[Federal Register: August 16, 2006 (Volume 71, Number 158)]
[Notices]
[Page 47276-47278]
[DOCID:fr16au06-141]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-54288; File No. SR-NASDAQ-2006-008]

 Self-Regulatory Organizations; The NASDAQ Stock Market LLC;
Order Granting Approval of a Proposed Rule Change Requiring Securities
be Eligible To Participate in a Direct Registration System

August 8, 2006.

I. Introduction

    On April 27, 2006, The NASDAQ Stock Market LLC (``Nasdaq'') filed
with the Securities and Exchange Commission (``Commission'') proposed
rule change SR-NASDAQ-2006-008 pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (``Act'').\1\ Notice of the proposal
was published in the Federal Register on June 7, 2006.\2\ Two comment
letters were received.\3\ For the reasons discussed below, the
Commission is granting approval of the proposed rule change.\4\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1).
    \2\ Securities Exchange Act Release No. 53913 (May 31, 2006), 71
FR 33024 (June 7, 2006) [File No. SR-NASDAQ-2006-008].
    \3\ Letters from Noland Cheng, Chairman, SIA Operations
Committee, Securities Industry Association (June 27, 2006) and Paul
Conn, President, Global Capital Markets, Computershare Limited, and
Charlie Rossi, Executive Vice President, Computershare Investor
Services (July 28, 2006).
    \4\ Concurrent with the Commission's approval of Nasdaq's rule
change, the Commission is also approving in separate orders similar
rule changes proposed by the American Stock Exchange LLC (``Amex'')
and the New York Stock Exchange LLC (``NYSE''). Securities Exchange
Act Release Nos. 54290 (August 8, 2006) [File No. SR-Amex-2006-40]
and 54289 (August 8, 2006) [File No. SR-NYSE-2006-29]. The
Commission has also published notice of a similar rule changed
proposed by NYSE Arca, Inc. Securities Exchange Act Release No.
54126 (July 11, 2006), 71 FR 40768 (July 18, 2006) [File No. SR-
NYSEArca-2006-31].
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

II. Description

    The Direct Registration System (``DRS'') allows an investor to
establish either through the issuer's transfer agent or through the
investor's broker-dealer a book-entry position on the books of the
issuer and to electronically transfer her position between the transfer
agent and the broker-dealer of her choice through a facility currently
administered by The Depository Trust Company (``DTC'').\5\ DRS,
therefore, enables an investor to have securities registered in her
name without having a securities certificate issued to her and to
electronically transfer her securities to her broker-dealer in order to
effect a transaction without the risk and delays associated with the
use of securities certificates.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ Currently, the only registered clearing agency operating a
DRS is DTC. For a detailed description of DRS and the DRS facilities
administered by DTC, see Securities Exchange Act Release Nos. 37931
(November 7, 1996), 61 FR 58600 (November 15, 1996), [File No. SR-
DTC-96-15] (order granting approval to establish DRS) and 41862
(September 10, 1999), 64 FR 51162 (September 21, 1999), [File No.
SR-DTC-99-16] (order approving implementation of the Profile
Modification System).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Investors holding their securities in DRS retain the rights
associated with securities certificates, including such rights as
control of ownership and voting rights, without having the
responsibility of holding and safeguarding securities certificates. In
addition, in corporate actions such as reverse stock splits and
mergers, cancellation of old shares and issuance of new shares are
handled electronically with no securities certificates to be returned
to or received from the transfer agent.
    In order to reduce the number of transactions in securities for
which settlement is effected by the physical delivery of securities
certificates and thereby reduce the risks, costs, and delays associated
with the physical delivery of securities certificates, Nasdaq is
proposing to add new Section (l) to its Rule 4350 to require that all
listed securities be eligible to participate in DRS.\6\ While the rule
change requires that issuers' securities be eligible for DRS, it does
not require issuers to participate in DRS operated by DTC and would not
mandate the elimination of physical certificates. As a result, subject
to applicable state law and the company's governing documents, an
investor could still elect to receive a certificate if the issuer chose
to make certificates available.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ The exact text of the Nasdaq proposed rule change is set
forth in its filing, which can be found at http://www.complinet.com/nasdaq/display/display.html?rbid=1705&elementid=26
.

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

    Because currently the only DRS operated by a registered clearing
agency is the DRS operated by DTC, in order for a security to be
eligible to participate in DRS, an issuer will be required to use a
transfer agent that meets DTC's DRS transfer agent requirements,
including insurance and connectivity requirements. As a result, some
transfer agents acting for Nasdaq issuers may have to make changes to
comply with these requirements. Certain issuers may also have to make
amendments to their governing documents, such as their by-laws, to be
eligible to issue securities that are not represented by certificates.
To allow sufficient time for any of these changes that need to take
place, Nasdaq will implement the proposed rule change January 1, 2008,
for the securities of issuers with securities already listed on Nasdaq
or another listed marketplace at the time the rule change is approved.
Companies listing for the first time should have greater flexibility to
adopt any changes required to have their securities DRS eligible, and
therefore, the rule change will be applicable to new listings beginning
January 1, 2007. The requirement will not apply to non-equity
securities that are held in book-entry-only form.

III. Comment Letters

    The Commission received two comment letters in support of the
proposed rule change.\7\ The SIA Operations Committee (``SIA''), an
industry organization representing broker-dealers, stated that the
effect of the proposed rule change will be to reduce significantly the
number of transactions in securities for which settlement is effected
by the physical delivery of securities certificates thereby reducing
costs, risks, and delays associated with physical settlement. The SIA
also contended that by increasing the number of DRS-eligible
securities, the proposed rule change is an important step in reducing
the number physical certificates, a goal the SIA has long supported in
its efforts to promote immobilization and dematerialization.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ Supra note 3. The SIA and Computershare's comment letters
were written in support of the three similar proposed rule changes
filed by Amex, Nasdaq, and NYSE. Supra note 4. The NYSE Arca's
proposed rule change was noticed by the Commission subsequent to the
date the commenters submitted their comment letters.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Computershare, a registered transfer agent, stated that the
proposed rule change will help immobilize and eventually dematerialize
certificates in the U.S. market, which it believes will result in
benefits such as cost savings,

increased efficiency, more accurate and timely trade settlements, and
reduced risk of loss for investors. Computershare noted however that
some challenges remain to be overcome in the broker-dealer community
before these benefits can be realized. For example, Computershare
contended, among other things, that broker-dealers are not sufficiently
educating their employees or their customers about the inherent risks
associated with owning certificates or the benefits of owning in DRS.
In addition, Computershare stated that certain current industry
processing practices also need to be changed. Specifically, it believes
that the industry should ``default to DRS,'' a process whereby
customers of broker-dealers would obtain only a statement of their
positions held on the issuer's records rather than a certificate unless
the customer contacted the issuer's transfer agent directly to obtain a
certificate. Computershare urged the Commission to review and modify
current regulation to address these issues.

IV. Discussion

    Section 6(b)(5) of the Act requires, among other things, that the
rules of an exchange be designed to prevent fraudulent and manipulative
acts and practices, to promote just and equitable principles of trade,
to foster cooperation and coordination with persons engaged in
regulating, clearing, settling, processing information with respect to,
and facilitating transactions in securities, to remove impediments to
perfect the mechanism of a free and open market and a national market
system, and, in general, to protect investors and the public
interest.\8\ For the reasons described below, the Commission finds that
the rule change is consistent with Section 6(b)(5) of the Act.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \8\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The use of securities certificates has long been identified as an
inefficient and risk-laden mechanism by which to hold and transfer
ownership.\9\ Because securities certificates require manual
processing, their use can result in significant delays and expenses in
processing securities transactions and present the risk of certificates
being lost, stolen, or forged. Many of these costs and risks are
ultimately borne by investors.\10\ Congress has recognized the problems
and dangers that the use of certificates presents to the safe and
efficient operation of the U.S. clearance and settlement system and has
given the Commission responsibility and authority to address these
issues.\11\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \9\ Securities Exchange Act Release No. 49405 (March 11, 2004),
69 FR 12922 (March 18, 2004), [File No. S7-13-04] (Securities
Transaction Settlement Concept Release).
    \10\ Id.
    \11\ 15 U.S.C. 78q-1(a)(2)(A). Congress expressly envisioned the
Commission's authority to extend to all aspects of the securities
handling process involving securities transactions within the United
States, including activities by clearing agencies, depositories,
corporate issuers, and transfer agents. See S. Rep. No. 75, 94th
Cong., 1st Sess. at 55 (1975).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Consistent with its Congressional directives, in its efforts to
improve efficiencies and decrease risks associated with processing
securities transactions, the Commission has long advocated a reduction
in the use of certificates in the trading environment by immobilizing
or dematerializing securities and has encouraged the use of
alternatives to holding securities in certificated form. Among other
things, the Commission has approved the rule filings of self-regulatory
organizations that require their members to use the facilities of a
securities depository for the book-entry settlement of all transactions
in depository-eligible securities \12\ and that require any security
listed for trading must be depository eligible if possible.\13\ More
recently the Commission has approved the implementation and expansion
of DRS.\14\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \12\ Securities Exchange Act Release No. 32455 (June 11, 1993),
58 FR 33679 (June 18, 1993) (order approving rules requiring
members, member organizations, and affiliated members of the New
York Stock Exchange, National Association of Securities Dealers,
American Stock Exchange, Midwest Stock Exchange, Boston Stock
Exchange, Pacific Stock Exchange, and Philadelphia Stock Exchange to
use the facilities of a securities depository for the book-entry
settlement of all transactions in depository-eligible securities
with another financial intermediary).
    \13\ Securities Exchange Act Release No. 35798 (June 1, 1995),
60 FR 30909 (June 12, 1995), [File Nos. SR-Amex-95-17; SR-BSE-95-09;
SR-CHX-95-12; SR-NASD-95-24; SR-NYSE-95-19; SR-PSE-95-14; SR-PHLX-
95-34] (order approving rules setting forth depository eligibility
requirements for issuers seeking to have their shares listed on the
exchange).
    \14\ In 1996, the NYSE modified its listing criteria to permit
listed companies to issue securities in book entry form provided
that the issue is included in DRS. Securities Exchange Act Release
No. 37937 (November 8, 1996), 61 FR 58728 (November 18, 1996), [File
No. SR-NYSE-96-29]. Similarly, the NASD modified its rule to require
that if an issuer establishes a direct registration program, it must
participate in an electronic link with a securities depository in
order to facilitate the electronic transfer of the issue. Securities
Exchange Act Release No. 39369 (November 26, 1997), 62 FR 64034
(December 3, 1997), [File No. SR-97-51]. On July 30, 2002, the
Commission approved a rule change proposed by the NYSE to amend
Section 501.01 of the NYSE Listed Company Manual to allow a listed
company to issue securities in a dematerialized or completely
immobilized form and therefore not send stock certificates to record
holders, provided the company's stock is issued pursuant to a
dividend reinvestment program, stock purchase plan, or is included
in DRS. Securities Exchange Act Release No. 46282 (July 30, 2002),
67 FR 50972 (August 6, 2002), [File No. SR-NYSE-2001-33].
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    While the U.S. markets have made great progress in immobilization
and dematerialization for institutional and broker-to-broker
transactions, many industry representatives believe that the small
percentage of securities held in certificated form (mostly by retail
customers of broker-dealers) impose unnecessary risk and
disproportionately large expense to the industry and to investors. In
an attempt to address this issue, Nasdaq's rule change, along with
those of Amex and the NYSE, should help expand the use of DRS. As a
result, risks, costs, and processing inefficiencies associated with the
physical delivery of securities certificates should be reduced, and the
perfection of the national market system should be promoted.
Additionally, those investors holding securities in listed securities
covered by the rule change that decide to hold their securities in DRS
should realize the benefits of more accurate, quicker, and more cost-
efficient transfers; faster distribution of sale proceeds; reduced
number of lost or stolen certificates and a reduction in the associated
certificate replacement costs; and consistency of owning in book-entry
across asset classes.
    The Commission realizes that some issuers and transfer agents may
bear expenses related to complying with the rule change. In order to
make a security DRS-eligible, issuers of listed companies must have a
transfer agent which is a DRS Limited Participants.\15\ In order to
make an issue DRS-eligible, issuers may need to amend their corporate
governing documents to permit the issuance of book-entry shares. The
Commission believes, however, that the long-term benefits of increased
efficiencies and reduced risks afforded by DRS outweigh the costs that
some issuers and transfer agents may incur. Furthermore, the time
frames built into the proposal should allow issuers sufficient time to
make any necessary changes to comply with the rule change.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \15\ For a description of DTC's rules relating to DRS Limited
Participants, see Securities Exchange Act Release Nos. 37931 and
41862. Supra note 5.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    While the propose rule change should significantly reduce the
number of transactions in securities for which settlement is effected
by the physical delivery of securities certificates, the proposed rule
change will not eliminate the ability of investors to obtain securities
certificates after the settlement of securities transactions provided
the issuer has chosen to issue certificates. Such investors can
continue to contact the issuer's transfer agent,

either directly or through their broker-dealer, to obtain a securities
certificate.
    Accordingly, for the reasons stated above the Commission finds that
the rule change, is consistent with Nasdaq's obligation under Section
6(b) of the Act to foster cooperation and coordination with persons
engaged in regulating, clearing, settling, processing information with
respect to, and facilitating transactions in securities, to remove
impediments to perfect the mechanism of a free and open market and a
national market system, and, in general, to protect investors and the
public interest.

V. Conclusion

    On the basis of the foregoing, the Commission finds that the
proposed rule change is consistent with the requirements of the Act and
in particular with the requirements of Section 6(b)(5) of the Act and
the rules and regulations thereunder.
    It is therefore ordered, pursuant to Section 19(b)(2) of the Act,
that the proposed rule change (File No. SR-NASDAQ-2006-008) be and
hereby is approved.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \16\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12).

    For the Commission by the Division of Market Regulation,
pursuant to delegated authority.\16\
Nancy M. Morris,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. E6-13416 Filed 8-15-06; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 8010-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 86, Number 159 (Friday, August 20, 2021)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 46781-46783]
[FR Doc No: 2021-17892]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Coast Guard

33 CFR Part 165

[Docket Number USCG-2021-0451]
RIN 1625-AA00

Safety Zone; Ohio River, Newburgh, IN

AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS.

ACTION: Temporary final rule.

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

SUMMARY: The Coast Guard is establishing a temporary safety zone for
all navigable waters of the Ohio River extending the entire width of
the river, from mile marker (MM) 777.3 to MM 778.3. This action is
necessary to provide for the safety of life on these navigable waters
near Newburgh, Indiana during the City of Newburgh fireworks display on
September 4, 2021. This regulation prohibits persons and vessels from
being in the safety zone unless authorized by the Captain of the Port
Sector Ohio Valley or a designated representative.

DATES: This rule is effective from 9:30 p.m. through 10 p.m. on
September 4, 2021.

ADDRESSES: To view documents mentioned in this preamble as being
available in the docket, go to https://www.regulations.gov, type USCG-
2021-0451 in the search box and click ``Search.'' Next, in the Document
Type column, select ``Supporting & Related Material.''

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: If you have questions on this rule,
call or email MST3 Christopher Matthews, U.S. Coast Guard; telephone
502-779-5334, email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Table of Abbreviations

CFR Code of Federal Regulations
COTP Captain of the Port Sector Ohio Valley
DHS Department of Homeland Security
FR Federal Register
NPRM Notice of proposed rulemaking
Sec.  Section
U.S.C. United States Code

II. Background Information and Regulatory History

    On June 17, 2021, the Historic Newburgh, Inc notified the Coast
Guard that it will be conducting a fireworks display from 9:30 p.m.
though 10 p.m. on September 4, 2021. The fireworks are to be launched
from the shore of the Ohio River at approximately mile marker (MM)
777.3 to MM 778.3. Hazards from firework displays include accidental
discharge of fireworks, dangerous projectiles, and falling hot embers
or other debris. The Captain of the Port Sector Ohio Valley (COTP) has
determined that potential hazards associated with the fireworks to be
used in this display would be a safety concern for anyone on a one-mile
stretch of the Ohio River. In response, on July, 2, 2021, the Coast
Guard published a notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) titled ``Safety
Zone; Ohio River, Newburgh, IN'' docket number USCG-2021-0451 (86 FR
35242). There we stated why we issued the NPRM, and invited comments on
our proposed regulatory action related to this fireworks display.
During the comment period that ended August 2, 2021, we received 1
comment.
    Under 5 U.S.C. 553(d)(3), the Coast Guard finds that good cause
exists for making this rule effective less than 30 days after
publication in the Federal Register. Delaying the effective date of
this rule would be impracticable and contrary to the public interest
because we must establish the safety zone by September 4, 2021 to
protect the public from the potential hazards associated with the
fireworks event on that date.

III. Legal Authority and Need for Rule

    The Coast Guard is issuing this rule under authority in 46 U.S.C.
70034 (previously 33 U.S.C. 1231). The Captain of the Port Sector Ohio
Valley (COTP) has determined that potential hazards associated with the
fireworks to be used in this September 4, 2021 display will be a safety
concern for anyone within the area. The purpose of this rule is to
ensure safety of vessels and the navigable waters in the safety zone
before, during, and after the scheduled event.

IV. Discussion of Comments, Changes, and the Rule

    As noted above, we received one comment on our NPRM published July
2, 2021. The comment was from a citizen concerned about environmental
impact of this firework display. The environmental concerns raised by
the commenter appear to be in regards to the potential dangers to the
environment from the fireworks, and not the environmental impact of
this safety zone. The Coast Guard is not sponsoring or conducting the
fireworks; we are only establishing a safety zone around the display to
protect persons and property from hazards associated with the display.
During the development of this temporary final rule, the Coast Guard
underwent an environmental review process and determined this safety
zone fit a categorical exclusion under the National Environmental
Policy Act as explained in greater detail in paragraph F of this
document. The Coast Guard duly considered the environmental impacts in
our decision to authorize the safety zone as part of the decision
making process. No changes have been made to the final rule regulatory
text from what was proposed in the NPRM.
    This rule establishes a safety zone from 9:30 p.m. through 10 p.m.
on September 4, 2021. The safety zone will cover all navigable waters,
extending the entire width of the Ohio River from MM 777.3 to MM 778.3.
The duration of the zone is intended to ensure the safety of vessels
and these navigable waters before, during, and after the scheduled 9:30
p.m. to 10 p.m. fireworks display. No vessel or person will be
permitted to enter the safety zone without obtaining permission from
the COTP or a designated representative.

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. 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).
    This regulatory action determination is based on the size,
location, and duration of the temporary safety zone. This safety zone
restricts transit on a one-mile stretch of the Ohio River for thirty
minutes on one day. Morever, the Coast Guard would issue Broadcast
Notice to Mariners (BNMs), Local Notices to Mariners (LNMs), and Marine
Safety Information Bulletins (MSIBs) about this safety zone so that
waterway users may plan accordingly for this short restriction on
transit, and the rule would allow vessels to request 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 received no comments from the Small Business
Administration on this rulemaking. The Coast Guard certifies under 5
U.S.C. 605(b) that this rule will not have a significant economic
impact on a substantial number of small entities.
    While some owners or operators of vessels intending to transit the
safety zone may be small entities, for the reasons stated in section
V.A above, this rule will not have a significant economic impact on any
vessel owner or operator.
    Under section 213(a) of the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement
Fairness Act of 1996 (Pub. L. 104-121), we want to assist small
entities in understanding this rule. If the rule would affect your
small business, organization, or governmental jurisdiction and you have
questions concerning its provisions or options for compliance, please
call or email the person listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT
section.
    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.

E. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act

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

F. Environment

    We have analyzed this rule under Department of Homeland Security
Directive 023-01, Rev. 1, associated implementing instructions, and
Environmental Planning COMDTINST 5090.1 (series), which guide the Coast
Guard in complying with the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969
(42 U.S.C. 4321-4370f), and have determined that this action is one of
a category of actions that do not individually or cumulatively have a
significant effect on the human environment. This rule involves a
safety zone lasting 30 minutes that will prohibit entry within a one-
mile stretch of the Ohio River for one day. It is categorically
excluded from further review under paragraph L60(a) of Appendix A,
Table 1 of DHS Instruction Manual 023-01-001-01, Rev. 1. A Record of
Environmental Consideration supporting this determination is available
in the docket. For instructions on locating the docket, see the
ADDRESSES section of this preamble.

G. Protest Activities

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

List of Subjects in 33 CFR Part 165

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

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

PART 165--REGULATED NAVIGATION AREAS AND LIMITED ACCESS AREAS.

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

    Authority: 46 U.S.C. 70034, 70051; 33 CFR 1.05-1, 6.04-1, 6.04-
6, and 160.5; Department of Homeland Security Delegation No.
00170.1., Revision No. 01.2

0
2. Add Sec.  165.T08-0451 to read as follows:

Sec.  165.T08-0451  Safety Zone; Ohio River, Newburgh, IN.

    (a) Location. The following area is a safety zone: All navigable
waters of the Ohio River between MM 777.3 to MM 778.3 in Newburgh, IN.
    (b) Regulations. (1) Under the general safety zone regulations in
subpart C of this part, you may not enter the safety zone described in
paragraph (a) of this section unless authorized by the COTP or the
COTP's designated representative.
    (2) To seek permission to enter, contact the COTP or the COTP's
representative by VHF-FM radio channel 16 or phone at 1-800-253-7465.
Those in the safety zone must comply with all lawful orders or
directions given to them by the COTP or the COTP's designated
representative.
    (c) Enforcement period. This section will be enforced from 9:30
p.m. through 10 p.m. on September 4, 2021.

    Dated: August 12, 2021
A.M. Beach,
Captain, U.S. Coast Guard, Captain of the Port Sector Ohio Valley.
[FR Doc. 2021-17892 Filed 8-19-21; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 9110-04-P