[Federal Register: October 2, 2008 (Volume 73, Number 192)]
[Notices]
[Page 57393-57395]
[DOCID:fr02oc08-122]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-58660; File No. SR-FINRA-2008-027]

Self-Regulatory Organizations: Financial Industry Regulatory
Authority, Inc.; Order Approving Proposed Rule Change Relating to the
Adoption of FINRA Rule 3220 (Influencing or Rewarding Employees of
Others) and FINRA Rule 2070 (Transactions Involving FINRA Employees) in
the Consolidated FINRA Rulebook

September 26, 2008.

I. Introduction

    On July 18, 2008, the Financial Industry Regulatory Authority, Inc.
(``FINRA'') (f/k/a National Association of Securities Dealers, Inc.
(``NASD'')) filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission
(``Commission'') pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the Securities
Exchange Act of 1934 (``Act'')\1\ and Rule 19b-4 thereunder,\2\ a
proposed rule relating to the adoption of FINRA Rule 3220 (Influencing
or Rewarding Employees of Others) and FINRA Rule 2070 (Transactions
Involving FINRA Employees) in the new consolidated FINRA rulebook
(``Consolidated FINRA Rulebook'').\3\ The proposed rule change was
published for comment in the Federal Register on August 11, 2008.\4\
The Commission received one comment letter in response to the proposed
rule change.\5\ This order approves the proposed rule change.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1).
    \2\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4.
    \3\ The current FINRA rulebook consists of two sets of rules:
(1) NASD Rules and (2) rules incorporated from NYSE (``Incorporated
NYSE Rules'') (together referred to as the ``Transitional
Rulebook''). The Incorporated NYSE Rules (hereinafter, ``NYSE
Rules'') apply only to those members of FINRA that are also members
of the NYSE (``Dual Members''). Dual Members also must comply with
NASD Rules. For more information about the rulebook consolidation
process, see FINRA Information Notice, March 12, 2008 (Rulebook
Consolidation Process).
    \4\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 34-58308 (August 5,
2008); 73 FR 46664 (Aug. 11, 2008) (notice).
    \5\ See letter from Amal Aly, Managing Director and Associate
General Counsel, Securities Industry and Financial Markets
Association, dated Sept. 2, 2008 (``SIFMA letter'').
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

II. Description of the Proposed Rule Change

    As part of the process of developing the Consolidated FINRA
Rulebook, FINRA proposed to transfer without material change NASD Rules
3060 (Influencing or Rewarding Employees of Others) and 3090
(Transactions Involving Association and American Stock Exchange
Employees) into the Consolidated FINRA Rulebook and to delete the
corresponding provisions in Incorporated NYSE Rules 350, 350.10,
407(a), 407.10 and NYSE Rule Interpretations 350/01 through 350/03. The
proposed rule change would renumber NASD Rule 3060 as FINRA Rule 3220
and NASD Rule 3090 as FINRA Rule 2070 in the Consolidated FINRA
Rulebook, and would delete NASD Rules 3060 and 3090 in their entirety
from the Transitional Rulebook.

(A) Proposed FINRA Rule 3220

(1) Background
    NASD Rule 3060 (Influencing or Rewarding Employees of Others)
currently states that no member or associated person shall give gifts
or gratuities to an agent or employee of another person in excess of
$100 per year where the gift or gratuity is in relation to the business
of the employer of the recipient. The rule, which protects against
improprieties that may arise when members or their associated persons
give gifts or gratuities to employees of a customer, has been in effect
in its current form since 1969, with changes only to the dollar
amounts, rising from $25 to $50 to $100.\6\ The rule requires each
member to maintain a separate record of all gifts or gratuities. The
rule also contains an express exclusion for payments made pursuant to
bona fide, written employment contracts.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ See NASD Notice to Members 93-8 (February 1993) (SEC
Approval of Amendment Relating to the Payment of Gratuities or
Anything of Value by Members to Others); see also Securities
Exchange Act Release No. 21074 (June 20, 1984), 49 FR 26330 (June
27, 1984) (SR-NASD-84-8) (approval order).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    NYSE Rule 350 (Compensation or Gratuities to Employees of Others)
reaches similar conduct in prohibiting, absent prior written consent of
the recipient's employer, any member or member organization from giving
any gratuity in excess of $100 per person per year to any principal,
officer, or employee of another member or member organization,
financial institution, news or financial information media, or non-
member broker or dealer in securities, commodities or money
instruments.\7\ NYSE Rule 350 has specific provisions addressing
compensation to operations employees of members (e.g., NYSE Floor
personnel). In addition, NYSE Rule 350 requires that records of all
such gratuities and compensation be retained for at least three years.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ In addition, NYSE Rule 350(a)(1) prohibits any member from
employing or compensating any person for services rendered except
with the prior consent of that person's employer. FINRA proposed to
delete this provision, even though it does not pertain to gifts,
because a substantively identical provision exists in NYSE Rule
346(b). FINRA intends to review NYSE Rule 346(b) as part of a later
phase of the rulebook consolidation process.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

(2) Proposal
    FINRA proposed to transfer NASD Rule 3060 into the Consolidated
FINRA Rulebook without material change and renumbered as FINRA Rule
3220. One of the advantages of the existing regulatory standard is the
clarity of the rule's application--it prevents gifts in excess of a
fixed amount, currently $100. Both the NASD and NYSE rules have a $100
limitation on gifts.
    FINRA believes that NASD Rule 3060 generally is well understood by
members. FINRA recently issued additional guidance on NASD Rule 3060 in
Notice to Members 06-69.\8\ Among the issues addressed in that Notice
was the fact that NASD Rule 3060 does not apply to gifts of de minimis
value, or to promotional items of nominal value

displaying a firm's logo. The Notice stated that NASD Rule 3060 does
not prohibit customary Lucite tombstones, plaques or other similar
solely decorative items commemorating a business transaction or event.
The Notice also stated that gifts should be valued at the higher of
cost or market value and tickets should be valued at the higher of cost
or face value. In addition, FINRA staff has used its interpretive
authority to address unintended consequences of the rule, such as
unreasonable limitations on giving a bereavement or sympathy gift.\9\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \8\ See NASD Notice to Members 06-69 (December 2006) (Gifts and
Gratuities).
    \9\ See Interpretive Letter dated December 17, 2007 to Amal Aly,
SIFMA from Gary L. Goldsholle, FINRA, available at: http://
www.finra.org/RulesRegulation/PublicationsGuidance/
InterpretiveLetters/ConductRules/P037695.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    FINRA proposed to eliminate the provision in NYSE Rule 350
permitting member firms to obtain prior written consent of the
recipient's employer for any gift over $100. FINRA believes that the
gift rule should establish a fixed amount and does not see any business
need to justify giving gifts in amounts greater than the limits
specified in the rule. FINRA also would delete the provisions in NYSE
Rule 350 and NYSE Rule Interpretation 350/02 addressing compensation to
operations/Floor employees of NYSE as they are not relevant for
FINRA.\10\ For similar reasons, provisions in NYSE Rule 350.10
pertaining to employment of or gratuities to personnel working the
Floor of other exchanges would be deleted.\11\ Finally, FINRA would
eliminate the provisions of NYSE Rule 350 relating to record retention,
as NASD Rule 3060(c) addresses the same issue. FINRA proposed to
eliminate NYSE Rule Interpretation 350/01, and provisions in NYSE Rule
350.10 pertaining to gifts among close relatives, because the concepts
contained in both are adequately addressed by proposed FINRA Rule 3220
and existing guidance. Lastly, FINRA would eliminate NYSE Rule
Interpretation 350/03 because FINRA has proposed a separate rule that
addresses business entertainment.\12\ Any guidance provided under NASD
Rule 3060, including, without limitation, notices to members and
interpretation letters, also would apply to the proposed FINRA Rule
3220.\13\ The Commission notes three interpretative letters previously
issued with respect to NASD Rule 3060.\14\ The interpretative letters
include FINRA's rule on members providing business entertainment.\15\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \10\ NYSE Rule Interpretation 350/02 would be deleted in its
entirety. Note that NYSE Rule 350 also contains provisions that
address gifts and gratuities to employees of the NYSE. These
provisions are addressed in connection with FINRA's proposal to
adopt FINRA Rule 2070. See Section (B) under Item II.A.1. FINRA's
proposals with respect to FINRA Rules 3220 and 2070 would, in
combination, delete NYSE Rule 350 in its entirety.
    \11\ NYSE Rule 350.10 also contains provisions that address
employment or compensation of NYSE employees by members or member
organizations. These provisions are addressed in connection with
FINRA's proposal to adopt FINRA Rule 2070. See Section (B) under
Item II.A.1. Because Proposed FINRA Rules 3220 and 2070 would
address the substance of NYSE Rule 350.10, FINRA proposed to delete
NYSE Rule 350.10 in its entirety.
    \12\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 55765 (May 15,
2007), 72 FR 28743 (May 22, 2007) (notice) see also Amendment No. 3
to File No. SR-NASD-2006-044 (January 2, 2008).
    \13\ Telephone conference among Gary Goldsholle and Adam Arkel,
FINRA, and Haimera Workie, Branch Chief, Alicia Goldin, Special
Counsel, Sharon Lawson, Senior Special Counsel and Steve Kuan,
Special Counsel, Commission, on September 11, 2008.
    \14\ These interpretative letters are currently available at
FINRA's web site at http://www.finra.org/Industry/Regulation/
Guidance/InterpretiveLetters/ConductRules/index.htm.
    \15\ See, e.g., letter to Henry H. Hopkins and Sarah McCafferty,
T. Rowe Price Investment Services, Inc., dated June 24, 1999.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

(B) Proposed FINRA Rule 2070

(1) Background
    Both NASD and NYSE rules address conflicts of interest involving
FINRA and NYSE employees.
    NASD Rule 3090 addresses this issue in three ways. First, NASD Rule
3090(a) requires a member, when it has actual notice that an NASD
employee has a financial interest or controls trading in an account, to
promptly obtain and implement an instruction from the employee
directing that duplicate account statements be provided by the member
to NASD. Second, NASD Rule 3090(b) prohibits a member from making any
loan of money or securities to an NASD employee. This prohibition does
not apply to loans made in the context of disclosed, routine banking
and brokerage agreements, or loans that are clearly motivated by a
personal or family relationship. Third, NASD Rule 3090(c) prohibits any
member from directly or indirectly giving, or permitting to be given,
anything of more than nominal value to any NASD employee who has
responsibility for a regulatory matter involving the member. This
applies regardless of the $100 per individual per year limitation set
forth in NASD Rule 3060(a). The term ``regulatory matter'' is defined
to include, without limitation, examinations, disciplinary proceedings,
membership applications, listing applications, delisting proceedings,
and dispute-resolution proceedings that involve the member.
    The NYSE rules governing conflicts of interest involving NYSE
employees differ from the NASD approach in two ways. First, rather than
applying the duplicate statement approach to NYSE employees (which
applies to NASD employees under NASD Rule 3090(a)), NYSE Rule 407(a)
prohibits a member or member organization, without the prior written
consent of the NYSE, from opening a securities or commodities account
or executing any transaction in which an employee of the NYSE is
directly or indirectly interested.\16\ NYSE Rule 401.10 states that an
employee of the NYSE or any of its affiliated companies who wishes to
open a securities or commodities account should apply for permission
from the NYSE's Ethics Officer. Second, the NYSE Rules differ from the
nominal value approach set forth in NASD Rule 3090(c) by instead
setting procedures for outside compensation and placing a dollar limit
on gifts. Specifically, with respect to outside compensation, NYSE Rule
350(a)(1) prohibits any member, allied member, member organization or
employee thereof from employing or compensating any person for services
rendered without the prior consent of the person's employer (i.e., the
NYSE with respect to NYSE employees).\17\ With respect to gifts, NYSE
Rule 350(a)(2) prohibits giving any gift or gratuity in excess of $50
per person per year to any principal, officer, or employee of the NYSE
or its subsidiaries without the prior written consent of the NYSE. This
rule is written without regard to whether the NYSE employee has
responsibility for regulatory matters affecting the member.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \16\ NYSE Rule 407(a) requires duplicate confirmations and
account statements with respect to accounts or transactions of
members, allied members and employees associated with another member
or member organizations.
    \17\ NYSE Rule 350.10 provides that requests for NYSE consent
under Rule 350(a)(1) should be sent to the NYSE's Human Resources
Department at least 10 days in advance of the proposed date of
employment. NYSE Rule 350.10 states that approval to employ an NYSE
employee outside the hours of regular employment by the NYSE will be
limited to employment of a routine or clerical nature. NYSE Rule
350.10 further states that when the NYSE has granted permission for
part-time employment of a NYSE employee, no approval is required for
a subsequent gratuity or bonus to such person provided it is in
proportion to gratuities given to full-time employees of the
employing organization.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

(2) Proposal
    FINRA proposed to transfer NASD Rule 3090 into the Consolidated
FINRA Rulebook without material change,\18\ renumbered as FINRA Rule
2070 and that the corresponding provisions in NYSE Rules 350(a)(1),
350(a)(2), 350.10,

407(a) and 407.10 be eliminated.\19\ Rather than requiring the member
to obtain FINRA's consent to open a securities or commodities account
or execute a trade (as set forth under NYSE Rules 407(a) and 407.10),
FINRA believes that it is sufficient, as set forth under NASD Rule
3090(a), to continue to require the member to obtain and implement an
instruction from the FINRA employee directing the member to provide
duplicate statements to FINRA. The proposed rule change would, as set
forth in NASD Rule 3090(b), continue to prohibit members from making
any loan of money or securities to a FINRA employee, subject to the
exceptions set forth in that rule. Lastly, the proposed rule change
would, as set forth in NASD Rule 3090(c), continue to prohibit members
from directly or indirectly giving, or permitting to be given, anything
above nominal value to any FINRA employee who has responsibility for a
``regulatory matter'' involving the member. FINRA does not believe that
its employees should be permitted to receive gifts of up to $50 per
year when such employees have responsibility for a regulatory matter.
In addition, FINRA proposed not to adopt the $50 limit in NYSE Rule
350(a)(2) for gifts to all other employees to maintain consistency with
the FINRA Code of Conduct, which, like NASD Rule 3060(a) (and proposed
FINRA Rule 3220(a)), establishes a $100 limit. Rule 3090(c) need not be
amended to address the employment and compensation issues as to NYSE
employees in NYSE Rules 350(a)(1) and 350.10 because the FINRA Code of
Conduct addresses these issues through its provisions on Outside
Activities or Employment.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \18\ The proposal included stylistic edits to NASD Rule 3090 for
purposes of clarity and readability.
    \19\ With respect to NYSE Rule 407(a), the only change to the
rule at this stage in the rulebook consolidation would be to delete
language pertaining to employees of the NYSE. See Exhibit 5. NYSE
Rule 407.10 would be deleted in its entirety. With respect to NYSE
Rules 350(a)(1), 350(a)(2) and 350.10, see supra notes 10 and 11.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    FINRA proposed to delete listing and delisting proceedings as
potential ``regulatory matters'' under NASD Rule 3090(c) in light of
FINRA's separation from NASDAQ and The American Stock Exchange.

III. Comment Letters

    The Commission received one comment letter on the proposal \20\ and
a response to comments from FINRA.\21\ In its comment letter, SIFMA
supported FINRA's effort to consolidate its two rulebooks.\22\ However,
SIFMA suggested that FINRA should amend the proposed rule change with
respect to NASD Rule 3060 to incorporate a principles-based approach to
gifts and gratuities.\23\ SIFMA said that FINRA should permit firms to
establish their own gifts and gratuities policies and limits rather
than retain the limits set forth in the rule.\24\ SIFMA also supports
the inclusion of a safe harbor in new Rule 3220, under which a FINRA
member firm would be deemed to be in compliance with new Rule 3220, if
the aggregate annual amount of gifts and gratuities to any one person
did not exceed a de minimis amount, such as $250.\25\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \20\ See supra, footnote 5.
    \21\ See letter from Gary L. Goldsholle, Vice President and
Associate General Counsel, FINRA Regulatory Group, dated September
11, 2008.
    \22\ See SIFMA letter.
    \23\ Id.
    \24\ Id.
    \25\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    FINRA responded to the request by SIFMA for a principles-based
approach to gifts and gratuities by stating that FINRA had given a
great deal of consideration to this approach, but had determined to
maintain the existing standards, which offer predictability and
clarity.\26\ FINRA also noted that it does not believe that it is
appropriate at this time to increase the limit for gifts and gratuities
to $250 from $100.\27\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \26\ See supra, footnote 21.
    \27\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

IV. Discussion and Findings

    After careful review, the Commission finds that the proposed rule
change is consistent with the requirements of the Act, and the rules
and regulations thereunder that are applicable to a national securities
association.\28\ In particular, the Commission believes that the
proposed rule change is consistent with the provisions of Section
15A(b)(6) of the Act,\29\ which requires, among other things, that
FINRA rules must be designed to prevent fraudulent and manipulative
acts and practices, to promote just and equitable principles of trade,
and, in general, to protect investors and the public interest. The
Commission believes that, as part of the FINRA rulebook consolidation
process, the proposed rule change would streamline and reorganize
existing rules that govern influencing or rewarding the employees of
others and transactions involving FINRA employees. Further, the
proposed rule change would provide greater regulatory clarity with
respect to these issues.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \28\ In approving this proposal, the Commission has considered
the proposed rule's impact on efficiency, competition and capital
formation. See 15 U.S.C. 78c(f).
    \29\ 15 U.S.C. 78o-3(b)(6).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

V. Conclusion

    It is therefore ordered, pursuant to Section 19(b)(2) of the
Act,\30\ that the proposed rule change (SR-FINRA-2008-027) be, and
hereby is, approved.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \30\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(2).

    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets,
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
pursuant to delegated authority.\31\

Florence E. Harmon,
Acting Secretary.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \31\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

 [FR Doc. E8-23196 Filed 10-1-08; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 82, Number 90 (Thursday, May 11, 2017)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 21917-21919]
[FR Doc No: 2017-09554]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Coast Guard

33 CFR Part 165

[Docket No. USCG-2017-0303]
RIN 1625-AA00

Safety Zone; Tuskegee Airmen River Days Air Show, Detroit River,
Detroit, MI

AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS.

ACTION: Temporary final rule.

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

SUMMARY: The Coast Guard is establishing a temporary safety zone on the
waters of the Detroit River in the vicinity of Detroit, MI. This zone
is intended to restrict and control movement of vessels in a portion of
the Detroit River. This zone is necessary to protect spectators and
vessels from potential hazards associated with the Tuskegee Airmen
River Days Air Show.

DATES: This temporary final rule is effective from 12:30 p.m. on June
23, 2017 until 9 p.m. on June 26, 2017.

ADDRESSES: To view documents mentioned in this preamble as being
available in the docket, go to http://www.regulations.gov, type USCG-
2017-0303 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
temporary rule, call or email Tracy Girard, Prevention Department,
Sector Detroit, Coast Guard; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>, or 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. The
Coast Guard did not receive the final details of this air show until
there was insufficient time remaining before the event to publish an
NPRM.

III. Legal Authority and Need for Rule

    The Coast Guard is issuing this rule under authority in 33 U.S.C.
1231. Having reviewed the application for a marine event submitted by
the sponsor on March 14, 2017, the Captain of the Port Detroit (COTP)
has determined that an aircraft aerial display proximate to a gathering
of watercraft poses a significant risk to public safety and property.
Such hazards include potential aircraft malfunctions, loud noise
levels, and waterway distractions. Therefore, the COTP is establishing
a safety zone around the event location to

help minimize risks to safety of life and property during this event.

IV. Discussion of the Rule

    This rule establishes a safety zone from 12:30 p.m. on June 23,
2017 through 9 p.m. on June 26, 2017. The safety zone will encompass
all U.S. navigable waters of the Detroit River between the following
two lines extending from 70 feet off the bank to the US/Canadian
demarcation line: the first line is drawn directly across the channel
at position 42[deg]19.444' N., 083[deg]03.114' W. (NAD 83); the second
line, to the north, is drawn directly across the channel at position
42[deg]19.860' N. 083[deg]01.683' W. (NAD 83). No vessel or person will
be permitted to enter the safety zone without obtaining permission from
the COTP or a designated representative.
    The COTP or his designated on-scene representative will notify the
public of the enforcement of this rule by all appropriate means,
including a Broadcast Notice to Mariners and Local Notice to Mariners.

V. Regulatory Analyses

    We developed this rule after considering numerous statutes and
executive orders related to rulemaking. Below we summarize our analyses
based on these statutes and executive orders.

A. Regulatory Planning and Review

    Executive Orders 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. Executive Order 13771 (``Reducing Regulation and
Controlling Regulatory Costs''), directs agencies to reduce regulation
and control regulatory costs and provides that ``for every one new
regulation issued, at least two prior regulations be identified for
elimination, and that the cost of planned regulations be prudently
managed and controlled through a budgeting process.''
    The Office of Management and Budget (OMB) has not designated this
rule a significant regulatory action under section 3(f) of Executive
Order 12866. Accordingly, the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) has
not reviewed it.
    As this rule is not a significant regulatory action, this rule is
exempt from the requirements of Executive Order 13771. See OMB's
Memorandum titled ``Interim Guidance Implementing Section 2 of the
Executive Order of January 30, 2017 titled `Reducing Regulation and
Controlling Regulatory Costs' '' (February 2, 2017).
    This regulatory action determination is based on the size,
location, duration, and time-of-year of the safety zone. Vessel traffic
will be able to safely transit around this safety zone which will
impact a small designated area of the Detroit River from 12:30 p.m. on
June 23, 2017 until 9 p.m. on June 26, 2017. Moreover, the Coast Guard
will issue Broadcast Notice to Mariners via VHF-FM marine channel 16
about the zone and the rule allows vessels to seek permission to enter
the zone.

B. Impact on Small Entities

    The Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980, 5 U.S.C. 601-612, as
amended, requires Federal agencies to consider the potential impact of
regulations on small entities during rulemaking. The term ``small
entities'' comprises small businesses, not-for-profit organizations
that are independently owned and operated and are not dominant in their
fields, and governmental jurisdictions with populations of less than
50,000. The Coast Guard certifies under 5 U.S.C. 605(b) that this rule
will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of
small entities.
    While some owners or operators of vessels intending to transit the
safety zone may be small entities, for the reasons stated in section
V.A above, this rule will not have a significant economic impact on any
vessel owner or operator.
    Under section 213(a) of the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement
Fairness Act of 1996 (Pub. L. 104-121), we want to assist small
entities in understanding this rule. If the rule would affect your
small business, organization, or governmental jurisdiction and you have
questions concerning its provisions or options for compliance, please
contact the person listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT
section.
    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 expenditure, we do discuss the effects of this rule elsewhere in
this preamble.

F. Environment

    We have analyzed this rule under Department of Homeland Security
Management Directive 023-01 and Commandant Instruction M16475.lD, which
guide the Coast Guard in complying with the National Environmental
Policy Act of 1969 (42

U.S.C. 4321-4370f), and have determined that 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 a
safety zone lasting less than three hours per day that will prohibit
entry within the 1 mile by .2 mile air show site. It is categorically
excluded under section 2.B.2, figure 2-1, paragraph 34(g) of the
Instruction. A Record of Environmental Consideration (REC) supporting
this determination is available in the docket where indicated in the
ADDRESSES section of this preamble.

G. Protest Activities

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

List of Subjects in 33 CFR Part 165

    Harbors, Marine safety, Navigation (water), Reporting and
recordkeeping requirements, Security measures, Waterways.
    For the reasons discussed in the preamble, the Coast Guard amends
33 CFR part 165 as follows:

PART 165--REGULATED NAVIGATION AREAS AND LIMITED ACCESS AREAS

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

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

0
2. Add Sec.  165.T09-0303 to read as follows:

Sec.  165.T09-0303  Safety Zone; Tuskegee Airmen River Days Air show;
Detroit, MI.

    (a) Location. A safety zone is established to include all U.S.
navigable waters of the Detroit River between the following two lines
extending 70 feet off the bank to the US/Canadian demarcation line: the
first line is drawn directly across the channel at position
42[deg]19.444' N., 083[deg]03.114' W. (NAD 83); the second line, to the
north, is drawn directly across the channel, at position 42[deg]19.860'
N., 083[deg]01.683' W. (NAD 83).
    (b) Enforcement period. The regulated area described in paragraph
(a) of this section will be enforced from 12:30 p.m. thru 3 p.m. on
June 23, 2017 and June 24, 2017; 3 p.m. through 5:30 p.m. on June 25,
2017; and from 5 p.m. through 7:30 p.m. on June 26, 2017.
    (c) Regulations. (1) No vessel or person may enter, transit
through, or anchor within the safety zone unless authorized by the
Captain of the Port Detroit, or his on-scene representative.
    (2) The safety zone is closed to all vessel traffic, except as may
be permitted by the Captain of the Port Detroit or his on-scene
representative.
    (3) The ``on-scene representative'' of the Captain of the Port
Detroit is any Coast Guard commissioned, warrant or petty officer or a
Federal, State, or local law enforcement officer designated by or
assisting the Captain of the Port Detroit to act on his behalf.
    (4) Vessel operators shall contact the Captain of the Port Detroit
or his on-scene representative to obtain permission to enter or operate
within the safety zone. The Captain of the Port Detroit or his on-scene
representative may be contacted via VHF Channel 16 or at<PHONE_NUMBER>.
Vessel operators given permission to enter or operate in the regulated
area must comply with all directions given to them by the Captain of
the Port Detroit or his on-scene representative.

    Dated: May 5, 2017.
Scott B. Lemasters,
Captain, U.S. Coast Guard, Captain of the Port Detroit.
[FR Doc. 2017-09554 Filed 5-10-17; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 9110-04-P


[Federal Register Volume 86, Number 236 (Monday, December 13, 2021)]
[Notices]
[Pages 70833-70834]
[FR Doc No: 2021-26901]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

Combined Notice of Filings

    Take notice that the Commission has received the following Natural
Gas Pipeline Rate and Refund Report filings:

Filings Instituting Proceedings

    Docket Numbers: RP21-937-000.
    Applicants: Sea Robin Pipeline Company, LLC.
    Description: Motion Filing: Motion Tariff Records into Effect RP21-
937-000 to be effective 1/1/2022.
    Filed Date: 12/7/21.
    Accession Number: 20211207-5029.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. ET 12/20/21.

    Any person desiring to intervene or protest in any of the above
proceedings must file in accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of the
Commission's Regulations (18 CFR 385.211 and 385.214) on or before 5:00
p.m. Eastern time on the specified comment date. Protests may be
considered, but intervention is necessary to become a party to the
proceeding.

Filings in Existing Proceedings

    Docket Numbers: RP21-778-000.
    Applicants: Southern Star Central Gas Pipeline, Inc.
    Description: Report Filing: Rate Case (RP21-778) Test Period Update
Filing to be effective N/A.
    Filed Date: 12/3/21.
    Accession Number: 20211203-5177.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. ET 12/15/21.

    Any person desiring to protest in any the above proceedings must
file in accordance with Rule 211 of the Commission's Regulations (18
CFR 385.211) on or before 5:00 p.m. Eastern time on the specified
comment date.
    The filings are accessible in the Commission's eLibrary system
(https://elibrary.ferc.gov/idmws/search/fercgensearch.asp) by querying
the docket number.

    eFiling is encouraged. More detailed information relating to filing
requirements, interventions, protests, service, and qualifying
facilities filings can be found at: http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/efiling/filing-req.pdf. For other information, call<PHONE_NUMBER>
(toll free). For TTY, call<PHONE_NUMBER>.

    Dated: December 7, 2021.
Kimberly D. Bose,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2021-26901 Filed 12-10-21; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 77, Number 157 (Tuesday, August 14, 2012)]
[Notices]
[Pages 48590-48591]
[FR Doc No: 2012-19885]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration

[Docket No. FMCSA-1999-6480; FMCSA-2001-11426; FMCSA-2002-12294; FMCSA-
2006-24015; FMCSA-2006-24783; FMCSA-2008-0106; FMCSA-2008-0174; FMCSA-
2010-0050; FMCSA-2010-0114]

Qualification of Drivers; Exemption Applications; Vision

AGENCY: Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration (FMCSA), DOT.

ACTION: Notice of renewal of exemptions; request for comments.

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

SUMMARY: FMCSA announces its decision to renew the exemptions from the
vision requirement in the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Regulations for
16 individuals. FMCSA has statutory authority to exempt individuals
from the vision requirement if the exemptions granted will not
compromise safety. The Agency has concluded that granting these
exemption renewals will provide a level of safety that is equivalent to
or greater than the level of safety maintained without the exemptions
for these commercial motor vehicle (CMV) drivers.

DATES: This decision is effective September 9, 2012. Comments must be
received on or before September 13, 2012.

ADDRESSES: You may submit comments bearing the Federal Docket
Management
    System (FDMS) numbers: Docket No. FMCSA-1999-6480; FMCSA-2001-
11426; FMCSA-2002-12294; FMCSA-2006-24015; FMCSA-2006-24783; FMCSA-
2008-0106; FMCSA-2008-0174; FMCSA-2010-0050; FMCSA-2010-0114, using any
of the following methods:
     Federal eRulemaking Portal: Go to http://www.regulations.gov. Follow the on-line instructions for submitting
comments.
     Mail: Docket Management Facility; U.S. Department of
Transportation, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., West Building Ground Floor,
Room W12-140, Washington, DC 20590-0001.
     Hand Delivery or Courier: West Building Ground Floor, Room
W12-140, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., Washington, DC, between 9 a.m. and
5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal Holidays.
     Fax: 1-202-493-2251.
    Instructions: Each submission must include the Agency name and the
docket number for this notice. Note that DOT posts all comments
received without change to http://www.regulations.gov, including any
personal information included in a comment. Please see the Privacy Act
heading below.
    Docket: For access to the docket to read background documents or
comments, go to http://www.regulations.gov at any time or Room W12-140
on the ground level of the West Building, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE.,
Washington, DC, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday,
except Federal holidays. The Federal Docket Management System (FDMS) is
available 24 hours each day, 365 days each year. If you want
acknowledgment that we received your comments, please include a self-
addressed, stamped envelope or postcard or print the acknowledgement
page that appears after submitting comments on-line.
    Privacy Act: Anyone may search the electronic form of all comments
received into any of our dockets by the name of the individual
submitting the comment (or of the person signing the comment, if
submitted on behalf of an association, business, labor union, etc.).
You may review DOT's Privacy Act Statement for the FDMS published in
the Federal Register on January 17, 2008 (73 FR 3316), or you may visit
http://edocket.access.gpo.gov/2008/pdf/E8-785.pdf.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Elaine M. Papp, Chief, Medical
Programs Division,<PHONE_NUMBER><EMAIL_ADDRESS>FMCSA,
Department of Transportation, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., Room W64-224,
Washington, DC 20590-0001. Office hours are from 8:30 a.m. to 5 p.m.
Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Background

    Under 49 U.S.C. 31136(e) and 31315, FMCSA may renew an exemption
from the vision requirements in 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10), which applies to
drivers of CMVs in interstate commerce, for a two-year period if it
finds ``such exemption would likely achieve a level of safety that is
equivalent to or greater than the level that would be achieved absent
such exemption.'' The procedures for requesting an exemption (including
renewals) are set out in 49 CFR part 381.

Exemption Decision

    This notice addresses 16 individuals who have requested renewal of
their exemptions in accordance with FMCSA procedures. FMCSA has
evaluated these 16 applications for renewal on their merits and decided
to extend each exemption for a renewable two-year period. They are:

Jawad K. Al-Shaibani (WA)
Frank R. Berritto (NY)
Timothy J. Droeger (MN)
James H. Facemyre (WV)
James M. Fairman (NJ)
Gregory L. Farrar (TX)
Jeffrey M. Hall (AL)
Oskia D. Johnson (IN)
Bobby L. Mashburn (GA)
Larry A. Priewe (ND)
Kenneth R. Riener (MT)
Manuel C. Savin (LA)
Robert J. Szeman (PA)
Patrick D. Talley (SC)
Todd V. Welch (NY)
Timothy J. Wilson (MD)

    The exemptions are extended subject to the following conditions:
(1) That each individual has a physical examination every year (a) by
an ophthalmologist or optometrist who attests that the vision in the
better eye continues to meet the requirements in 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10),
and (b) by a medical examiner who attests that the individual is
otherwise physically qualified under 49 CFR 391.41; (2) that each
individual provides a copy of the ophthalmologist's or optometrist's
report to the medical examiner at the time of the annual medical
examination; and (3) that each individual provide a copy of the annual
medical certification to the employer for retention in the driver's
qualification file and retains a copy of the certification on his/her
person while driving for presentation to a duly authorized Federal,
State, or local enforcement official. Each exemption will be valid for
two years unless rescinded earlier by FMCSA. The exemption will be
rescinded if: (1) The person fails to comply with the terms and
conditions of the exemption; (2) the exemption has resulted in a lower
level of safety than was maintained before it was granted; or (3)
continuation of the exemption would not be consistent with the goals
and objectives of 49 U.S.C. 31136(e) and 31315.

Basis for Renewing Exemptions

    Under 49 U.S.C. 31315(b)(1), an exemption may be granted for no
longer than two years from its approval date and may be renewed upon
application for additional two year periods. In accordance with 49
U.S.C. 31136(e) and 31315, each of the 16 applicants has satisfied the
entry conditions for obtaining an exemption from the vision
requirements (64 FR 68195; 65 FR 20251; 67 FR 10471; 67 FR 19798; 67 FR
38311; 67 FR 46016; 67 FR 57267; 69 FR

51346; 71 FR 14566; 71 FR 30227; 71 FR 32183; 71 FR 41310; 71 FR 50970;
73 FR 27014; 73 FR 35197; 73 FR 35200; 73 FR 36955; 73 FR 38498; 73 FR
48270; 73 FR 48273; 73 FR 48275; 75 FR 14658; 75 FR 27623; 75 FR 28684;
75 FR 34212; 75 FR 36778; 75 FR 44051; 75 FR 47888; 75 FR 50799). Each
of these 16 applicants has requested renewal of the exemption and has
submitted evidence showing that the vision in the better eye continues
to meet the requirement specified at 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10) and that the
vision impairment is stable. In addition, a review of each record of
safety while driving with the respective vision deficiencies over the
past two years indicates each applicant continues to meet the vision
exemption requirements. These factors provide an adequate basis for
predicting each driver's ability to continue to drive safely in
interstate commerce. Therefore, FMCSA concludes that extending the
exemption for each renewal applicant for a period of two years is
likely to achieve a level of safety equal to that existing without the
exemption.

Request for Comments

    FMCSA will review comments received at any time concerning a
particular driver's safety record and determine if the continuation of
the exemption is consistent with the requirements at 49 U.S.C. 31136(e)
and 31315. However, FMCSA requests that interested parties with
specific data concerning the safety records of these drivers submit
comments by September 13, 2012.
    FMCSA believes that the requirements for a renewal of an exemption
under 49 U.S.C. 31136(e) and 31315 can be satisfied by initially
granting the renewal and then requesting and evaluating, if needed,
subsequent comments submitted by interested parties. As indicated
above, the Agency previously published notices of final disposition
announcing its decision to exempt these 16 individuals from the vision
requirement in 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10). The final decision to grant an
exemption to each of these individuals was made on the merits of each
case and made only after careful consideration of the comments received
to its notices of applications. The notices of applications stated in
detail the qualifications, experience, and medical condition of each
applicant for an exemption from the vision requirements. That
information is available by consulting the above cited Federal Register
publications.
    Interested parties or organizations possessing information that
would otherwise show that any, or all, of these drivers are not
currently achieving the statutory level of safety should immediately
notify FMCSA. The Agency will evaluate any adverse evidence submitted
and, if safety is being compromised or if continuation of the exemption
would not be consistent with the goals and objectives of 49 U.S.C.
31136(e) and 31315, FMCSA will take immediate steps to revoke the
exemption of a driver.

    Issued on: August 6, 2012.
Larry W. Minor,
Associate Administrator for Policy.
[FR Doc. 2012-19885 Filed 8-13-12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-EX-P