[Federal Register Volume 84, Number 175 (Tuesday, September 10, 2019)]
[Notices]
[Pages 47625-47627]
[FR Doc No: 2019-19469]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-86874]

Order Granting Application by The Financial Information Forum and
Security Traders Association for an Exemption Pursuant to Rule 606(c)
of Regulation NMS Under the Exchange Act From Certain Requirements of
Rule 606 of Regulation NMS Under the Exchange Act

September 4, 2019.

I. Introduction

    The Financial Information Forum (``FIF'') and Security Traders
Association (``STA'') have filed with the Securities and Exchange
Commission (``Commission'') an application for an exemption from
certain requirements \1\ of Rule 606 of Regulation NMS under the
Exchange Act.\2\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ See letter from Christopher Bok, Director, FIF, and James
Toes, President & CEO, STA, to Brett Redfearn, Director, Division of
Trading and Markets (``Division''), Securities and Exchange
Commission (``Commission''), dated August 2, 2019 (``FIF/STA
Letter'').
    \2\ 17 CFR 242.606.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    This order grants the following exemptive relief from certain
requirements of Rule 606, subject to certain conditions, which are
outlined in greater detail below: (1) All broker-dealers are exempt
from the requirement to comply with Rule 606(a) until January 1, 2020;
(2) all broker-dealers that engage in self-routing activity are exempt
from the requirement to comply with Rule 606(b)(3) until January 1,
2020; and (3) all broker-dealers that engage in outsourced routing
activity are exempt from the requirement to comply with Rule 606(b)(3)
until April 1, 2020.

II. Background

    On November 2, 2018, the Commission adopted amendments to Rules
600, 605, and 606 of Regulation NMS under the Exchange Act.\3\ The

amendments to Rule 606(b) added a new disclosure requirement, set forth
in paragraph (b)(3), that requires a broker-dealer, upon request of its
customer, to provide specific disclosures related to the routing and
execution of the customer's NMS stock orders submitted on a not held
basis for the prior six months, subject to two de minimis exceptions.
The Commission also amended the customer-specific disclosure
requirement in paragraph (b)(1) of Rule 606 to apply to NMS stock
orders submitted on a held basis, NMS stock orders that are submitted
on a not held basis and the broker-dealer is not required to provide
the customer a report under paragraph (b)(3), and NMS securities that
are options contracts. In addition, the Commission amended the
quarterly public order routing disclosure requirement in Rule 606(a) to
apply to NMS stock orders submitted on a held basis, among other
things. The Commission also amended Rule 605 of Regulation NMS to
require that the public order execution report be kept publicly
available for a period of three years.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ See Exchange Act Release No. 84528 (November 2, 2018), 83 FR
58338 (November 19, 2018) (``Adopting Release'').
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    On April 30, 2019, the Commission extended the compliance date for
the amendments to Rule 606 to begin following September 30, 2019, to
provide broker-dealers with time to implement fully the systems and
other changes necessary to comply with amended Rule 606.\4\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ See Exchange Act Release No. 85714 (April 24, 2019), 84 FR
18136 (April 30, 2019) (``Rule 606 Compliance Date Extension
Release''). The original compliance date set forth in the Adopting
Release was May 20, 2019. The Rule 606 Compliance Date Extension
Release did not extend the original compliance date for the
amendment to Rule 605.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    FIF/STA request that: (1) The data collection period for Rule
606(a) be extended to commence on January 1, 2020; (2) the data
collection period for Rule 606(b)(3) for broker-dealers that engage in
``self-routing activity'' (as defined below) be extended to 180 days
following the issuance of Commission staff responses to frequently
asked questions regarding amended Rule 606 (``Staff FAQs''); and (3)
the Commission delay the Rule 606(b)(3) reporting requirement for
broker-dealers that engage in ``outsourced routing activity'' (as
defined below).\5\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ See FIF/STA Letter, supra note 2, at 2. We note that
Commission staff issued the Staff FAQs on August 16, 2019. See
Responses to Frequently Asked Questions Concerning Rule 606 of
Regulation NMS, https://www.sec.gov/tm/faq-rule-606-regulation-nms.
The Staff FAQs are not a rule, regulation, or statement of the
Commission, and the Commission has neither approved nor disapproved
their content. The Staff FAQs have no legal force or effect: they do
not alter or amend applicable law, and they create no new or
additional obligations for any person.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    According to FIF/STA, broker-dealers and other industry
stakeholders are unable to meaningfully comply with amended Rule 606
within the current implementation timeframe.\6\ FIF/STA set forth
several implementation challenges that they state would affect a
broker-dealer's ability to comply, in particular, with the Rule
606(b)(3) requirement that it provide customer-specific reports of data
regarding its handling of customers' not held NMS stock orders.\7\ In
addition, according to FIF/STA, these challenges are greater when a
broker-dealer must report the information required under Rule 606(b)(3)
for orders handled using the order routing systems of another broker-
dealer (``outsourced routing activity'') than they are for orders
handled using a broker-dealer's own systems (``self-routing
activity'').\8\ Self-routing activity for the purposes of this
exemption is when a broker-dealer receives a customer's order and
routes it (or child orders thereof) to venues using its own systems.
Outsourced routing activity is when a broker-dealer receives a
customer's order and utilizes the systems of another broker-dealer to
route it (or child orders thereof) to venues.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ See FIF/STA Letter, supra note 2, at 1-4.
    \7\ See id. at 4-8.
    \8\ See id. (using the terms ``look through information'' or
``look through data'' and ``non-look through information'' or ``non-
look through data,'' respectively).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    With respect to the quarterly public reporting requirement in Rule
606(a), FIF/STA state that ``the majority of 606(a) provisions are
implementable within a relatively short timeframe'' after the issuance
of requested guidance.\9\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \9\ See id. at 2.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

III. Order Granting Conditional Exemption

    Rule 606(c) \10\ authorizes the Commission to conditionally or
unconditionally exempt any person, security, or transaction, or any
class or classes of persons, securities, or transactions, from any
provision or provisions of this section, if the Commission determines
that such exemption is necessary or appropriate in the public interest,
and is consistent with the protection of investors. The Commission, by
the Division pursuant to delegated authority,\11\ is granting a
temporary exemption from reporting obligations under Rules 606(a) and
606(b)(3) to provide additional time for broker-dealers to complete the
development of systems and processes necessary to begin collecting the
data required by the rule. As described below, however, the length of
time of the exemption from reporting obligations under Rule 606(b)(3)
differs based on whether a broker-dealer is engaged in self-routing
activity or outsourced routing activity.\12\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \10\ 17 CFR 242.606(c).
    \11\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(69).
    \12\ The Commission is not issuing an exemption from any other
provisions of Rule 606. Accordingly, compliance with Rule 606(b)(1)
and the obligation to provide, upon request, customer-specific
reports on routing of the following securities is still required to
begin following September 30, 2019: (1) NMS stock orders submitted
on a held basis; (2) NMS stock orders that are submitted on a not
held basis and the broker-dealer is not required to provide the
customer a report under paragraph (b)(3); and NMS securities that
are options contracts. See Rule 606 Compliance Date Extension
Release, supra note 4.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

A. Amended Rule 606(a)

    The Commission has determined that providing broker-dealers with an
exemption from the quarterly public reporting requirements of amended
Rule 606(a) relating to held orders and options orders until January 1,
2020 is necessary or appropriate in the public interest, and is
consistent with the protection of investors. While the Commission
previously extended the compliance date for the amendments to Rule
606(a), FIF/STA note that a few open items remain before implementation
efforts are finalized.\13\ The Commission agrees with the importance of
what FIF/STA describe as consistent, complete and accurate reporting
across broker-dealers complying with all aspects of amended Rule
606(a). As FIF/STA state, complete and accurate data will ``provide
customers with the value the Rule intends.'' Pursuant to this
exemption, a broker-dealer has three additional months from the current
compliance date to comply with amended Rule 606(a) and therefore must
begin collecting the amended Rule 606(a) data for the first quarter of
2020, and the public report of first quarter 2020 data is required by
the end of April 2020.\14\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \13\ See FIF/STA Letter, supra note 2, at 9 (noting that
compliance efforts continue with, e.g., options reporting and the
capture of aggregated fee information for orders).
    \14\ The Commission is granting the exemption as requested by
FIF/STA. See FIF/STA Letter, supra note 2, at 2.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

B. Rule 606(b)(3) for Broker-Dealers Engaged in Self-Routing Activity

    Further, the Commission has determined that providing a temporary
exemption from reporting obligations under Rule 606(b)(3) for not held
orders for a broker-dealer engaged in self-routing activity is
necessary or appropriate in the public interest, and is consistent with
the protection of

investors because it will provide additional time to finalize
development efforts. Specifically, the Commission believes that further
time will allow the industry to complete implementation, ultimately
allowing broker-dealers to provide customers with consistent, complete,
and accurate 606(b)(3) reports, as described above.\15\ Accordingly, a
broker-dealer engaged in self-routing activity is exempt until January
1, 2020 from the requirement to start collecting the data required by
Rule 606(b)(3) for such activity. For customer requests that are made
on or before February 15, 2020, a broker-dealer is exempt from the
requirement to provide a report for self-routing activity covering
January 2020 data until seven business days after February 15, 2020.
Pursuant to this exemption, a broker-dealer has three additional months
from the current compliance date to prepare to collect the data
required by Rule 606(b)(3) for self-routing activity, and has extra
time in February 2020 to prepare the first report relating to self-
routing activity for January 2020 data.\16\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \15\ See FIF/STA Letter, supra note 2, at 9 (noting that
compliance efforts continue with, e.g., options reporting and the
capture of aggregated fee information for orders).
    \16\ Under Rule 606(b)(3), if a customer requests a report on
the first of the month for example, the broker-dealer is required to
provide the report within seven business days of the customer's
request. Under the relief provided herein, however, if a customer
requests a report of January 2020 data on February 1, 2020, the
broker-dealer is not required to provide the report within seven
business days of February 1, 2020; instead, the broker-dealer is
required to provide the report within seven business days of
February 15.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    While the Commission is not granting the specific relief requested
by FIF/STA and is instead granting a shorter extension, the Commission
believes that this new date should provide self-routing broker-dealers
with sufficient time to finalize their internal development efforts.

C. Rule 606(b)(3) for Broker-Dealers Engaged in Outsourced Routing
Activity

    Finally, the Commission has determined that providing a temporary
exemption from reporting obligations under Rule 606(b)(3) for not held
orders for a broker-dealer engaged in outsourced routing activity is
necessary or appropriate in the public interest, and is consistent with
the protection of investors. This exemption will provide additional
time to coordinate and finalize development efforts, including among
third parties.
    As also is the case for broker-dealers engaged in self-routing
activity, discussed above, the Commission believes that further time
will allow the industry to complete implementation, ultimately allowing
broker-dealers to provide customers with consistent, complete, and
accurate 606(b)(3) reports.\17\ Specifically, to comply with Rule
606(b)(3), broker-dealers may need to develop systems to pass the data
required by Rule 606(b)(3) from an executing broker to an introducing
broker. To the extent that any broker-dealers that handle outsourced
routing activity require additional time to complete development of
specific portions of their systems, e.g., the required XML schema and
PDF renderer, the Commission believes that the six-month exemption it
is granting today provides sufficient time to finalize that
development. Further, the Commission believes that this additional time
should permit broker-dealers that outsource their routing activity to
third parties the additional time needed to finalize updating their
routing arrangements with such parties.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \17\ See FIF/STA Letter, supra note 2, at 9 (noting that
compliance efforts continue with, e.g., options reporting and the
capture of aggregated fee information for orders).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Accordingly, a broker-dealer engaged in outsourced routing activity
is exempt from the requirement to start collecting the Rule 606(b)(3)
data until April 1, 2020 for such activity. For customer requests that
are made on or before May 15, 2020, a broker-dealer is exempt from the
requirement to provide a Rule 606(b)(3) report for outsourced routing
activity covering April 2020 data until seven business days after May
15, 2020. Pursuant to this exemption, a broker-dealer has six
additional months from the current compliance date to prepare to
collect the data required by Rule 606(b)(3) for outsourced routing
activity, and has extra time in May 2020 to prepare the first report
relating to outsourced routing activity for April 2020 data.\18\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \18\ The Commission notes that FIF/STA did not request a
specific alternative compliance date for the Rule 606(b)(3)
reporting requirement for broker-dealers that outsource routing
services. See FIF/STA Letter, supra note 2, at 2.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Accordingly, it is ordered, pursuant to Rule 606(c) of Regulation
NMS under the Exchange Act,\19\ that:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \19\ 17 CFR 242.606(c).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    (1) Broker-dealers are exempt from the requirement to comply with
amended Rule 606(a) by the current compliance date of October 1, 2019
and instead must begin collecting amended Rule 606(a) data for the
first quarter of 2020. The public report of first quarter 2020 data is
required by April 30, 2020.
    (2) Broker-dealers engaged in self-routing activity are exempt from
the requirement to start collecting the data required by Rule 606(b)(3)
until January 1, 2020 for such activity. For customer requests that are
made on or before February 15, 2020, a broker-dealer is exempt from the
requirement to provide a report for self-routing activity covering
January 2020 data until seven business days after February 15, 2020.
    (3) Broker-dealers engaged in outsourced routing activity are
exempt from the requirement to start collecting the Rule 606(b)(3) data
until April 1, 2020 for such activity. For customer requests that are
made on or before May 15, 2020, a broker-dealer is exempt from the
requirement to provide a Rule 606(b)(3) report for outsourced routing
activity covering April 2020 data until seven business days after May
15, 2020.

    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets,
pursuant to delegated authority.\20\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \20\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(69).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Jill M. Peterson,
Assistant Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2019-19469 Filed 9-9-19; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 84, Number 110 (Friday, June 7, 2019)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 26565-26567]
[FR Doc No: 2019-12008]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Coast Guard

33 CFR Part 100

[Docket Number USCG-2019-0443]
RIN 1625-AA08

Special Local Regulation; Great Western Tube Float; Colorado
River, Parker, AZ

AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS.

ACTION: Temporary final rule.

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

SUMMARY: The Coast Guard is issuing this rulemaking to change the
location of the special local regulation for the annual Great Western
Tube Float, which is held on the navigable waters of the Colorado River
in Parker, AZ. The change of the location for the special local
regulation is necessary to provide for the safety of life on the
navigable waters during the event.

DATES: This rule is effective from 7:00 a.m. through 6:00 p.m. on June
8, 2019.

ADDRESSES: To view documents mentioned in this preamble as being
available in the docket, go to https://www.regulations.gov, type USCG-
2019-0443 in the ``SEARCH'' box and click ``SEARCH.'' Click on Open
Docket Folder on the line associated with this rule.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: If you have questions on this rule,
call or email Lieutenant Briana Biagas, Coast Guard; telephone 619-278-
7656, 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 temporary 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 doing so would be impracticable. We
were notified that the event location would be changed permanently on
April 26, 2019. Due to the timing of the event we are unable to issue a
NPRM before the event is scheduled.
    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 because the immediate implementation
is necessary to ensure the safety of life during the Great Western Tube
Float event.

III. Legal Authority and Need for Rule

    The Great Western Tube Float is an annual recurring event listed in
Table 1, Item 9 of 33 CFR 100.1102, Annual Marine Events on the
Colorado River, between Davis Dam (Bullhead City, Arizona) and Headgate
Dam (Parker, Arizona). Special local regulations exist for the marine
event to allow for special use of the Colorado River, Parker, AZ for
this event.
    Section 100.1102 of title 33 of the CFR lists the annual marine
events and special local regulations on the Colorado River, between
Davis Dam (Bullhead City, Arizona) and Headgate Dam (Parker, Arizona).
The enforcement date and regulated location for this marine event are
listed in Table 1, Item 9 of Sec.  100.1102. The location listed in the
Table indicates that the marine event will occur on the navigable
waters of the Colorado River from La Paz County Park to the BlueWater
Resort and Casino, immediately before the Headgate Dam. However, due to
a change of the location of this year's event from Buckskin Mountain
State Park to La Paz County Park, a temporary rule is needed to reflect
the actual location of this year's event.
    The Coast Guard is issuing this rule under authority in 46 U.S.C.
70041, which authorizes the Coast Guard to establish and define special
local regulations. The COTP San Diego is establishing a special local
regulation for the waters of the Colorado River, Parker, AZ. The
purpose of this rule is to ensure safety of participants, vessels and
the navigable waters in the regulated area before, during, and after
the scheduled event.

IV. Discussion of the Rule

    The Coast Guard is temporarily suspending the regulations in 33 CFR
100.1102 for Table 1, Item 9 of that Section and is inserting a
temporary regulation as Item 100.1102T11-0443 of that Section in order
to reflect that the special local regulation will be effective and
enforced from 7:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m. on June 8, 2019. This change is
needed to accommodate the sponsor's event plan and ensure that adequate
regulations are in place to protect the safety of vessels and
individuals that may be present in the regulated area. No other portion
of Table 1 of Sec.  100.1102 or other provisions in Sec.  100.1102
shall be affected by this regulation.

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 time-of-day of the special local regulation.
The Coast Guard will publish a LNM that details the vessel restrictions
of the regulated area.

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
regulated area may be small entities, for the reasons stated in section
V.A above, this rule will not have a significant economic impact on any
vessel owner or operator.
    Under section 213(a) of the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement
Fairness Act of 1996 (Pub. L. 104-121), we want to assist small
entities in understanding this rule. If the rule would affect your
small business, organization, or governmental jurisdiction and you have
questions concerning its provisions or options for compliance, please
contact the person listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT
section.
    Small businesses may send comments on the actions of Federal
employees who enforce, or otherwise determine compliance with, Federal
regulations to the Small Business and Agriculture Regulatory
Enforcement Ombudsman and the Regional Small Business Regulatory
Fairness Boards. The Ombudsman evaluates these actions annually and
rates each agency's responsiveness to small business. If you wish to
comment on actions by employees of the Coast Guard, call 1-888-REG-FAIR
(1-888-734-3247). The Coast Guard will not retaliate against small
entities that question or complain about this rule or any policy or
action of the Coast Guard.

C. Collection of Information

    This rule will not call for a new collection of information under
the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501-3520).

D. Federalism and Indian Tribal Governments

    A rule has implications for federalism under Executive Order 13132,
Federalism, if it has a substantial direct effect on the States, on the
relationship between the national government and the States, or on the
distribution of power and responsibilities among the various levels of
government. We have analyzed this rule under that Order and have
determined that it is consistent with the fundamental federalism
principles and preemption requirements described in Executive Order
13132.
    Also, this rule does not have tribal implications under Executive
Order 13175, Consultation and Coordination with Indian Tribal
Governments, because it does not have a substantial direct effect on
one or more Indian tribes, on the relationship between the Federal
Government and Indian tribes, or on the distribution of power and
responsibilities between the Federal Government and Indian tribes. If
you believe this rule has implications for federalism or Indian tribes,
please contact the person listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT
section above.

E. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act

    The Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (2 U.S.C. 1531-1538)
requires Federal agencies to assess the effects of their discretionary
regulatory actions. In particular, the Act addresses actions that may
result in the expenditure by a State, local, or tribal government, in
the aggregate, or by the private sector of $100,000,000 (adjusted for
inflation) or more in any one year. Though this rule will not result in
such an expenditure, we do discuss the effects of this rule elsewhere
in this preamble.

F. Environment

    We have analyzed this rule under Department of Homeland Security
Directive 023-01 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 establishment of marine event special
local regulations on the navigable waters of the Colorado River. It is
categorically excluded from further review under paragraph L[61] in
Table 3-1 of U.S. Coast Guard Environmental Planning Implementing
Procedures 5090.1. A Record of Environmental Consideration supporting
this determination is available in the docket where indicated under
ADDRESSES.

G. Protest Activities

    The Coast Guard respects the First Amendment rights of protesters.
Protesters are asked to contact the person listed in the FOR FURTHER
INFORMATION CONTACT section to coordinate protest activities so that
your message can be received without jeopardizing the safety or
security of people, places or vessels.

List of Subjects in 33 CFR Part 100

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

    For the reasons discussed in the preamble, the Coast Guard amends
33 CFR part 100 as follows:

PART 100--SAFETY OF LIFE ON NAVIGABLE WATERS

0
1. The authority citation for part 100 continues to read as follows:

    Authority:  46 U.S.C 70041; 33 CFR 1.05-1.

0
2. In Sec.  100.1102, in Table 1 to Sec.  100.1102, suspend item ``9''
and add item ``100.1102T11-0443'' in numerical order to read as
follows:

Sec.  100.1102   Annual Marine Events on the Colorado River, between
Davis Dam (Bullhead City, Arizona) and Headgate Dam (Parker, Arizona).

* * * * *

                       Table 1 to Sec.   100.1102
              [All coordinates referenced use datum NAD 83]
------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

                              * * * * * * *
               100.1102T11-0443. Great Western Tube Float
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Sponsor...........................  City of Parker, AZ.
Event Description.................  River float.
Date..............................  June 8, 2019.
Location..........................  Parker, AZ.
Regulated Area....................  The navigable waters of the Colorado
                                     River from Buckskin Mountain State
                                     Park to La Paz County Park.
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Dated: June 3, 2019.
J.R. Buzzella,
Captain, U.S. Coast Guard, Captain of the Port San Diego.
[FR Doc. 2019-12008 Filed 6-6-19; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 9110-04-P


[Federal Register Volume 80, Number 118 (Friday, June 19, 2015)]
[Notices]
[Pages 35339-35340]
[FR Doc No: 2015-15098]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Docket No. CD15-26-000]

Mountain Village, CO; Notice of Preliminary Determination of a
Qualifying Conduit Hydropower Facility and Soliciting Comments and
Motions To Intervene

    On June 3, 2015, the town of Mountain Village, CO filed a notice of
intent to construct a qualifying conduit hydropower facility, pursuant
to section 30 of the Federal Power Act (FPA), as amended by section 4
of the Hydropower Regulatory Efficiency Act of 2013 (HREA). The
proposed San Joaquin PRV Hydro Project would have an installed capacity
of 15 kilowatts (kW) and would be located on the existing water supply
pipeline for Mountain Village, which transports water for municipal
consumption. The project would be located near Mountain Village in San
Miguel County, Colorado.
    Applicant Contact: Finn Kjome, Director of Public Works, 455
Mountain Village Blvd., Suite A, Mountain Village, CO 81435, Phone No.
(970) 369-8206.
    FERC Contact: Robert Bell, Phone No.<PHONE_NUMBER>, email:
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>    Qualifying Conduit Hydropower Facility Description: The proposed
project would consist of: (1) A proposed short, 2-inch-diameter intake
pipe that connects to a 10-inch-diameter main water supply pipe; (2) a
proposed powerhouse that contains one turbine-generator unit with an
installed capacity of 15 kW; (3) a proposed short 2-inch-diamter exit
pipe returning flow to the main water supply pipe, making the total
bypass approximately 10-feet; and (5) appurtenant facilities. The
proposed project would have an estimated annual generating capacity of
15 megawatt-hours.
    A qualifying conduit hydropower facility is one that is determined
or deemed to meet all of the criteria shown in the table below.

      Table 1--Criteria for Qualifying Conduit Hydropower Facility
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                            Satisfies (Y/
       Statutory provision               Description             N)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
FPA 30(a)(3)(A), as amended by    The conduit the facility            Y
 HREA.                             uses is a tunnel,
                                   canal, pipeline,
                                   aqueduct, flume, ditch,
                                   or similar manmade
                                   water conveyance that
                                   is operated for the
                                   distribution of water
                                   for agricultural,
                                   municipal, or
                                   industrial consumption
                                   and not primarily for
                                   the generation of
                                   electricity.
FPA 30(a)(3)(C)(i), as amended    The facility is                     Y
 by HREA.                          constructed, operated,
                                   or maintained for the
                                   generation of electric
                                   power and uses for such
                                   generation only the
                                   hydroelectric potential
                                   of a non-federally
                                   owned conduit.

FPA 30(a)(3)(C)(ii), as amended   The facility has an                 Y
 by HREA.                          installed capacity that
                                   does not exceed 5
                                   megawatts.
FPA 30(a)(3)(C)(iii), as amended  On or before August 9,              Y
 by HREA.                          2013, the facility is
                                   not licensed, or
                                   exempted from the
                                   licensing requirements
                                   of Part I of the FPA.
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Preliminary Determination: Based upon the above criteria,
Commission staff preliminarily determines that the proposal satisfies
the requirements for a qualifying conduit hydropower facility, which is
not required to be licensed or exempted from licensing.
    Comments and Motions to Intervene: Deadline for filing comments
contesting whether the facility meets the qualifying criteria is 45
days from the issuance date of this notice.
    Deadline for filing motions to intervene is 30 days from the
issuance date of this notice.
    Anyone may submit comments or a motion to intervene in accordance
with the requirements of Rules of Practice and Procedure, 18 CFR
385.210 and 385.214. Any motions to intervene must be received on or
before the specified deadline date for the particular proceeding.
    Filing and Service of Responsive Documents: All filings must (1)
bear in all capital letters the ``COMMENTS CONTESTING QUALIFICATION FOR
A CONDUIT HYDROPOWER FACILITY'' or ``MOTION TO INTERVENE,'' as
applicable; (2) state in the heading the name of the applicant and the
project number of the application to which the filing responds; (3)
state the name, address, and telephone number of the person filing; and
(4) otherwise comply with the requirements of sections 385.2001 through
385.2005 of the Commission's regulations.\1\ All comments contesting
Commission staff's preliminary determination that the facility meets
the qualifying criteria must set forth their evidentiary basis.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ 18 CFR 385.2001-2005 (2014).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Commission strongly encourages electronic filing. Please file
motions to intervene and comments using the Commission's eFiling system
at http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/efiling.asp. Commenters can submit
brief comments up to 6,000 characters, without prior registration,
using the eComment system at http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/ecomment.asp. You must include your name and contact information at the
end of your comments. For assistance, please contact FERC Online
Support at<EMAIL_ADDRESS>(866) 208-3676 (toll free), or
(202) 502-8659 (TTY). In lieu of electronic filing, please send a paper
copy to: Secretary, Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First
Street NE., Washington, DC 20426. A copy of all other filings in
reference to this application must be accompanied by proof of service
on all persons listed in the service list prepared by the Commission in
this proceeding, in accordance with 18 CFR 4.34(b) and 385.2010.
    Locations of Notice of Intent: Copies of the notice of intent can
be obtained directly from the applicant or such copies can be viewed
and reproduced at the Commission in its Public Reference Room, Room 2A,
888 First Street NE., Washington, DC 20426. The filing may also be
viewed on the web at http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/elibrary.asp using
the ``eLibrary'' link. Enter the docket number (e.g., CD15-26-000) in
the docket number field to access the document. For assistance, call
toll-free 1-866-208-3676 or email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>For TTY,
call<PHONE_NUMBER>.

    Dated: June 15, 2015.
Kimberly D. Bose,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2015-15098 Filed 6-18-15; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


              Publically available information on diisocyanates

1.  In fall 2009, EPA hosted a webinar presentation on "What You Need to Know about the Safe Use of Spray Polyurethane Foam (SPF)", with participants from OSHA, NIOSH, CPSC, and industry available online at: http://www.epa.gov/dfe/spf_presentation_2009_epa_osha_niosh_cpsc.pdf

2. The Design for the Environment Program has a history of development of best practices working with isocyanates in the automotive refinishing industry. Isocyanates are also a key component of SPF. Please see EPA's Design for the Environment Program site available online at:  http://www.epa.gov/dfe/best_practices.html  for links to additional publically available resources. The DfE Program hopes to provide a similar information page for SPF and other isocyanate uses.

3. Health and safety information:

CPSC - an incident report on SPF available online at: http://www.saferproducts.gov/ViewIncident/1193994

- NIOSH Health & Safety Topic Page on Isocyanates available online at: http://www.cdc.gov/niosh/topics/isocyanates/

- OSHA Safety & Health Topic page on Isocyanates available online at: http://www.osha.gov/SLTC/isocyanates/index.html

- NIOSH ALERT, NIOSH Publication No. 2006-149 Preventing Asthma and Death from MDI Exposure During Spray-on Truck Bed Liner and Related Applications available online at:
http://www.cdc.gov/niosh/docs/2006-149/default.html

- NIOSH ALERT 1996:  Preventing Asthma and Death from Diisocyanates Exposure available online at: http://www.cdc.gov/niosh/asthma.html

- Method for measuring volatile chemicals is the standard method under California Section 01350.

- ASTM International, an organization that sets standards for products and materials, has initiated development of a standard (D22.05) to determine volatile organic compounds, diisocyanates, oligomeric isocyanates, and amine catalysts emitted from SPF insulation products designed for on-site application in buildings (ASTM WK30960).

- Manufacturer's Material Safety Data Sheets - available from the manufacturers. Some are available online at the US Department of Health and Human Services' Household Products Database.

- Integrated Risk Information System (IRIS) report on Methylene Diphenyl Diisocyanate (monomeric MDI) and polymeric MDI (PMDI); CASRN 101-68-8, 9016-87-9 (02/07/1998)
 available online at: http://www.epa.gov/iris/subst/0529.htm

- EPA's New Chemical Program Chemical Category on Isocyanates available online at:  http://www.epa.gov/dfe/pubs/auto/profile/appa.pdf

- Toxic Substances Control Act Section 8(e) Notices of Substantial Risk & FYI Notices:
	Polymeric MDI  -  Results of a modified local lymph node assay in mice (PDF) (28 pp., 839 KB, about PDF)
	Blocked Aromatic Isocyanate (PDF) (1 pp, 38 KB, about PDF)
	4,4'-Methylenedianiline (MDA) (PDF) (80 pp, 2.28 MB, about PDF)
	Isocyanates (Emissions from fires) (PDF) (130 pp, 10 MB, about PDF)
	"Fatalities Linked to Diisocyanates" (PDF) (16 pp, 1.42MB, about PDF)
	Diphenylmethane-4,4'-diisocyanate (Polymeric MDI) (PDF) (47 pp, 3.56MB, about PDF)

4. Industry Resources:

- Bayer Material Science Residential SPF Survey available online at:  http://www.sprayfoam.org/uploads/pages/4507/SPFA-CPI%20Emissions.pdf

- Bayer Material Science study entitled "A Proposed Methodology for Development of Building Re-Occupancy Guidelines Following Installation of Spray Polyurethane Foam Insulation" available online at:
http://www.baycareonline.com/ums/import-export/nafta_479.pdf


[Federal Register Volume 79, Number 60 (Friday, March 28, 2014)]
[Notices]
[Pages 17648-17649]
[FR Doc No: 2014-06922]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

National Highway Traffic Safety Administration

[Docket No. NHTSA-2013-0065; Notice 2]

PACCAR Incorporated, Grant of Petition for Decision of
Inconsequential Noncompliance

AGENCY: National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA),
Department of Transportation (DOT).

ACTION: Grant of Petition.

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

SUMMARY: PACCAR Incorporated (PACCAR) has determined that certain model
year (MY) 2013 Kenworth and Peterbilt brand chassis cab incomplete
vehicles do not fully comply with paragraph S3.1.3 of Federal Motor
Vehicle Safety Standard (FMVSS) No. 102, Transmission Shift Position
Sequence, Starter Interlock, and Transmission Braking Effect. PACCAR
has filed an appropriate revised report dated March 1, 2013, pursuant
to 49 CFR part 573, Defect and Noncompliance Responsibility and
Reports.

ADDRESSES: For further information on this decision contact Vince
Williams, Office of Vehicle Safety Compliance, the National Highway
Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA), telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>,
facsimile<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
    I. PACCAR's Petition: Pursuant to 49 U.S.C. 30118(d) and 30120(h)
and the rule implementing those provisions at 49 CFR part 556, PACCAR
has petitioned for an exemption from the notification and remedy
requirements of 49 U.S.C. Chapter 301 on the basis that this
noncompliance is inconsequential to motor vehicle safety.
    Notice of receipt of the petition was published, with a 30-day
public comment period, on September 26, 2013 in the Federal Register
(78 FR 59419). No comments were received. To view the petition and all
supporting documents log onto the Federal Docket Management System
(FDMS) Web site at: http://www.regulations.gov/. Then follow the online
search instructions to locate docket number ``NHTSA-2013-0065.''
    II. Chassis Cabs Involved: Affected are approximately 452 Kenworth
MY 2013 model K270 and model K370 chassis cabs that were manufactured
between March 29, 2012 and November 2, 2012, and MY 2013 Peterbilt
model 210 and model 220 chassis cabs that were manufactured between
March 21, 2012 and November 6, 2012. Hereafter these vehicles are
referred to as trucks.
    III. Noncompliance: PACCAR explains that the noncompliance is that
the starter interlock in the affected automatic transmission trucks
does not conform to paragraph S3.1.3 of FMVSS No. 102 because the
starter interlock is based on a system that differs from the system
specified in the standard. Although the starter interlock on these
trucks prevents the transmission from propelling the vehicle and,
therefore, is effective in preventing truck ``roll away,'' the
engineering of the starter interlock is not consistent with the
specification prescribed in paragraph S3.1.3 of FMVSS No. 102.
    IV. Summary of PACCAR'S Analyses: PACCAR stated its belief that the
subject noncompliance is inconsequential to motor vehicle safety for
the following reasons:
    S3.1.3 of FMVSS No. 102 provides, in pertinent part: ``. . . the
engine starter shall be inoperative when the transmission shift
position is in a forward or reverse drive position.'' Assuming that the
term ``transmission shift position'' refers to the position of the gear
selector (as opposed to the position of the transmission itself), the
subject trucks do not comply with this provision as written. That is
because the starter interlock system in these vehicles, which is an
electronic system that was originally used in PACCAR's European trucks,
differs from the system specified in S3.1.3. PACCAR's starter interlock
system effectively achieves the objectives of S3.1.3 by precluding the
possibility of a powered rollaway or lurching when the vehicle is
started. However, the manner in which the system functions is not
consistent with the design that is prescribed in the standard.
    The engine in the subject trucks can be started with the gear
selector in any position, thus creating what appears to be a technical
noncompliance with S3.1.3. However, even if the engine is started when
the gear selector indicates a forward or reverse gear, the transmission
itself will remain in neutral, and the message ``Gearshift Inhibited''
will be prominently displayed to the driver. The transmission can be
shifted into a forward or reverse gear only after the gear selector is
first moved into the neutral position and then moved back into gear
while the service brake is applied. At that point, the ``Gearshift
Inhibited'' message will be replaced by a ``Transmission Warning''
message, which will remain illuminated until the engine is turned off
and then restarted.
    As NHTSA explained in a 2005 Final Rule that amended FMVSS No. 102
to allow idle stop technology, ``The purpose of [S3.1.3] is to prevent
injuries and death from the unexpected motion of a vehicle when the
driver starts the vehicle with the transmission inadvertently in a
forward or reverse gear.'' 70 FR 38040 (July 1, 2005). The agency also
referred to ``S3.1.3's underlying purpose of ensuring that the vehicle
will not lurch forward or backward during driver activation of the
engine starter. . . .'' ld. at 38041. As described above, the starter
interlock system in the subject vehicles completely prevents any
possibility of ``unexpected motion'' or vehicle ``lurching'' because
the transmission remains neutralized, even if the engine is started
with the gear selector indicating a forward or reverse gear. Thus, the
PACCAR system, which has been used successfully for more than three
years in PACCAR's European vehicles, fully satisfies the purposes of
S3.1.3 and achieves the same level of safety as that provision.
Moreover, PACCAR is unaware of any consumer complaints, accidents, or
injuries related to this design.

    PACCAR has additionally informed NHTSA that it has corrected the
noncompliance so that all future production vehicles will comply with
FMVSS No. 102.
    In summation, PACCAR believes that the described noncompliance of
the subject vehicles is inconsequential to motor vehicle safety, and
that its petition, to exempt from providing recall notification of
noncompliance as required by 49 U.S.C. 30118 and remedying the recall
noncompliance as required by 49 U.S.C. 30120 should be granted.
    V. NHTSA Decision: The affected incomplete vehicles were
manufactured as chassis cabs by PACCAR under the Kenworth and Peterbilt
makes. Based on the brochures on the Kenworth and Peterbilt make Web
sites, the subject chassis cabs are typically completed by final stage
manufacturers as class 6 and 7 cargo-carrying medium/heavy trucks. The
brochures also show the transmission gear selector adjacent to the
driver's seated position, easily visible to the driver. These vehicles
will most likely be operated by professional drivers who would be less
likely to forget to place the transmission control in ``neutral'' when
stopping the engine. In addition, even if the driver starts the vehicle
with the gear selector in drive or reverse, PACCAR reported that the
transmission will remain in neutral until the driver applies the
service brake, shifts the gear selector to neutral and then selects the
desired gear.
    Subsequent to filing the subject petition PACCAR notified NHTSA
that it has initiated a field repair campaign under which owners of the
affected vehicles could have a starter interlock jumper harness
installed free of charge to remedy the subject noncompliance. On 6/11/
13, a Field Repair Notice was sent to notify dealerships of the repair
and of the vehicles within the affected population. PACCAR also stated
that it was unaware of any instance in which a customer eligible for
the field repair has experienced unintended movement.
    In consideration of the foregoing, NHTSA has decided that PACCAR
has met its burden of persuasion that the FMVSS No. 102 noncompliance
is inconsequential to motor vehicle safety. Accordingly, PACCAR's
petition is hereby granted and PACCAR is exempted from the obligation
of providing notification of, and a remedy for, that noncompliance
under 49 U.S.C. 30118 and 30120.
    NHTSA notes that the statutory provisions (49 U.S.C. 30118(d) and
30120(h)) that permit manufacturers to file petitions for a
determination of inconsequentiality allow NHTSA to exempt manufacturers
only from the duties found in sections 30118 and 30120, respectively,
to notify owners, purchasers, and dealers of a defect or noncompliance
and to remedy the defect or noncompliance. Therefore, this decision
only applies to the chassis cabs that PACCAR no longer controlled at
the time it determined that the noncompliance existed. However, the
granting of this petition does not relieve vehicle distributors and
dealers of the prohibitions on the sale, offer for sale, or
introduction or delivery for introduction into interstate commerce of
the noncompliant trucks under their control after PACCAR notified them
that the subject noncompliance existed.

    Authority: (49 U.S.C. 30118, 30120: delegations of authority at
49 CFR 1.95 and 501.8)

Jeffrey Giuseppe,
Acting Director, Office of Vehicle Safety Compliance.
[FR Doc. 2014-06922 Filed 3-27-14; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-59-P


[Federal Register Volume 81, Number 55 (Tuesday, March 22, 2016)]
[Notices]
[Pages 15323-15324]
[FR Doc No: 2016-06430]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Coast Guard

[Docket No. USCG-2016-0106]

Information Collection Request to Office of Management and
Budget; OMB Control Number: 1625-0104

AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS.

ACTION: Sixty-Day Notice requesting comments.

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

SUMMARY: In compliance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, the
U.S. Coast Guard intends to submit an Information Collection Request
(ICR) to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB), Office of
Information and Regulatory Affairs (OIRA), requesting approval of
revisions to the following collection of information: 1625-0104, Barges
Carrying Bulk Hazardous Materials. Our ICR describes the information we
seek to collect from the public. Before submitting this ICR to OIRA,
the Coast Guard is inviting comments as described below.

DATES: Comments must reach the Coast Guard on or before May 23, 2016.

ADDRESSES: You may submit comments identified by Coast Guard docket
number [USCG-2016-0106] to the Coast Guard using the Federal
eRulemaking Portal at http://www.regulations.gov. See the ``Public
participation and request for comments'' portion of the SUPPLEMENTARY
INFORMATION section for further instructions on submitting comments.
    A copy of the ICR is available through the docket on the Internet
at http://www.regulations.gov. Additionally, copies are available from:
COMMANDANT (CG-612), ATTN: PAPERWORK REDUCTION ACT MANAGER, U.S. COAST
GUARD, 2703 MARTIN LUTHER KING JR. AVE. SE., STOP 7710, WASHINGTON, DC
20593-7710.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Contact Mr. Anthony Smith, Office of
Information Management, telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>, or fax<PHONE_NUMBER>,
for questions on these documents.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Public Participation and Request for Comments

    This Notice relies on the authority of the Paperwork Reduction Act
of 1995; 44 U.S.C. Chapter 35, as amended. An ICR is an application to
OIRA seeking the approval, extension, or renewal of a Coast Guard
collection of information (Collection). The ICR contains information
describing the Collection's purpose, the Collection's likely burden on
the affected public, an explanation of the necessity of the Collection,
and other important information describing the Collection. There is one
ICR for each Collection.
    The Coast Guard invites comments on whether this ICR should be
granted based on the Collection being necessary for the proper
performance of Departmental functions. In particular, the Coast Guard
would appreciate comments addressing: (1) The practical utility of the
Collection; (2) the accuracy of the estimated burden of the Collection;
(3) ways to enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of information
subject to the Collection; and (4) ways to minimize the burden of the
Collection on respondents, including the use of automated collection
techniques or other forms of information technology. In response to
your comments, we may revise this ICR or decide not to seek approval of
revisions of the Collection. We will consider all comments and material
received during the comment period.
    We encourage you to respond to this request by submitting comments
and related materials. Comments must contain the OMB Control Number of
the ICR and the docket number of this request, [USCG-2016-0106], and
must be received by May 23, 2016.

Submitting Comments

    We encourage you to submit comments through the Federal eRulemaking
Portal at http://www.regulations.gov. If your material cannot be
submitted using http://www.regulations.gov, contact the person in the
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section of this document for alternate
instructions. Documents mentioned in this notice, and all public
comments, are in our online docket at http://www.regulations.gov and
can be viewed by following that Web site's instructions. Additionally,
if you go to the online docket and sign up for email alerts, you will
be notified when comments are posted.
    We accept anonymous comments. All comments received will be posted
without change to http://www.regulations.gov and will include any
personal information you have provided. For more about privacy and the
docket, you may review a Privacy Act notice regarding the Federal
Docket Management System in the March 24, 2005, issue of the Federal
Register (70 FR 15086).

Information Collection Request

    Title: Barges Carrying Bulk Hazardous Materials.
    OMB Control Number: 1625-0104.
    SUMMARY: This information is needed to ensure the safe shipment of
bulk hazardous liquids in barges. The requirements are necessary to
ensure that barges meet safety standards and to ensure that barge's
crewmembers have the information necessary to operate barges safely.
    Need: Title 46 U.S.C. 3703 authorizes the Coast Guard to prescribe
rules

related to the carriage of liquid bulk dangerous cargoes. Title 46 CFR
151 prescribes rules for barges carrying bulk liquid hazardous
materials.
    Forms: N/A.
    Respondents: Owners and operators of tank barges.
    Frequency: On occasion.
    Hour Burden Estimate: The estimated burden has increased from
28,958 hours a year to 40,307 hours a year. The change in burden is an
ADJUSTMENT due to a change in the estimated annual number of new
construction (n/c) tank barges. In the last ICR, the Coast Guard
estimated about 160 n/c tank barges per year. In this ICR, the Coast
Guard estimates about 282 n/c tank barges per year.

    Authority: The Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995; 44 U.S.C.
Chapter 35, as amended.

    Dated: March 14, 2016.
Thomas P. Michelli,
U.S. Coast Guard, Deputy Chief Information Officer.
[FR Doc. 2016-06430 Filed 3-21-16; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 9110-04-P