur more than three times a day. At all other times, at least one
side of the main navigational channel will be open for vessels to
transit. Moreover, the Coast Guard will work in coordination with the
pilots to ensure vessel traffic is limited during the times of
detonation and Broadcast Notice to Mariners are made via VHF-FM marine
channel 13 and 16 when blasting operations will occur.
    Although this regulation will restrict access to regulated areas,
the effect of this rule will not be significant because there are a
number of alternate anchorages available for vessels to anchor.
Furthermore, vessels may transit through the safety zones with the
permission of the COTP or make satisfactory passing arrangements with
the dredge ESSEX, drill boat APACHE, dredge NEW YORK or other dredges
that may be used in accordance with this rule and the Rules of the Road
(33 CFR subchapter E). Notification of the safety zones to the maritime
public will be made via maritime advisories allowing mariners to alter
their plans accordingly.

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
call or email the person listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT
section.
    If you think that your business, organization, or governmental
jurisdiction qualifies as a small entity and that this rule has 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 economically affects it.
    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 call or email 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
Directive 023-01, Rev. 1, associated implementing instructions, and
Environmental Planning COMDTINST 5090.1 (series), 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 this action is one of
a category of actions that do not individually or cumulatively have a
significant effect on the human environment. This rule involves safety
zones to protect waterway users that would prohibit entry within 500
yards of rock blasting, dredging, and rock removal conducted by the
drill boat APACHE and the dredge NEW YORK, within 250 yards of the
dredge ESSEX and associated equipment, and within Marcus Hook Anchorage
(No. 7) without prior approval. Vessels can request permission to enter
the safety zones. It is categorically excluded from further review
under paragraph L[60a] of Appendix A, Table 1 of DHS Instruction Manual
023-01-001-01, Rev. 1. A Record of Environmental Consideration
supporting this determination is available in the docket. For
instructions on locating the docket, see the ADDRESSES section of this
preamble.

G. Protest Activities

    The Coast Guard respects the First Amendment rights of protesters.
Protesters are asked to call or email 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.

VI. Public Participation and Request for Comments

    We view public participation as essential to effective rulemaking,
and will consider all comments and material received during the comment
period. Your comment can help shape the outcome of this rulemaking. If
you submit a comment, please include the docket number for this
rulemaking, indicate the specific section of this document to which
each comment applies, and provide a reason for each suggestion or
recommendation.
    We encourage you to submit comments through the Federal eRulemaking
Portal at https://www.regulations.gov. If your material cannot be
submitted using https://www.regulations.gov, call or email the person
in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section of this document for
alternate instructions.
    We accept anonymous comments. All comments received will be posted
without change to https://www.regulations.gov and will include any
personal information you have provided. For more about privacy and
submissions in response to this document, see DHS's Correspondence
System of Records notice (84 FR 48645, September 26, 2018).
    Documents mentioned in this interim final rule as being available
in the docket, and all public comments, will be in our online docket at
https://www.regulations.gov and can be viewed by following that
website's instructions.

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:  46 U.S.C. 70034, 70051; 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.T05-0001, to read as follows:

Sec.  165.T05-0001   Safety Zone, Delaware River Rock Blasting; Marcus
Hook, PA.

    (a) Location. The following areas are safety zones:
    (1) Safety zone one includes all waters within 250 yards of the
dredge displaying lights and shapes for vessels restricted in ability
to maneuver as described in 33 CFR 83.27, as well as all related dredge
equipment, while the dredge is operating in Marcus Hook Range. For
enforcement purposes Marcus Hook Range includes all navigable waters of
the Delaware River shoreline to shoreline, bound by a line drawn
perpendicular to the center line of the channel at the farthest upriver
point of the range to a line drawn perpendicular to the center line of
the channel at the farthest downriver point of the range.
    (2) Safety zone two includes all the waters of Anchorage 7 off
Marcus Hook Range, as described in 33 CFR 110.157(a)(8) and depicted on
U.S. Nautical Chart 12312.
    (3) Safety zone three includes all the navigable waters of the
Delaware River within 500 yards of vessels and machinery performing
rock blasting, rock removal, and dredging operations, between Marcus
Hook Range and Tinicum Range.
    (b) Definitions. As used in this section, designated representative
means any Coast Guard commissioned, warrant, or petty officer who has
been authorized by the Captain of the Port to assist with enforcement
of the safety zone described in paragraph (a) of this section.
    (c) Regulations. (1) Entry into or transiting within the safety
zone one is prohibited unless vessels obtain permission from the
Captain of the Port via VHF-FM channel 16 or<PHONE_NUMBER>, or make
satisfactory passing arrangements via VHF-FM channel 13 or 16 with the
operating dredge per this section and the rules of the Road (33 CFR
subchapter E). Vessels requesting to transit shall contact the
operating dredge via VHF-FM channel 13 or 16 at least 1 hour prior to
arrival.
    (2) Vessels desiring to anchor in safety zone two, Anchorage 7 off
Marcus Hook Range, must obtain permission from the COTP at least 24
hours in advance by calling<PHONE_NUMBER>. The COTP will permit one
vessel at a time to anchor on a ``first-come, first-served'' basis.
Vessels will only be allowed to anchor for a 12 hour period. Vessels
that require an examination by the Public Health Service, Customs, or
Immigration authorities will be directed to an anchorage for the
required inspection by the COTP.
    (3) The operator of any vessel requesting to transit through safety
zone three shall proceed as directed by the drill boat APACHE, the
dredge TEXAS and NEW YORK, or the designated representative of the
Captain of the Port and must operate at the minimum safe speed
necessary to maintain steerage and reduce wake.
    (4) No vessels may transit through safety zone three during times
of explosive detonation. During explosive detonation, vessels will be
required to maintain a 500 yard distance from the drill boat APACHE.
The drill boat APACHE will make broadcasts, via VHF-FM Channel 13 and
16, at 15 minutes, 5 minutes, and 1 minute prior to detonation, as well
as a countdown to detonation on VHF-FM Channel 16.
    (4) After every explosive detonation a survey will be conducted by
the dredging contractor to ensure the navigational channel is clear for
vessels to transit. The drill boat APACHE will broadcast, via VHF-FM
channel 13 and 16, when the survey has been completed and the channel
is clear to transit. Vessels requesting to transit through the safety
zone shall proceed as directed by the Captain of the Port and contact
the drill boat APACHE on VHF-FM channel 13 to make safe passing
arrangements.
    (5) This section applies to all vessels except those engaged in the
following operations: Enforcement of laws, service of aids to
navigation, and emergency response.
    (d) Enforcement. The U.S. Coast Guard may be assisted by federal,
state and local agencies in the patrol and enforcement of the zone.
    (e) Enforcement period. This rule will be enforced from January 12,
2020, through March 15, 2020, unless cancelled earlier by the Captain
of the Port.

    Dated: January 10, 2020.
Scott E. Anderson,
Captain, U.S. Coast Guard, Captain of the Port, Delaware Bay.
[FR Doc. 2020-00607 Filed 1-27-20; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 9110-04-P


[Federal Register Volume 80, Number 143 (Monday, July 27, 2015)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 44289-44291]
[FR Doc No: 2015-18390]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Coast Guard

33 CFR Part 165

[Docket No. USCG-2015-0286]
RIN 1625-AA00

Safety Zone, Fall River Grand Prix, Mt. Hope Bay and Taunton
River, Fall River, MA

AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS.

ACTION: Temporary final rule.

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

SUMMARY: The Coast Guard is establishing a safety zone in the navigable
waters of Mt. Hope Bay and the Taunton River in the vicinity of Fall
River, MA, during the Fall River Grand Prix marine event from August
14-16, 2015. This safety zone is intended to safeguard mariners from
the hazards associated with high-speed, high-performance motorboats
competing in the event. Vessels are prohibited from entering into,
transiting through, mooring, or anchoring within this safety zone
during periods of enforcement unless authorized by the Captain of the
Port (COTP), Southeastern New England or the COTP's designated
representative.

DATES: This rule is effective from 9 a.m., Friday, August 14, 2015 to 5
p.m., Sunday, August 16, 2015. It will be subject to enforcement
between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m. on each of these three dates.

ADDRESSES: Documents mentioned in this preamble are part of docket
USCG-2015-0286. To view documents mentioned in the 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,
contact Mr. Edward G. LeBlanc at Coast Guard Sector Southeastern New
England, telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>, email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>If
you have questions on viewing the docket, please contact Ms. Cheryl
Collins, Program Manager, Docket Operations, telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>.

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 29, 2015, we published a notice of proposed rulemaking
(NPRM) entitled ``Safety Zone, Fall River Grand Prix, Mt. Hope Bay and
Taunton River, Fall River, MA'' in the Federal Register (80 FR 30637).
We received no comments on the NPRM.
    Under 5 U.S.C. 553(d)(3), the Coast Guard finds that good cause
exists for making this rule effective less than 30 days after
publication in the Federal Register. This provision authorizes an
agency to make a rule effective less than 30 days after publication in
the Federal Register when the agency for good cause finds that delaying
the effective period for 30 days or more is ''impracticable,
unnecessary, or contrary to the public interest.'' Under 5 U.S.C.
553(d)(3), the Coast Guard finds that good cause exists for making this
rule effective less than 30 days after publication in the Federal
Register to safeguard participants and the public at the Fall River
Grand Prix, which is scheduled for August 14-16, 2015. State and local
government officials support the event, there is no known opposition to
the event, and no comments opposing the safety zone were received in
response to the NPRM. Therefore, it is impracticable and unnecessary to
make this rule effective 30 days or more after publication in the
Federal Register.

B. Basis and Purpose

    The legal basis for the rule is 33 U.S.C. 1231; 50 U.S.C. 191, 33
CFR 1.05-1, 6.04-1, 6.04-6, 160.5; and Department of Homeland Security
Delegation No. 0170.1, which collectively authorize the Coast Guard to
establish regulatory safety zones.
    The initial Fall River Grand Prix is a three-day event where high-
speed, high-performance motorboats participate in controlled races
within a well-defined water area. This safety zone is intended to
encompass the racing area and will include a buffer between the racing
motorboats and spectator craft to provide a margin of safety. As these
races are part of a national series of events, governed by a national
racing and safety organization (the U.S. Offshore Powerboat
Association), and

operated by experienced high-speed motorboat crews and support teams,
they are expected to generate local and regional media coverage, and
attract spectators on a number of recreational and excursion vessels.
    The Coast Guard is establishing this safety zone, in conjunction
with the Fall River Grand Prix, to ensure the protection of the
maritime public and event participants from the hazards associated with
high-speed, high-performance motorboat racing.

C. Discussion of Comments, Changes and the Final Rule

    No comments were received and no changes were made to the language
contained in the NPRM.

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 or executive orders.

1. Executive Order 12866 and Executive Order 13563

    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, 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 adverse economic impact of this rule to be minimal.
Although this regulation may have some adverse impact on the public,
the potential impact will be minimized for the following reasons: The
safety zone will be in effect for only a few hours each day for three
consecutive days, and vessels will only be restricted from the zone in
Mt. Hope Bay and the Taunton River in the vicinity of Fall River, MA
during those limited periods when the races are actually ongoing;
during periods when there is no actual racing (e.g., racing vessels are
transiting from the pier to the racing site; downtime between races,
etc.) vessels may be allowed to transit through the safety zone; there
is an alternate route available for recreational vessels to the west of
the safety zone that does not add substantial transit time and is
already routinely used by mariners; many vessels, especially
recreational vessels, may transit in all portions of the affected
waterway except for those areas covered by the safety zone; and vessels
may enter or pass through the affected waterway with the permission of
the COTP or the COTP's representative.
    Notification of the Fall River Grand Prix and the associated safety
zone will be made to mariners through both the Southeastern
Massachusetts and Rhode Island Port Safety Forums, local Notice to
Mariners, event sponsors, and local media well in advance of the event.

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 received no comments on this rule from any
small business, nor from the U.S Small Business Administration. 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.
    This rule may affect the following entities, some of which might be
small entities: Owners or operators of vessels intending to transit in
Mt. Hope Bay and the Taunton River in the vicinity of Fall River, MA,
during the Fall River Grand Prix marine event. The impact to these
entities will not be significant, and this rule will not affect a
substantial number of small entities, because the waterway will be
restricted and the safety zone enforced only during those limited
periods when the races are actually ongoing. During periods when there
is no actual racing (e.g., racing vessels are transiting from the pier
to the racing site; downtime between races, etc.) vessels may be
allowed to transit through the safety zone. Also, there is an alternate
route available for recreational vessels to the west of the safety zone
that does not add substantial transit time and is already routinely
used by mariners. And many vessels, especially recreational vessels,
may transit in all portions of the affected waterway except for those
areas covered by the safety zone. And all vessels may enter or pass
through the affected waterway with the permission of the COTP or the
COTP's representative.

3. Assistance for Small Entities

    Under section 213(a) of the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement
Fairness Act of 1996 (Public Law 104-121), we want to assist small
entities in understanding this 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 the person listed under FOR
FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT.
    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 calls for no 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 State or local
governments and would either preempt State law or impose a substantial
direct cost of compliance on them. We have analyzed this rule under
that Order and have determined that it 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 would not result
in such expenditure,

we do discuss the effects of this rule elsewhere in this preamble.

8. Taking of Private Property

    This rule would 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 From Environmental Health Risks

    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 would not create an
environmental risk to health or risk to safety that might
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 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.

12. Energy Effects

    This rule 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 concluded
this action is one of a category of actions which do not individually
or cumulatively have a significant effect on the human environment.
This rule is categorically excluded, under figure 2-1, paragraph
(34)(g), of the Instruction. This rule involves the establishment of a
safety zone.
    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 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 reads as follows:

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

0
2. Add Sec.  165.T01-0286 to read as follows:

Sec.  165.T01-0286  Safety Zone, Fall River Grand Prix, Mt. Hope Bay
and Taunton River, Fall River, MA.

    (a) Location. The following area is a safety zone: Mt. Hope Bay and
the Taunton River navigation channel from approximately Mt. Hope Bay
buoy R10 southwest of Brayton Point channel, and extending
approximately two miles to the northeast up to and including Mt. Hope
Bay buoy C17 north of the Braga Bridge. The safety zone is encompassed
by the following coordinates:

------------------------------------------------------------------------
             Corner                    Latitude            Longitude
------------------------------------------------------------------------
SW.............................  41[deg]41.40' N.     71[deg]11.15' W.
NW.............................  41[deg]41.48' N.     71[deg]11.15' W.
SE.............................  41[deg]42.33' N.     71[deg]09.40' W.
NE.............................  41[deg]42.42' N.     71[deg]09.47' W.
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    (b) Enforcement Period. Vessels will be prohibited from entering
this safety zone, when enforced, during the Fall River Grand Prix
marine event between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m. from Friday, August 14, 2015 to
Sunday, August 16, 2015.
    (c) Definitions. The following definitions apply to this section:
    (1) Designated Representative. A ``designated representative'' is
any Coast Guard commissioned, warrant or petty officer of the U.S.
Coast Guard who has been designated by the Captain of the Port, Sector
Southeastern New England (COTP), to act on his or her behalf. The
designated representative may be on an official patrol vessel or may be
on shore and will communicate with vessels via VHF-FM radio or
loudhailer. In addition, members of the Coast Guard Auxiliary may be
present to inform vessel operators of this regulation.
    (2) Official Patrol Vessels. Official patrol vessels may consist of
any Coast Guard, Coast Guard Auxiliary, state, or local law enforcement
vessels assigned or approved by the COTP.
    (3) Patrol Commander. The Coast Guard may patrol each safety zone
under the direction of a designated Coast Guard Patrol Commander. The
Patrol Commander may be contacted on Channel 16 VHF-FM (156.8 MHz) by
the call sign ``PATCOM.''
    (4) Spectators. All persons and vessels not registered with the
event sponsor as participants or official patrol vessels.
    (d) Regulations. (1) The general regulations contained in 33 CFR
165.23 as well as the following regulations apply to the safety zone
established in conjunction with the Fall River Grand Prix, Taunton
River, vicinity of Fall River, MA. These regulations may be enforced
for the duration of the event.
    (2) No later than 8 a.m. each day of the event, the Coast Guard
will announce via Safety Marine Information Broadcasts and local media
the times and duration of each race scheduled for that day, and the
precise area(s) of the safety zone that will be enforced.
    (3) Vessels may not transit through or within the safety zone
during periods of enforcement without Patrol Commander approval.
Vessels permitted to transit must operate at a no-wake speed, in a
manner which will not endanger participants or other crafts in the
event.
    (4) Spectators or other vessels shall not anchor, block, loiter, or
impede the movement of event participants or official patrol vessels in
the safety zone unless authorized by an official patrol vessel.
    (5) The Patrol Commander may control the movement of all vessels in
the safety zone. When hailed or signaled by an official patrol vessel,
a vessel shall come to an immediate stop and comply with the lawful
directions issued. Failure to comply with a lawful direction may result
in expulsion from the area, citation for failure to comply, or both.
    (6) The Patrol Commander may delay or terminate the Fall River
Grand Prix at any time to ensure safety. Such action may be justified
as a result of weather, traffic density, spectator operation or
participant behavior.

    Dated: July 8, 2015.
Richard J. Schultz,
Commander, U.S. Coast Guard, Acting Captain of the Port Southeastern
New England.
[FR Doc. 2015-18390 Filed 7-24-15; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 9110-04-P


[Federal Register Volume 80, Number 166 (Thursday, August 27, 2015)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 51970-51972]
[FR Doc No: 2015-21089]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 71

[Docket No. FAA-2015-3322; Airspace Docket No. 15-ANM-16]

Proposed Establishment of Class E Airspace; Vancouver, WA

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM).

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

SUMMARY: This action proposes to establish Class E surface area
airspace at Pearson Field, Vancouver, WA, to accommodate existing
Standard Instrument Approach Procedures (SIAPs) at the airport. The FAA
is taking this action to enhance the safety and

management of Instrument Flight Rules (IFR) operations at the airport.

DATES: Comments must be received on or before October 13, 2015.

ADDRESSES: Send comments on this proposal to the U.S. Department of
Transportation, Docket Operations, M-30, West Building Ground Floor,
Room W12-140, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., Washington, DC 20590;
telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>. You must identify FAA Docket No. FAA-2015-
3322; Airspace Docket No. 15-ANM-16, at the beginning of your comments.
You may also submit comments through the Internet at http://www.regulations.gov. You may review the public docket containing the
proposal, any comments received, and any final disposition in person in
the Dockets Office between 9:00 a.m. and 5:00 p.m., Monday through
Friday, except Federal holidays. The Docket Office (telephone 1-800-
647-5527), is on the ground floor of the building at the above address.
    FAA Order 7400.9Y, Airspace Designations and Reporting Points, and
subsequent amendments can be viewed online at http://www.faa.gov/air_traffic/publications/. For further information, you can contact the
Airspace Policy and ATC Regulations Group, Federal Aviation
Administration, 800 Independence Avenue SW., Washington, DC 29591;
telephone:<PHONE_NUMBER>. The Order is also available for inspection at
the National Archives and Records Administration (NARA). For
information on the availability of this material at NARA, call 202-741-
6030, or go to http://www.archives.gov/federal_register/code_of_federal-regulations/ibr_locations.html.
    FAA Order 7400.9, Airspace Designations and Reporting Points, is
published yearly and effective on September 15.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Steve Haga, Federal Aviation
Administration, Operations Support Group, Western Service Center, 1601
Lind Avenue SW, Renton, WA 98057; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Authority for This Rulemaking

    The FAA's authority to issue rules regarding aviation safety is
found in Title 49 of the United States Code. Subtitle I, Section 106
describes the authority of the FAA Administrator. Subtitle VII,
Aviation Programs, describes in more detail the scope of the agency's
authority. This rulemaking is promulgated under the authority described
in Subtitle VII, Part, A, Subpart I, Section 40103. Under that section,
the FAA is charged with prescribing regulations to assign the use of
airspace necessary to ensure the safety of aircraft and the efficient
use of airspace. This regulation is within the scope of that authority
as it would establish Class E airspace at Pearson Field, Vancouver, WA.

Comments Invited

    Interested parties are invited to participate in this proposed
rulemaking by submitting such written data, views, or arguments, as
they may desire. Comments that provide the factual basis supporting the
views and suggestions presented are particularly helpful in developing
reasoned regulatory decisions on the proposal. Comments are
specifically invited on the overall regulatory, aeronautical, economic,
environmental, and energy-related aspects of the proposal.
Communications should identify both docket numbers and be submitted in
triplicate to the address listed above. Commenters wishing the FAA to
acknowledge receipt of their comments on this notice must submit with
those comments a self-addressed, stamped postcard on which the
following statement is made: ``Comments to Docket No. FAA-2015-3322;
Airspace Docket No. 15-ANM-16.'' The postcard will be date/time stamped
and returned to the commenter.

Availability of NPRMs

    An electronic copy of this document may be downloaded through the
Internet at http://www.regulations.gov. Recently published rulemaking
documents can also be accessed through the FAA's Web page at http://www.faa.gov/airports_airtraffic/air_traffic/publications/airspace_amendments/.
    You may review the public docket containing the proposal, any
comments received, and any final disposition in person in the Dockets
Office (see the ADDRESSES section for the address and phone number)
between 9:00 a.m. and 5:00 p.m., Monday through Friday, except federal
holidays. An informal docket may also be examined during normal
business hours at the Northwest Mountain Regional Office of the Federal
Aviation Administration, Air Traffic Organization, Western Service
Center, Operations Support Group, 1601 Lind Avenue SW., Renton, WA
98057.
    Persons interested in being placed on a mailing list for future
NPRMs should contact the FAA's Office of Rulemaking,<PHONE_NUMBER>,
for a copy of Advisory Circular No. 11-2A, Notice of Proposed
Rulemaking Distribution System, which describes the application
procedure.

Availability and Summary of Documents Proposed for Incorporation by
Reference

    This document proposes to amend FAA Order 7400.9Y, Airspace
Designations and Reporting Points, dated August 6, 2014, and effective
September 15, 2014. FAA Order 7400.9Y is publicly available as listed
in the ADDRESSES section of this proposed rule. FAA Order 7400.9Y lists
Class A, B, C, D, and E airspace areas, air traffic service routes, and
reporting points.

The Proposal

    The FAA is proposing an amendment to Title 14 Code of Federal
Regulations (14 CFR) Part 71 by establishing Class E surface area
airspace at Pearson Field, Vancouver, WA. A review of the airspace
revealed establishment necessary due to current standard instrument
approach procedures not contained within controlled airspace.
    Class E surface area airspace would be established to an area 4.9
miles west, 4 miles east, 2.9 miles north, and 1.8 miles south of
Pearson Field.
    Class E airspace designations are published in paragraph 6002 of
FAA Order 7400.9Y, dated August 6, 2014, and effective September 15,
2014, which is incorporated by reference in 14 CFR 71.1. The Class E
airspace designations listed in this document will be published
subsequently in the Order.

Regulatory Notices and Analyses

    The FAA has determined this proposed regulation only involves an
established body of technical regulations for which frequent and
routine amendments are necessary to keep them operationally current.
Therefore, this proposed regulation; (1) Is not a ``significant
regulatory action'' under Executive Order 12866; (2) is not a
``significant rule'' under DOT Regulatory Policies and Procedures (44
FR 11034; February 26, 1979); and (3) does not warrant preparation of a
regulatory evaluation as the anticipated impact is so minimal. Since
this is a routine matter that will only affect air traffic procedures
and air navigation, it is certified this proposed rule, when
promulgated, would not have a significant economic impact on a
substantial number of small entities under the criteria of the
Regulatory Flexibility Act.

Environmental Review

    This proposal will be subject to an environmental analysis in
accordance with FAA Order 1050.1E, ``Environmental Impacts: Policies
and Procedures'' prior to any FAA final regulatory action.

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 71

    Airspace, Incorporation by reference, Navigation (air).

The Proposed Amendment

    Accordingly, pursuant to the authority delegated to me, the Federal
Aviation Administration proposes to amend 14 CFR part 71 as follows:

PART 71--DESIGNATION OF CLASS A, B, C, D, AND E AIRSPACE AREAS; AIR
TRAFFIC SERVICE ROUTES; AND REPORTING POINTS

0
1. The authority citation for 14 CFR part 71 continues to read as
follows:

     Authority:  49 U.S.C. 106(f), 106(g); 40103, 40113, 40120; E.O.
10854, 24 FR 9565, 3 CFR, 1959-1963 Comp., p. 389.

Sec.  71.1  [Amended]

0
2. The incorporation by reference in 14 CFR 71.1 of FAA Order 7400.9Y,
Airspace Designations and Reporting Points, dated August 6, 2014, and
effective September 15, 2014, is amended as follows:

Paragraph 6002 Class E Airspace Designated as Surface Areas

* * * * *

ANM OR E2 Vancouver, WA [New]

Pearson Field, WA
    (Lat. 45[deg]37'14'' N., long. 122[deg]39'23'' W.)

That airspace extending upward from the surface bounded by a line
beginning at lat. 45[deg]36'06'' N., long. 122[deg]46'29'' W.; to
lat. 45[deg]38'27'' N., long. 122[deg]46'19'' W.; to lat.
45[deg]40'21'' N., long. 122[deg]44'08'' W.; to lat. 45[deg]39'49''
N., long. 122[deg]33'23'' W.; to lat. 45[deg]34'51'' N., long.
122[deg]33'53'' W.; thence to the point of beginning.

    Issued in Seattle, Washington, on August 19, 2015.
Christopher Ramirez,
Manager, Operations Support Group, Western Service Center.
[FR Doc. 2015-21089 Filed 8-26-15; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 4910-13-P