[Federal Register: May 10, 2007 (Volume 72, Number 90)]
[Notices]
[Page 26669-26671]
[DOCID:fr10my07-121]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-55709; File No. SR-OCC-2007-05]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; The Options Clearing Corporation;
Notice of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of a Proposed Rule Change
Relating to OCC's Clearing Fee Schedule

May 4, 2007.
    Pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934
(``Act''),\1\ notice is hereby given that on April 11, 2007, The
Options Clearing Corporation (``OCC'') 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
primarily by OCC. 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).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

    The proposed rule change would (i) make permanent the current
discounted clearing fee schedule for specified contracts, (ii) further
discount the newly adopted clearing fee schedule, and (iii) modify the
new product clearing fee schedule, with all changes being effective May
1, 2007.

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

    In its filing with the Commission, OCC 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. OCC has prepared summaries, set forth in sections (A),
(B), and (C) below, of the most significant aspects of such
statements.\2\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \2\ The Commission has modified parts of these statements.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

    The purpose of the proposed rule change is to amend OCC's standard
clearing and new products fee schedules, effective May 1, 2007, as
described below. First, OCC is making permanent the current discounted
clearing fee schedule for (i) securities

options and (ii) security futures where at least one side of the trade
is cleared by an OCC clearing member. Second, OCC is discounting the
newly adopted permanent clearing fee schedule until further action by
the OCC Board of Directors. Third, OCC is modifying its new product fee
schedule to reflect the foregoing clearing fee changes and to make it
easier to administer. The following charts summarize the changes:

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                          Current permanent
                                       standard fee  schedule,   New permanent standard  Discounted standard fee
           Contracts/trade               effective  April 1,         fee  schedule,         schedule, effective
                                                 2004           effective  May 1, 2007*        May 1, 2007
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1-500................................  $0.0825/contract.......  $0.05/contract.........  $0.035/contract.
501-1,000............................  $0.0675/contract.......  $0.04/contract.........  $0.028/contract.
1,001-2,000..........................  $0.0575/contract.......  $0.03/contract.........  $0.021/contract.
>2,000...............................  $110.00 (capped).......  $55.00 (capped)........  $35.00 (capped).
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
*Clearing fees are currently charged at these rates as discounted fees. See File No. SR-OCC-2006-14.

------------------------------------------------------------------------
 New product fee schedule, effective July     New product fee schedule,
                  1, 2005                       effective May 1, 2007
------------------------------------------------------------------------
First calendar month traded: $ .00.         From first day of listing
                                             through the end of the
                                             following calendar month.
Second calendar month traded: $0.00.
Cleared trades w/contracts of: 1-4,400--$
 .01.
Thereafter reverts to clearing fees
 specified in the current clearing fee
 schedule.
Greater than 4,400--$ 40.00 per trade
Third calendar month traded:                ............................
Cleared trades w/contracts of: 1-2,200--$   ............................
 .02.
Greater than 2,200--$ 40.00 per trade.      ............................
Fourth calendar month traded:               ............................
Reverts to current clearing fees.           ............................
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The foregoing reductions in OCC's clearing fees reflect the strong
contract volume experienced by OCC this year to date. OCC believes that
these fee changes will financially benefit clearing members and other
market participants without adversely affecting OCC's ability to meet
its expenses and maintain an acceptable level of retained earnings. The
discounted clearing fees will remain in effect until further action by
OCC's Board of Directors.
    The proposed rule change is consistent with Section 17A of the Act
because it benefits clearing members and other market participants by
reducing and discounting clearing fees and allocating them in a fair
and equitable manner. The proposed rule change is not inconsistent with
the existing rules of OCC, including any other rules proposed to be
amended.

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

    OCC does not believe that the proposed rule change would impose any
burden on competition.

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

    Written comments were not and are not intended to be solicited with
respect to the proposed rule change and none have been received.

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

    Because the foregoing rule change changes fees charged clearing
members by OCC, it has become effective pursuant to Section
19(b)(3)(A)(ii) of the Act\3\ and Rule 19b-4(f)(2)\4\ thereunder. At
any time within sixty days of the filing of the proposed rule change,
the Commission may summarily abrogate 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.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

IV. Solicitation of Comments

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

Electronic Comments

     Use the Commission's Internet comment form (http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml.
) or     Send an e-mail to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Please include

File Number SR-OCC-2007-05 on the subject line.

Paper Comments

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

All submissions should refer to File Number SR-OCC-2007-05. This file
number should be included on the subject line if e-mail 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 inspection and
copying in the Commission's Public Reference Section, 100 F Street,
NE., Washington, DC 20549. Copies of such filing also will be available
for inspection and copying at the principal office of OCC and on OCC's
Web site at http://www.optionsclearing.com.

    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-OCC-2007-05 and should be submitted on or before May 31,
2007.

    For the Commission by the Division of Market Regulation,
pursuant to delegated authority.\5\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Florence E. Harmon,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. E7-8957 Filed 5-9-07; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 8010-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 82, Number 102 (Tuesday, May 30, 2017)]
[Notices]
[Pages 24770-24771]
[FR Doc No: 2017-11071]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

Noise Exposure Map Notice for John F. Kennedy International
Airport, New York City, New York

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration, DOT.

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: The Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) announces its
determination that the noise exposure maps submitted by the Port
Authority of New York and New Jersey for John F. Kennedy International
Airport under the provisions of the Aviation Safety and Noise Abatement
Act and 14 CFR part 150 are in compliance with applicable requirements.

DATES: The effective date of the FAA's determination on the noise
exposure maps is May 19, 2017.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Eastern Region Airports Division (AEA-
600), Andrew Brooks, Environmental Program Manager, Federal Aviation
Administration, AEA-600, 1 Aviation Plaza, Jamaica, New York 11434,
Telephone:<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This notice announces that the FAA finds
that the noise exposure maps submitted for John F. Kennedy
International Airport are in compliance with applicable requirements of
14 CFR part 150, effective January 13, 2004. Under 49 U.S.C. Section
47503 of the Aviation Safety and Noise Abatement Act (hereinafter
referred to as ``the Act''), an airport operator may submit to the FAA
noise exposure maps which meet applicable regulations and which depict
non-compatible land uses as of the date of submission of such maps, a
description of projected aircraft operations during a forecast period
that is at least five (5) years in the future, and the ways in which
such operations will affect such maps. The Act requires such maps to be
developed in consultation with interested and affected parties in the
local community, government agencies, and persons using the airport. An
airport operator who has submitted noise exposure maps that are found
by FAA to be in compliance with the requirements of Federal Aviation
Regulations (FAR) Part 150, promulgated pursuant to the Act, may submit
a noise compatibility program for FAA approval which sets forth the
measures the operator has taken or proposes to take to reduce existing
non-compatible uses and prevent the introduction of additional non-
compatible uses.
    The FAA has completed its review of the noise exposure maps and
accompanying documentation submitted by the Port Authority of New York
and New Jersey. The documentation that constitutes the ``Noise Exposure
Maps'' (NEM) as defined in Section 150.7 of Part 150 includes a 2016
Base Year NEM, Figure 5-1, and a 2021 Future Year NEM, Figure 5-2,
located in Chapter 5 of the NEM Report. Details of the NEM contours are
provided by Runway end in Figures 5-3 through 5-6 of Chapter 5. The
figures contained within Chapter 5 are scaled to fit within the report
context; however, the official, to scale, 2016 Base Year NEM and 2021
Future Year NEM are both located in Appendix M of the official NEM
Report submittal. The Noise Exposure Maps contain current and forecast
information including the depiction of the airport and its boundaries,
the runway configurations, land uses such as single and two-family
residential; multi-family residential; mixed residential and
commercial; commercial and office; industrial and manufacturing;
transportation, parking and utilities; public facilities and
institutions; unclassified; open space, cemetaries, and outdoor
recreation; vacant land; places of worship; schools; historic
structures; hospitals; and day care/assisted living facilities and
those areas within the Day Night Average Sound Level (DNL) 65, 70 and
75 noise contours. Estimates for the area within these contours for the
2016 Base Year and 2021 Future Year are shown in Table 5-1 and Table 5-
4 in Chapter 5 of the NEM Report respectively. Estimates of the
residential population within the 2016 Base Year and 2021 Future Year
noise contours are also shown in Table 5-1 and Table 5-4 in Chapter 5
of the NEM Report respectively. Figure 4-12, in Chapter 4, displays the
location of noise monitoring sites. Flight tracks are found in Figures
4-2 through 4-5 of Chapter 4 and detailed in Appedices E and M. The
type and frequency of aircraft operations (including nighttime
operations) are found in Chapter 4, Tables 4-1 and 4-2.
    As discussed in Chapter 6 of the NEM Report, the Port Authority of
New York and New Jersey provided the general public the opportunity to
review and comment on the NEMs. This public comment period opened on
October 26, 2016 and closed on November 28, 2016. Public workshops for
the Draft NEMs were held on November 2 and November 3, 2016. All
comments received during the public comment

period and throughout the development of the NEMs, as well as responses
to these comments, are contained in Appendix L of the NEM Report.
    The FAA has determined that these noise exposure maps and
accompanying documentation are in compliance with applicable
requirements. This determination is effective on May 19, 2017.
    FAA's determination on an airport operator's noise exposure maps is
limited to a finding that the maps were developed in accordance with
the procedures contained in Appendix A of FAR Part 150. Such
determination does not constitute approval of the applicant's data,
information or plans, or a commitment to approve a noise compatibility
program or to fund the implementation of that program. If questions
arise concerning the precise relationship of specific properties to
noise exposure contours depicted on a noise exposure map submitted
under Section 47503 of the Act, it should be noted that the FAA is not
involved in any way in determining the relative locations of specific
properties with regard to the depicted noise contours, or in
interpreting the noise exposure maps to resolve questions concerning,
for example, which properties should be covered by the provisions of
Section 47506 of the Act. These functions are inseparable from the
ultimate land use control and planning responsibilities of local
government. These local responsibilities are not changed in any way
under Part 150 or through FAA's review of noise exposure maps.
Therefore, the responsibility for the detailed overlaying of noise
exposure contours onto the map depicting properties on the surface
rests exclusively with the airport operator that submitted those maps,
or with those public agencies and planning authorities with which
consultation is required under Section 47503 of the Act. The FAA has
relied on the certification by the airport operator, under Section
150.21 of FAR Part 150, that the statutorily required consultation has
been accomplished.
    Copies of the full noise exposure map documentation and of the
FAA's evaluation of the maps are available for examination at the
following locations:

Federal Aviation Administration, Eastern Region, Airports Division,
AEA-600, 1 Aviation Plaza, Jamaica, New York 11434
Federal Aviation Administration, New York Airports District Office, 1
Aviation Plaza, Jamaica, New York 11434
The Port Authority of New York and New Jersey, Aviation Department, 4
World Trade Center, 150 Greenwich Street, 18th Floor, New York, New
York 10007

    Issued in Jamaica, NY, on May 19, 2017.
Steven M. Urlass,
Director, Airports Division, Eastern Region.
[FR Doc. 2017-11071 Filed 5-26-17; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


[Federal Register Volume 77, Number 108 (Tuesday, June 5, 2012)]
[Notices]
[Pages 33257-33258]
[FR Doc No: 2012-13511]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-67074; File No. SR-BX-2012-037]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; NASDAQ OMX BX, Inc.; Notice of
Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of Proposed Rule Change Relating to
a Waiver of Fees for BX Options Participants

May 30, 2012.
    Pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934
(``Act''),\1\ and Rule 19b-4 thereunder,\2\ notice is hereby given that
on May 18, 2012, NASDAQ OMX BX, Inc. (``BX'' or ``Exchange'') filed
with the Securities and Exchange Commission (``SEC'' or ``Commission'')
the proposed rule change as described in Items I, II, and III, below,
which Items have been prepared by the Exchange. The Commission is
publishing this notice to solicit comments on the proposed rule change
from interested persons.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

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

    The Exchange proposes to waive certain application, membership and
data fees for BX members seeking to participate solely in the new BX
Options Market.
    The text of the proposed rule change is available on the Exchange's
Web site at http://www.nasdaqtrader.com/micro.aspx?id=BXRulefilings, at
the principal office of the Exchange, and at the Commission's Public
Reference Room.

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

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

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

1. Purpose
    The purpose of the proposed rule change is to waive the following
BX fees to promote participation in the new BX Options Market: (1)
Membership Fee; (2) Trading Rights Fee; (3) Application Fee; (4)
testing fee; and (5) Annual Administrative Fee.
    The Exchange recently filed for approval to operate a new options
market.\3\ The new market, called NASDAQ OMX BX Options, or BX Options,
will be all-electronic with no physical trading floor. BX proposed to
adopt a series of rules based on the existing rules of NOM.\4\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ See SR-BX-2012-30.
    \4\ See SR-BX-2012-30. BX will operate an electronic trading
system developed to trade options that will provide for the
electronic display and execution of orders in price/time priority
without regard to the status of the entities that are entering
orders.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Persons desiring to join the new BX Options Market need to apply to
become members of BX pursuant to BX Rules. BX Members are subject to
various charges for membership, services and equipment as noted in the
7000 Rules. The Exchange desires to waive certain of those fees to
attract market participants to the new BX Options Market. BX seeks to
implement the fee waivers immediately so that Applicants seeking to
participate in the new BX Options market may begin submitting
applications to the Exchange prior to the market's commencement of
operations.
    Currently, BX members are assessed a $3,000 Membership Fee \5\ per
year and a $500 per month trading rights fee.\6\ The Exchange also
assesses an Application Fee of $2,000.\7\ Among other fees, the
Exchange also currently assesses subscribers to the Exchange a fee for
conducting tests of their Exchange access protocols connection or
market data feeds through the Exchange's Testing Facility a fee of $300
per port, per month.\8\ The Exchange assesses an Annual Administrative
Fee to market data distributors that receive any proprietary Exchange
data feed product. The amount of this fee is the higher of the delayed
distributor fee of $500 or the real-time distributor fee of $1,000
(which may include the delayed fee). This fee is assessed annually.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ The Membership Fee is imposed on all persons that are
Exchange members as of a date determined by the Exchange in December
of each year. This fee is not refundable in the event that a person
ceases to be an Exchange member following the date on which the fee
is assessed. See Rule 7001. This Membership Fee is collected by the
Financial Industry Regulatory Authority (FINRA) on behalf of the
Exchange and would be refunded by the Exchange annually, if the fee
is assessed to a BX Options Participant who qualified for the
waiver.
    \6\ The Trading Rights Fee is assessed on all persons that are
Exchange members as of a date determined by the Exchange in each
month. This fee is not refundable in the event that a person ceases
to be an Exchange member following the date on which the fee is
assessed. See Rule 7001.
    \7\ The Application Fee for membership in the Exchange is non-
refundable.
    \8\ These fees do not apply to testing occasioned by new or
enhanced services or software, modifications to services or software
initiated by the Exchange in response to a contingency or testing by
a new subscriber under certain circumstances. See Rule 7030.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange proposes to waive the Membership Fee, Trading Rights
Fee, Application Fee, and Annual Administrative Fee for Applicants
desiring to apply to become BX Options Market Participants, who will
not transact business on the BX Equities Market.\9\ The proposed fee
waivers for the Membership Fee, Trading Rights Fee and Annual
Administrative Fee would apply also to an existing BX member if that
member applies to transact business on the BX Options Market only and
will no longer be conducting an equities business on BX. In this
example, the Application Fee would not be waived because it was already
assessed at the time the member became a BX member.

The waiver would also apply to a BX member who determines at a later
date to transact business on the BX Options Market only; the
Application Fee would not be waived in this case because it was already
paid at the time the member became a BX member. The aforementioned
waivers would not apply to Applicants seeking approval to participate
solely in the BX Equities Market, or to an applicant seeking to
participate in both the BX Equities and the BX Options Markets. In the
event that an Applicant applies to be a BX Options Participant and
obtains the waiver but later determines to commence an equities
business, the BX Options Participant would be assessed the Membership
Fee, Trading Rights Fee; testing fees; and Annual Administrative Fee
going forward.\10\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \9\ New BX Options Market members would be assigned an account
by the Membership Department.
    \10\ These members would not be assessed an Application Fee,
which was previously waived at the time they became Exchange
members.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange also proposes to waive BX Options testing fees as such
fees are described in Rule 7030(d). The Exchange also proposes to make
minor technical amendments to Rule 7001 to remove outdated text that
dates back to the commencement of the BX Equities Market.
2. Statutory Basis
    The Exchange believes that its proposal to amend its fees is
consistent with Section 6(b) of the Act \11\ in general, and furthers
the objectives of Section 6(b)(4) of the Act \12\ in particular, in
that it is an equitable allocation of reasonable fees and other charges
among Exchange members and other persons using its facilities.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \11\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b).
    \12\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(4).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange makes all services and products subject to its fees
available on a non-discriminatory basis to similarly situated
recipients. The proposed waivers of the Membership Fee, Trading Rights
Fee, Application Fee, testing fee and Annual Administrative Fee are
reasonable because the Exchange is seeking to attract market
participants to the new BX Options Market.
    The Exchange believes that the proposed waivers of the Membership
Fee, Trading Rights Fee, Application Fee and Annual Administrative Fee
are equitable and not unfairly discriminatory because the waivers will
uniformly apply to BX Options Participants that transact business
solely on the BX Options Market. The testing fee will also be uniformly
waived for all testing related to the BX Options market.
    The proposed technical amendments are reasonable, equitable and not
unfairly discriminatory because the amendments remove outdated text.

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

    The Exchange does not believe that the proposed rule change will
impose any burden on competition not necessary or appropriate in
furtherance of the purposes of the Act.

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

    No written comments were either solicited or received.

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

    The foregoing rule change has become effective pursuant to Section
19(b)(3)(A)(ii) of the Act.\13\ 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. If the Commission takes such action, the
Commission shall institute proceedings to determine whether the
proposed rule should be approved or disapproved.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \13\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A)(ii).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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-BX-2012-037 on the subject line.

Paper Comments

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

All submissions should refer to File Number SR-BX-2012-037. 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 the filing also will be available
for inspection and copying at the principal office of the Exchange. All
comments received will be posted without change; 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-BX-2012-037 and should be
submitted on or before June 26, 2012.

    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets,
pursuant to delegated authority.\14\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \14\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Kevin M. O'Neill,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2012-13511 Filed 6-4-12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 80, Number 72 (Wednesday, April 15, 2015)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 20159-20163]
[FR Doc No: 2015-08533]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Coast Guard

33 CFR Parts 3 and 141

[Docket No. USCG-2013-0491]
RIN 1625-AB88

Consolidation of Officer in Charge, Marine Inspection for Outer
Continental Shelf Activities; Eighth Coast Guard District; Technical,
Organizational, and Conforming Amendments

AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS.

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: The Coast Guard is issuing a final rule establishing a
consolidated Officer in Charge, Marine Inspection (OCMI) for the
purposes of inspecting mobile offshore drilling units, and fixed and
floating facilities, engaged in OCS activities in the Eighth Coast
Guard District. This final rule also addresses comments submitted in
response to our notice and request for comments related to the
consolidation of the OCMI, for OCS activities, and makes other non-
substantive changes. This rule will have no substantive effect on the
regulated public.

DATES: This rule is effective May 1, 2015.

ADDRESSES: Documents mentioned in this preamble as being available in
the docket, are part of docket USCG-2013-0491 and are available for
inspection or copying at the Docket Management Facility (M-30), U.S.
Department of Transportation, West Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140,
1200 New Jersey Avenue, Washington, DC 20590, between 9 a.m. and 5
p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays. You may also view
the docket on the Internet by going to http://www.regulations.gov,
inserting USCG-2013-0491 in the ``Search'' box, and then clicking
``Search.''

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: If you have questions on this notice,
call or email Commander Steven Keel, U.S. Coast Guard Headquarters,
Office of Commercial Vessel Compliance; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>, email
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>If you have questions on viewing or submitting
material to the docket, call Cheryl Collins, Program Manager, Docket
Operations, telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Table of Contents for Preamble

I. Abbreviations
II. Regulatory History and Information
III. Basis and Purpose
IV. Discussion of Comments Received
V. Discussion of the Rule
VI. Regulatory Analysis
    A. Regulatory Planning and Review
    B. Small Entities
    C. Assistance for Small Business
    D. Collection of Information
    E. Federalism
    F. Unfunded mandates Reform Act
    G. Taking of Private Property
    H. Civil Justice Reform
    I. Protection of Children
    J. Indian Tribal Governments
    K. Energy Effects
    L. Technical Standards
    M. Environment

I. Abbreviations

CFR Code of Federal Regulations
DHS Department of Homeland Security
E.O. Executive Order
FR Federal Register
NCOE National Center of Expertise
OCMI Officer in Charge, Marine Inspection
OMB Office of Management and Budget
OCS Outer Continental Shelf
Pub. L. Public Law
Sec.  Section Symbol
U.S.C. United States Code

II. Regulatory History and Information

    This rule reflects the internal organization of the Coast Guard's
Eighth District, and affects administrative procedures such as contact
information. It is a rule of agency organization,

procedure, and practice within the meaning of 5 U.S.C. 553(b)(A) and
under that section no prior notice or opportunity to comment is
required. Also, the Coast Guard finds for good cause that notice and
comment procedures are unnecessary under 5 U.S.C. 553(b)(B) because
this final rule consists only of administrative, organizational, and
conforming amendments that will have no substantive effect on the
public. Therefore, we did not publish a notice of proposed rulemaking
for this final rule, although we did provide for public comment as
described below.
    Because this is a rule of internal agency organization with no
substantive impact on the public, we find that good cause exists under
5 U.S.C. (d)(3) for making this final rule effective immediately upon
the date specified in the DATES section above.
    On August 7, 2013 we published a notice and request for comments
(78 FR 48180) informing the public that the Eighth Coast Guard District
in New Orleans was considering consolidating its OCS marine inspection
function from six offices to one and invited public comment on making
such a change. The duties of an OCMI are found in 33 CFR 1.01-20 and
include inspection of vessels in order to determine that they comply
with the applicable laws, rules, and regulations relating to safe
construction, equipment, manning, and operation and that they are in a
seaworthy condition for the services in which they are operated.
Currently, the six OCMI field offices in the Eighth District that
handle OCS matters are located in the following cities: Mobile,
Alabama; New Orleans, Louisiana; Morgan City, Louisiana; Port Arthur,
Texas; Houston, Texas, and Corpus Christi, Texas.
    In addition to requesting comments on the efficacy of combining the
OCS OCMI function, the request offered four different ways in which the
consolidated Eighth District OCS OCMI could be established using the
existing organizational structure of the Eighth District. We also asked
for comments on which city a consolidated Eighth District OCS OCMI
should be physically located.
    With input received in response to our request, we have decided to
consolidate OCMI functions for the purposes of inspecting fixed and
floating facilities, and mobile offshore drilling units (MODUs), in the
Eighth Coast Guard District, into a single OCMI that will serve as the
Chief, Outer Continental Shelf Division, on the Eighth District staff
(hereafter referred to as ``Eighth District OCS OCMI''). For
simplicity, we have included every Eighth District Marine Inspection
Zone defined in Title 33, Code of Federal Regulations, Part 3, Subpart
3.40 in the consolidation even though offshore inspections are not
usually carried out in the inland rivers.

III. Basis and Purpose

    The legal basis for this rule is provided by 14 U.S. Code (U.S.C.)
92 and DHS Delegation No. 0170.1(II)(23). Section 92 authorizes the
Secretary of DHS to ``establish, change the limits of, consolidate,
discontinue, and re-establish Coast Guard districts'' and ``do any and
all things necessary to carry out the purposes of'' title 14,
pertaining to the Coast Guard. The DHS Delegation delegates the
Secretary's functions to the Commandant of the Coast Guard.
    The purpose of this rule is to make conforming amendments and
technical corrections specific to agency organization, procedure, and
practice. These conforming amendments and technical corrections
consolidate the existing individual OCMI authorities currently within
the Eighth Coast Guard District into a single OCMI authority.

IV. Discussion of Comments Received

    We received 12 comments on the docket addressing the specific
questions raised in the request for comments and we also received
additional comments beyond the scope of those questions. No adverse or
opposing comments were made and 11 comments expressed support for
consolidation. An analysis of those comments is as follows:
    a. Should the OCMI function be consolidated? Of the 12 comments
received, 11 supported the consolidation and one did not comment on
this question. The reasons cited for supporting the consolidation
included the belief that doing so would make more efficient use of
inspection personnel and provide more consistency since decisions
affecting the regulated industry would be made by one OCMI instead of
six. Additionally, several commenters suggested that consolidation be
carried out as promptly as possible, and three responses suggested that
proper staffing would be critical to the success of the consolidated
Eighth District OCMI.
    b. Where should the consolidated Eighth District OCMI be placed in
the organization? Seven commenters made recommendations related to
location and the remainder had none. The majority recommended that the
consolidated Eighth District OCS OCMI be located in Houston, Texas or
New Orleans, Louisiana and one commenter recommended Morgan City or
Houma, Louisiana. One commenter suggested that desirability of the
location should be taken into consideration to encourage recruitment
and retention. The Coast Guard is opting to establish the Eighth
District OCS OCMI as a staff element of the Eighth District, in New
Orleans, Louisiana. We believe this provides the most efficient means
of consolidation and places the Eighth District OCS OCMI in close
proximity with the Eighth District Commander, increasing the visibility
of the OCS inspection mission.
    c. Other comments: In addition to providing responses to the
questions we asked in the notice, several commenters provided concerns
and recommendations should the OCMI function be consolidated. Several
commenters expressed concern that the success of an Eighth District OCS
OCMI would depend on proper staffing levels. We agree. Workforce
capacity was taken into consideration when determining whether to
consolidate the OCS function or not. Our workload analysis of the
Eighth District OCS OCMI model identified a gain in labor efficiency
equivalent to hiring 1.5 new full time employees creating more workload
capacity with existing inspectors. Through consolidation, qualified
marine inspectors from each of the six current OCMI staffs have been
designated as dedicated OCS inspectors under the new Eighth District
OCS OCMI with OCS inspection as their primary duty. We believe that
focusing a core capacity of OCS inspectors will improve service
delivery to the regulated industry. Additionally, we will continue to
analyze workload levels for OCS inspection activities and make
workforce adjustments as necessary.
    Some comments also expressed concern for OCS marine inspector
proficiency. We believe that overall proficiency under the Eighth
District OCS OCMI will improve for two reasons. First, the
consolidation will facilitate movement of OCS inspectors within the
Eighth District between the MI zones that existed before the
consolidation to either meet spot workloads or gain experience more
quickly than they otherwise would have. Second, the Eighth District OCS
OCMI can serve as a single champion for all OCS inspectors in the
District and will be better placed to track and improve their
proficiency development. One commenter also recommended longer tour
lengths for active duty OCS inspectors and perhaps the addition of more
long term civilian OCS inspectors to improve proficiency. We agree with
this comment and are considering its potential future adoption. One

commenter suggested that OCS marine inspector proficiency could be
improved by using only Coast Guard civilian personnel who do not serve
tours like military personnel who regularly rotate out once their tour
is up. We believe using active duty military personnel provides long
term benefits to the Coast Guard by forming future leaders who will
serve in Headquarters where important program decisions impacting the
offshore energy sector are made.
    One commenter suggested that the OCS National Center of Expertise
(NCOE) be consolidated into the Eighth District OCS OCMI. We do not
intend to do so at this time. The NCOE is a Coast Guard Headquarters
unit that focuses on programmatic issues such as policy and
standardized training development. We believe that their current
position in the organization is better aligned with achieving those
goals than it would be if moved into the OCS OCMI organization within
the Eighth District.
    One commenter was uncertain as to which office would be responsible
for conducting marine casualty investigations for reportable incidents
occurring offshore. The Eighth District OCS OCMI will be responsible
for investigating marine casualties on fixed and floating OCS
facilities, and MODUs in the Eighth Coast Guard District.
    One commenter expressed confusion over which vessels and facilities
the Eighth District OCS OCMI would be responsible for inspecting. The
Eighth District OCS OCMI will be responsible for inspecting a specific
fleet of fixed or floating OCS facilities or mobile offshore drilling
units defined in 33 CFR 140.10. Any other vessel or OCS unit type will
continue to be inspected by the OCMI described in 33 CFR part 3.40 as
stated prior to the consolidation. For example, a well intervention
vessel that is not certificated as a mobile offshore drilling unit will
continue to be inspected by the cognizant Sector or Marine Safety Unit
OCMI.
    Vessels and facilities overseen by the Eighth District OCS OCMI are
fleet specific; any vessel meeting the description above will fall
under the purview of the Eighth District OCS OCMI regardless of where
in the Eighth Coast Guard District it may be located.
    One commenter observed that the consolidation of the OCMI function
fulfills a recommendation of the Coast Guard's Report of Investigation
in the Circumstances Surrounding the Explosion, Fire, Sinking, and Loss
of Eleven Crew Members Aboard the Mobile Offshore Drilling Unit
DEEPWATER HORIZON in the Gulf of Mexico April 20-22, 2010 (Volume I
pages 110-111).
    One commenter positively noted that the plan to consolidate the
Eighth District OCS OCMI function could be accomplished in a resource
neutral way thus gaining efficiency with no additional government
expense.

V. Discussion of the Rule

    As discussed in Section II above, this rule constitutes a non-
substantive organization change. Beginning May 1, 2015, vessels meeting
the description set out by this rulemaking will apply to the Eighth
District OCS OCMI for required inspections instead of the Sector OCMIs
as was previously the case. The Eighth District OCS OCMI will also
carry out other traditional OCMI activities such as inspection of
damage and repairs, as well as unannounced inspections. This rule also
amends 33 CFR 141.15 to clarify when determinations that affect
restrictions on employment of persons other than United States citizens
may be made by the Eighth District OCS OCMI. To apply for an inspection
after April 30, 2015, or to learn more about the business rules of the
Eighth District OCS OCMI, please visit their Web site at www.uscg.mil/d8/ocsocmi.asp, available beginning on April 27, 2015.

VI. Regulatory Analyses

    We developed this rule after considering numerous statutes and
executive orders (E.O.s) related to rulemaking. Below we summarize our
analyses based on these statutes or E.O.s.

1. Regulatory Planning and Review

    E.O.s 12866 (``Regulatory Planning and Review'') and 13563
(``Improving Regulation and Regulatory Review'') 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 (including potential economic, environmental,
public health and safety effects, distributive impacts, and equity).
Executive Order 13563 emphasizes the importance of quantifying both
costs and benefits, of reducing costs, of harmonizing rules, and of
promoting flexibility. Two additional E.O.s were recently published to
promote the goals of E.O. 13563: E.O. 13609 (``Promoting International
Regulatory Cooperation'') and E.O. 13610 (``Identifying and Reducing
Regulatory Burdens''). E.O. 13609 targets international regulatory
cooperation to reduce, eliminate, or prevent unnecessary differences in
regulatory requirements. E.O 13610 aims to modernize the regulatory
systems and to reduce unjustified regulatory burdens and costs on the
public.
    The provisions of this final rule are administrative, technical,
and non-substantive; they will have no substantive effect on the public
and will impose no additional costs. This final rule consolidates the
functions and requirements for six existing individual OCMI authorities
into a single OCMI authority within the Eighth Coast Guard District
known as the Eighth District OCS OCMI. OCS units meeting the
description set out by this rulemaking are already required to contact
an OCMI for mandatory inspections and LODs related to citizenship.
Under this final rule, such vessels will now contact the Eighth
District OCS OCMI for these same requirements rather than applying to
one of six different OCMIs within the Eighth District. Information on
applying for inspections or receiving an LOD from the Eighth District
OCS OCMI after April 30, 2015, and more about the business rules of the
Eighth District OCS OCMI, may be accessed at www.uscg.mil/d8/ocsocmi.asp, which will be available beginning on April 27, 2015. This
rule does not establish any new regulatory requirements impacting the
public. Therefore, this final rule is not a significant regulatory
action under section 3(f) of E.O. 12866 as supplemented by E.O. 13563,
and does not require an assessment of potential costs and benefits
under section 6(a)(3) of E.O. 12866. The Office of Management and
Budget (OMB) has not reviewed it under E.O. 12866.

2. Small Entities

    Under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601-612), rules
exempt from the notice and comment requirements of the Administrative
Procedure Act are not required to examine the impact of the rule on
small entities. Nevertheless, we have considered whether this rule
would have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of
small entities. The term ``small entities'' comprises small businesses,
not-for-profit organizations that are independently owned and operated
and are not dominant in their fields, and governmental jurisdictions
with populations of less than 50,000.
    There is no cost to this final rule, and we do not expect it to
have an impact on small entities because the provisions of this rule
will have no substantive effect on the public and will impose no
additional costs. Therefore, the Coast Guard certifies under 5 U.S.C.
605(b) that this final rule will not have a

significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities.

3. Assistance for Small Entities

    Under section 213(a) of the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement
Fairness Act of 1996 (Pub. L. 104-121), we want to assist small
entities in understanding this rule 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 consult Mr. Mugo Macharia by phone at
202-372-1472 or via email at<EMAIL_ADDRESS>    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 E.O. 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 E.O. 13132.

6. 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 1 year. Though this rule will not result in
such an expenditure, we do discuss the effects of this rule elsewhere
in this preamble.

7. Taking of Private Property

    This final rule will not cause a taking of private property or
otherwise have taking implications under E.O. 12630 (``Governmental
Actions and Interference with Constitutionally Protected Property
Rights'').

8. Civil Justice Reform

    This final rule meets applicable standards in sections 3(a) and
3(b)(2) of E.O. 12988 (``Civil Justice Reform''), to minimize
litigation, eliminate ambiguity, and reduce burden.

9. Protection of Children

    We have analyzed this final rule under E.O. 13045 (``Protection of
Children from Environmental Health Risks and Safety Risks''). This
final 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.

10. Indian Tribal Governments

    This final rule does not have tribal implications under E.O. 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.

11. Energy Effects

    We have analyzed this final rule under E.O. 13211 (``Actions
Concerning Regulations That Significantly Affect Energy Supply,
Distribution, or Use''). We have determined that it is not a
``significant energy action'' under that order because it is not a
``significant regulatory action'' under E.O. 12866 and is not likely to
have a significant adverse effect on the supply, distribution, or use
of energy. The Administrator of OMB's Office of Information and
Regulatory Affairs has not designated it as a significant energy
action. Therefore, it does not require a Statement of Energy Effects
under E.O. 13211.

12. Technical Standards

    This final rule does not use technical standards. Therefore, we did
not consider the use of voluntary consensus standards.

13. Environment

    We have analyzed this rule under Department of Homeland Security
Management Directive 023-01 and Commandant Instruction M16475.lD, which
guide the Coast Guard in complying with the National Environmental
Policy Act of 1969 (42 U.S.C. 4321-4370f), and have concluded 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 is categorically excluded under section 2.B.2, figure 2-1,
paragraphs (34)(a), (b), and (d) of the Instruction. This final rule
involves regulations that are editorial or procedural, or that concern
internal agency functions or organizations. An environmental analysis
checklist and a categorical exclusion determination are available in
the docket for this final rule where indicated under ADDRESSES.

List of Subjects

33 CFR Part 3

    Organization and functions (Government agencies).

33 CFR Part 141

    Citizenship and naturalization, Continental shelf, Employment,
Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.

    For the reasons discussed in the preamble, the Coast Guard amends
33 CFR Chapter I as follows:

0
1. The authority for part 3 continues to read as follows:

    Authority: 14 U.S.C. 92 and 93; Pub. L. 107-296, 116 Stat. 2135;
Department of Homeland Security Delegation No. 0170.1, para. 2(23).

PART 3--COAST GUARD AREAS, DISTRICTS, SECTORS, MARINE INSPECTION
ZONES, AND CAPTAIN OF THE PORT ZONES

0
2. Add Sec.  3.40-5 to read as follows:

Sec.  3.40-5.  Eighth District Outer Continental Shelf Marine
Inspection Zone.

    (a) A separate marine inspection zone, with an office located in
New Orleans, Louisiana, performs the OCMI functions defined in 33 CFR
1.01-20 for all MODUs and fixed and floating OCS facilities, as those
terms are defined in 33 CFR 140.10, engaged in OCS activities wherever
located in the Eighth Coast Guard District.
    (b) Notwithstanding the OCMI inspection authority held by Eighth
Coast Guard District Sector Commanders and Marine Safety Unit
Commanders in Sec.  3.01-1(d), the Chief, Outer Continental Shelf
Division at the Eighth Coast Guard District, shall serve as the Officer
in Charge, Marine Inspection, for this Marine Inspection

Zone and shall be known as the Eighth District Outer Continental Shelf
Officer in Charge, Marine Inspection. The District Commander resolves
any conflict between the functions of this marine inspection zone and
any geographically based marine inspection zones described in 33 CFR
3.40-10, 3.40-15, 3.40-28, 3.40-35, 3.40-40, 3.40-60, or 3.40.65.

Sec. Sec.  3.40-10, 3.40-15, 3.40-28, 3.40-35, 3.40-40, 3.40-60, 3.40-
65   [Amended]

0
3. Add the words the words ``Subject to the overriding provisions of
Sec.  3.40-5,'' in the following places:
0
a. In Sec.  3.40-10, at the beginning of the second sentence;
0
b. In Sec. Sec.  3.40-15 and 3.40-28, at the beginning of the first
sentence in paragraph (a);
0
c. In Sec. Sec.  3.40-35, 3.40-40, and 3.40-60 at the beginning of the
second sentence; and
0
d. In Sec.  3.40-65, at the beginning of the first sentence in
paragraph (a).

PART 141--PERSONNEL

0
4. The authority for part 141 continues to read as follows:

    Authority: 43 U.S.C. 1356; 46 U.S.C. 70105; 49 CFR 1.46(z).

0
5. In Sec.  141.15, redesignate paragraph (c) as paragraph (c)(1) and
add paragraph (c)(2) to read as follows:

Sec.  141.15  Restrictions on employment.

* * * * *
    (c) * * *
    (2) Determinations in paragraph (c)(1) of this section for all
MODUs and fixed and floating OCS facilities, as those terms are defined
in 33 CFR 140.10, operating within the Eighth District Outer
Continental Shelf Marine Inspection Zone will be made by the Eighth
District Outer Continental Shelf Officer in Charge, Marine Inspection,
as defined and described in Sec.  3.40-5 of this chapter.

    Dated: April 9, 2015.
J.C. Burton,
Captain, U.S. Coast Guard, Director of Inspections and Compliance.
[FR Doc. 2015-08533 Filed 4-14-15; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 9110-04-P