[Federal Register Volume 78, Number 239 (Thursday, December 12, 2013)]
[Notices]
[Pages 75627-75629]
[FR Doc No: 2013-29618]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-71014; File No. SR-MIAX-2013-53]

Self-Regulatory Organizations: Miami International Securities
Exchange LLC; Notice of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of a
Proposed Rule Change for the Extension of a Pilot Program for SPY
Position and Exercise Limits

December 6, 2013.
    Pursuant to the provisions of Section 19(b)(1) of the Securities
Exchange Act of 1934 (``Act'') \1\ and Rule 19b-4 thereunder,\2\ notice
is hereby given that on November 26, 2013, Miami International
Securities Exchange LLC (``MIAX'' or ``Exchange'') filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission (``Commission'') a proposed rule
change as described in Items I, II, and III below, which Items have
been prepared by the Exchange. The Commission is publishing this notice
to solicit comments on the proposed rule change from interested
persons.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

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

    The Exchange is filing a proposal to amend Exchange Rules 307 and
309 to extend the pilot program that eliminates the position and
exercise limits for physically-settled options on the SPDR S&P 500 ETF
Trust (``SPY Pilot Program'').
    The text of the proposed rule change is available on the Exchange's
Web site at http://www.miaxoptions.com/filter/wotitle/rule_filing, at
MIAX's principal office, and at the Commission's Public Reference Room.

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

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

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

1. Purpose
    The Exchange proposes to amend Exchange Rule 307, Commentary .01,
Position Limits, and Exchange Rule 309, Commentary .01, Exercise
limits, to extend the duration of the SPY Pilot Program through
December 15, 2014. There are no substantive changes being proposed to
the SPY Pilot Program.
    In proposing to extend the SPY Pilot Program, the Exchange affirms
its consideration of several factors that support the proposal to
establish the SPY Pilot Program, which include: (1) The liquidity of
the option and the underlying security; (2) the market

capitalization of the underlying security and the securities that make
up the S&P 500 Index; (3) options reporting requirements; and (4)
financial requirements imposed by MIAX and the Commission.
    The Pilot Report for the SPY Pilot Program is not due until on or
before January 5, 2014. However, because not all self-regulatory
organizations (``SROs'') have adopted similar rules eliminating
position and exercise limits for SPY options and because market
participants that are members of such SROs are required to comply with
the more restrictive SPY option position and exercise limits, no market
participants have availed themselves of the SPY Pilot Program. As a
result, there is not sufficient data to compile a meaningful Pilot
Report at this time to file with this current extension request.
    The Exchange believes that it is appropriate to extend the SPY
Pilot Program for an additional thirteen months to provide time for
other SROs to adopt similar pilot programs that eliminate positions and
exercise limits for SPY options. In that event (and in a year's time),
the Exchange will be able to either extend the SPY Pilot Program, adopt
the SPY Pilot Program on a permanent basis, or terminate the SPY Pilot
Program.
    The Exchange represents that the Pilot Report would be submitted
within thirty (30) days of the end of the first twelve months of the
extended SPY Pilot Program time period and would cover the twelve
months that just ended. The Pilot Report will compare the impact of the
pilot program, if any, on the volumes of SPY options and the volatility
in the price of the underlying SPY contract, particularly at
expiration. The Pilot Report also will detail the size and different
types of strategies employed with respect to positions established in
SPY options; note whether any problems, in the underlying SPY ETF or
otherwise, arose as a result of the no-limit approach; and include any
other information that may be useful in evaluating the effectiveness of
the pilot program. In preparing the Pilot Report, the Exchange will
utilize various data elements such as volume and open interest. In
addition the Exchange would make available to Commission staff data
elements relating to the effectiveness of the SPY Pilot Program.
2. Statutory Basis
    The Exchange believes that its proposed rule change is consistent
with Section 6(b) \3\ of the Act in general, and furthers the
objectives of Section 6(b)(5) \4\ of the Act in particular, in that it
is 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 facilitating
transactions in securities, to remove impediments to and perfect the
mechanisms of a free and open market and a national market system and,
in general, to protect investors and the public interest.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b).
    \4\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Specifically, the Exchange believes that extending the SPY Pilot
Program promotes just and equitable principles of trade by permitting
market participants, including market makers, institutional investors
and retail investors, to establish greater positions when pursuing
their investment goals and needs.

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

    The Exchange does not believe that the proposed rule change will
impose any burden on competition that is not necessary or appropriate
in furtherance of the purposes of the Act. The proposed rule change is
not designed to address any aspect of competition, whether between the
Exchange and its competitors, or among market participants. Instead,
the proposed rule change is designed to allow the SPY Pilot Program to
continue while other SROs adopt similar provisions.

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

    Written comments were neither solicited nor received.

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

    Because the foregoing proposed rule change does not: (i)
Significantly affect the protection of investors or the public
interest; (ii) impose any significant burden on competition; and (iii)
become operative for 30 days after the date of the filing, or such
shorter time as the Commission may designate, it has become effective
pursuant to 19(b)(3)(A) of the Act \5\ and Rule 19b-4(f)(6) \6\
thereunder.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A).
    \6\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6). In addition, Rule 19b-4(f)(6)
requires a self-regulatory organization to give the Commission
written notice of its intent to file the proposed rule change at
least five business days prior to the date of filing of the proposed
rule change, or such shorter time as designated by the Commission.
The Exchange has satisfied this requirement.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    At any time within 60 days of the filing of the proposed rule
change, the Commission summarily may temporarily suspend such rule
change if it appears to the Commission that such action is necessary or
appropriate in the public interest, for the protection of investors, or
otherwise in furtherance of the purposes of the Act. If the Commission
takes such action, the Commission shall institute proceedings to
determine whether the proposed rule should be approved or disapproved.

IV. Solicitation of Comments

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

Electronic Comments

     Use the Commission's Internet comment form (http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml); or
     Send an email to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Please include
File Number SR-MIAX-2013-53 on the subject line.

Paper Comments

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

All submissions should refer to File Number SR-MIAX-2013-53. This file
number should be included on the subject line if email is used. To help
the Commission process and review your comments more efficiently,
please use only one method. The Commission will post all comments on
the Commission's Internet Web site (http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml). Copies of the submission, all subsequent amendments, all
written statements with respect to the proposed rule change that are
filed with the Commission, and all written communications relating to
the proposed rule change between the Commission and any person, other
than those that may be withheld from the public in accordance with the
provisions of 5 U.S.C. 552, will be available for Web site viewing and
printing in the Commission's Public Reference Room, 100 F Street NE.,
Washington, DC 20549, on official business days between the hours of
10:00 a.m. and 3:00 p.m. Copies of the filing also will be available
for inspection and copying at the principal office of the Exchange. All
comments received will be posted without change; the Commission does
not edit personal

identifying information from submissions. You should submit only
information that you wish to make available publicly. All submissions
should refer to File Number SR-MIAX-2013-53 and should be submitted on
or before January 2, 2014. For the Commission, by the Division of
Trading and Markets, pursuant to delegated authority.\7\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12).

Elizabeth Murphy,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2013-29618 Filed 12-11-13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


1. Identification of the Information Collection

1(a) Title of the Information Collection
Recordkeeping for Institutional Dual Use Research of Concern (iDURC) Policy Compliance
EPA ICR Number 2530.03, OMB Control No. 2080-0082

1(b) Short Characterization/Abstract

The White House Office of Science and Technology Policy issued the United States Government Policy for Institutional Oversight of Life Sciences Dual Use Research of Concern (iDURC Policy) in September 2014. The purpose of the Policy is to identify Dual Use Research of Concern (DURC) and implement risk mitigation measures where applicable. DURC applies to life science research that provides knowledge, information, products, or technologies that could be directly misapplied to pose a significant threat with broad potential consequences to public health and safety, agricultural crops and other plants, animals, the environment, material, or national security.

Institutions subject to the iDURC Policy are those within the United States that (1) receive funding from the U.S. Government to conduct or sponsor life sciences research and (2) conduct or sponsor research that involves one or more of the 15 agents or toxins identified in the iDURC Policy, even if the research is not supported by U.S. Government funding. Institutions outside of the United States that receive U.S. Government funding to conduct or sponsor research that involves one or more of the 15 agents or toxins identified in the iDURC Policy are also subject to the Policy. The iDURC Policy requires that institutions subject to the Policy provide education and training on DURC for individuals conducting life sciences research with one or more of the 15 agents or toxins identified in the iDURC Policy. It is also required that they maintain education and training records for the term of the research grant or contract.

EPA is submitting an information collection request for the requirement of institutions to maintain these training records. EPA's Office of Research and Development may choose to collect these records to ensure policy compliance.

2. Need for and use of the Collection
2(a) Need/Authority for Collection

The White House Office of Science and Technology Policy issued the United States Government Policy for Institutional Oversight of Life Sciences Dual Use Research of Concern (iDURC Policy) on September 2014. It became effective on September 24, 2015 (79 FR 57589). All federal departments and agencies are required to implement this policy. The iDURC Policy requires institutions to maintain training records for individuals conducting life sciences research with one or more of the 15 agents or toxins identified in the Policy. The goal of this collection is to ensure that all personnel involved in conducting life sciences research with one or more of the 15 agents or toxins identified in the iDURC Policy understand what DURC is, how to mitigate risk, and how to communicate research findings in a responsible manner through the use of training and education.

2(b) Practical Utility/Users of the Data

The iDURC Policy requirement for training records helps institute a culture of responsibility for individuals conducting life science research with one or more of the 15 agents or toxins identified in the Policy.

3. Non duplication, Consultations, and Other Collection Criteria
3(a) Non duplication

Training information requested from institutions under this ICR is required by the iDURC Policy, which is being implemented by all federal departments and agencies. There are no other sources available to collect this information.

3(b) Public Notice Required Prior to ICR submission to OMB

To comply with the 1995 Amendments to the Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA), EPA solicited public comment on this ICR for a 60-day period prior to its submission to OMB. EPA published notice (84 FR 20352) in the Federal Register (FR) on May 9, 2019 requesting comment on the estimated respondent burden and other aspects of this ICR. EPA did not receive any comments. An additional FR notice will be published when this ICR is submitted to OMB. The public comment period for this additional notice will be 30 days.

3(c) Consultations
EPA consulted with one private sector organization, Battelle (Brian O'Shea,<PHONE_NUMBER>). This consultation confirmed the burden estimation of this ICR. EPA consulted with a potential private sector organization, RTI International, but they do not conduct research subject to the iDURC Policy. EPA is currently funding 10 projects that are subject to the Policy, 2 of which are conducted by non-Federal organizations and are subject to Paperwork Reduction Act requirements. EPA attempted to contact the non-Federal entities on multiple occasions but were unable to identify participants to provide feedback on the burden of this ICR.

3(d) Effects of Less Frequent Collection

The iDURC Policy requirement for training records helps institute a culture of responsibility for individuals conducting life science research with one or more of the 15 agents or toxins identified in the Policy. A less frequent collection of these training records may result in non-compliance with the Policy by EPA and/or U.S. Government-funded institutions. Non-compliance with the Policy could potentially result in the release of knowledge, information, products, or technologies that could be directly misapplied and pose a significant threat with broad potential consequences to public health and safety, agricultural crops and other plants, animals, the environment, materiel, or national security.

3(e) General Guidelines

This collection requires record retention beyond the 3-year limit noted in 5 CFR 1320.5(d)(2). This requirement is driven by the iDURC Policy itself which stipulates that records must be saved for three years after its completion, but no less than eight years, unless a shorter period is required by law or regulation. No other provisions requiring special justification under 5 CFR 1320.5(d)(2) are triggered.

3(f) Confidentiality

This information is required to be withheld from the public pursuant to Section 107(a) of the Ethics in Government Act of 1978. Agency personnel shall not publicly release the information contained therein.

If EPA chooses to collect this information, the designated official will store it on the EPA DURC SharePoint Site, which is only accessible to those who have the appropriate privileges. EPA does not intend to publish or make public any of the information that may be collected through this information request.

3(g) Sensitive Questions

This information collection does not require sensitive information be disclosed by respondents.

4. The Respondents and the Information Requested

4(a) Respondents/NAICS Codes

The iDURC Policy states that institutions subject to the Policy are those within the United States that both receive funding from the U.S. Government to conduct or sponsor life sciences research and conduct or sponsor research that involves one or more of the 15 agents or toxins identified in the iDURC Policy, even if the research is not supported by U.S. Government funding. Institutions outside of the United States that receive U.S. Government funding to conduct or sponsor research that involves one or more of the 15 agents or toxins identified in the iDURC Policy are also subject to the Policy. Institutions that do not receive U.S. Government funding for life sciences research, but conduct life sciences research that has potential to generate knowledge, information, products, or technologies that could be used in a manner that results in harm, are not subject to oversight as articulated in the Policy; however, they are strongly encouraged to implement internal oversight procedures consistent with the culture of shared responsibility and notify the National Institutes of Health (NIH) of any research that is determined to be DURC. NIH will refer the notification to the appropriate agency based upon the nature of the research. The North American Industry Classification System (NAICS) code for Research and Development in the Physical, Engineering and Life Sciences is code 54171.

4(b) Information Requested

(i) Data items, including record keeping requirements

Per iDURC Policy, the research institution is required to store training records for the term of the research grant or contract, plus three years after its completion, but no less than eight years, unless a shorter period is required by law or regulation. EPA may contact the institution via email requesting these records to ensure policy compliance. Additional information is found in section 5(b).

	(ii) Respondent Activities

The U.S. Government developed a compendium of tools to assist investigators and research institutions in the implementation of DURC oversight, including training and education on DURC. Institutions may wish to address dual use topics in existing courses on research ethics or the responsible conduct of research. Per iDURC Policy, institutions may require additional record keeping and should designate an individual responsible for maintaining documentation. Institutions should ensure that all individuals involved in research subject to iDURC Policy have completed this training and provided records of such training to the institution.

5. The Information Collected - Agency Activities, Collection Methodology, and Information Management

5(a) Agency Activities
To comply with the iDURC Policy, the EPA may have to analyze, evaluate, summarize, and/or report on the training records from institutions subject to the iDURC Policy.

5(b) Collection Methodology and Management

Information collected from institutions subject to the iDURC Policy must be useful, accurate, reliable, and retrievable. Institutions must comply with the practices and procedures outlined in the Policy, which includes ensuring data quality. Non-compliance with the iDURC Policy may result in suspension, limitation or termination of U.S. Government funding, or loss of future U.S. Government funding opportunities for the non-compliant U.S. Government-funded research project and of U.S. Government funds for other life sciences research at the institution.

If necessary, the designated official from EPA may collect the information via email and store it on the DURC SharePoint Site. The EPA DURC SharePoint Site is listed as For Official Use Only, and access to the site is managed by EPA's Office of Homeland Security. EPA does not intend to publish or make public any of the information that may be collected through this information request.

5(c) Small Entity Flexibility

This collection of information is not reasonably expected to impact small businesses or other small entities. For research institutions in low-resource environments outside of the U.S. that receive U.S. Government funds, EPA may consider serving as the implementing Institutional Review Entity, as the funding Agency, thereby providing the necessary oversight and compliance with the iDURC Policy.

5(d) Collection Schedule

Institutions subject to the iDURC Policy should certify that they will comply with the Policy at the time of seeking or receiving EPA funding. These institutions must notify the U.S Government funding agency within 30 calendar days of any research that involves one or more of the 15 agents and one or more of the 7 experiments, including whether it meets or does not meet the definition of DURC. Principal Investigators must ensure that laboratory personnel (i.e. those under the supervision of laboratory leadership, including graduate students, postdoctoral fellows, research technicians, laboratory staff, and visiting scientists) conducting life sciences research with one or more of the 15 agents or toxins identified in the iDURC Policy have received education and training on DURC. These training records must be maintained by the institution for the term of the research grant or contract, plus three years after its completion, but no less than eight years, unless a shorter period is required by law or regulation. EPA may choose to collect these records to ensure compliance with the Policy at any time.

6. Estimating the Burden and Cost of the Collection

6(a) Estimating Respondent Burden
The mean hourly wage for life, physical and social science occupations is listed in the Bureau of Labor Statistics' website: https://www.bls.gov/oes/current/oes_nat.htm#19-0000. The mean hourly wage for this occupation group is $35.76. In this ICR, that wage rate is multiplied by the standard overhead factor of 1.6 to produce a total hourly labor cost of approximately $57.21 (rounded to $58).

It is estimated that each respondent will take 30 minutes to complete the training and complete recordkeeping activities. Approximately 40 respondents could be requested to submit recordkeeping statements annually. These are one-time activities for the life of the research grant/contract. Multiplying the estimated number of respondents (40) by the estimated respondent labor cost ($58), by the number of hours (.50), we estimate the total dollar burden for this ICR to be $1,160 annually.

6(b) Estimating Respondent Costs

 Estimating Labor Costs

                             Respondent Activities
                          Burden Hours per Respondent
Burden for Respondent ($35.76 per labor hour multiplied by 1.6 for overhead equals $58)
                        Number of Respondents per Year
                        Total Respondent Cost per Year
Education & Training
                                      .33
                                   (20 min)
                                      $19
                                      40
                                     $760
Recordkeeping for Training
                                      .17
                                   (10 min)
                                      $10
                                      40
                                     $400
Total
                                   .5 hours
                                      $29
                                      40
                                    $1,160

Annual Cost for Respondents

 (ii) Estimating Capital and Operations and Maintenance Costs

There are no capital or operations and maintenance costs.

(iii) Capital/Start-up Operating and Maintenance (O&M) Costs

There are no capital/startup operating and maintenance costs.

(iv) Annualizing Capital Costs

There are no annualized capital costs.

(c) Estimating Agency Burden and Cost

                        Information Collection Activity
                                 Annual Hours
                                 Annual Costs
Analyzing, Evaluating, Summarizing, and/or Reporting on Training Records
                                      0.5
                                    $26.50

The Agency estimates that it would require 30 minutes for one staff member to review and evaluate training records performed by a GS-11 employee. The annual salary for a GS-11, Step 1 in Washington, DC is $69,581. The hourly rate including benefits is $53.52 ($33.45 hourly rate x 1.6 multiplier).

6(d) Estimating the Respondent Universe and Total Burden and Costs

See 6(a) and 6(b).

6(e) Bottom Line Burden Hours and Cost Tables

EPA estimates a total of 40 respondents would be required to take training and maintain records of that training for the duration of this ICR. On average, EPA has funded five research projects per year that involve one or more of the 15 agents or toxins identified in the iDURC Policy through a contract/grant mechanism. Previous consultations with Project Officers determined that there are about 6-8 respondents per research project. Average annual total costs are estimated to be $1,160.

 Respondent Tally

              Bottom-Line Annual Burden and Cost for Respondents
                 Respondent Activities to Complete the Survey
                            Burden Hours/Respondent
                           Number of Hours per Year
Burden for Respondent ($23.60 per labor hour multiplied by 1.6 for overhead equals $38)
                        Number of Respondents Per Year
                              Total Cost Per Year
Total Per Year
                                      .5
                                      20
                                      $29
                                      40
                                    $1,160
3 Years
                                      1.5
                                      60
                                      $29
                                      120
                                    $3,480

 The Agency Tally

                   Bottom-Line Annual Agency Burden and Cost

                       Agency Hours for Each Respondent
                           Number of Hours Per Year
                              Labor Cost Per Year
                          Total Agency Cost Per year
Agency Total
                                      .5
                                      20
                                     $530
                                     $530
3 Years
                                      1.5
                                      60
                                    $1,590
                                    $1,590

(iii) Variations in the Annual Bottom Line

We do not anticipate major variations in the annual bottom line burden hours and costs for the respondents or the Agency.

6(f) Reasons for Change in Burden

There is a decrease of 52 burden hours in the total estimated respondent burden compared with the ICR currently approved by OMB. This decrease is a result of adjustments in estimates of time required for recordkeeping duties. The previous ICR was a first-time estimate of the number of hours it would take for individuals to complete training and maintain those records, based on similar training efforts that were in place at the time.  The EPA-developed DURC training, as one example, requires about 20 minutes of an individual's time, with an additional 10 minutes for maintaining those records. Since then, in EPA's consultation with the private sector, the Agency learned that DURC training had been incorporated into ongoing and broader biosecurity and biosafety training and that the recordkeeping responsibilities covered in this ICR consume significantly less time than originally anticipated. Total burden hours have been adjusted accordingly.

6(g) Burden Statement

The annual public reporting and recordkeeping burden for this collection of information is estimated to average of 0.5 hours per response. Burden means the total time, effort, or financial resources expended by persons to generate, maintain, retain, or disclose or provide information to or for a Federal agency. This includes the time needed to review instructions; develop, acquire, install, and utilize technology and systems for the purpose of collecting, validating, and verifying information, processing and maintaining information, and disclosing and providing information; adjusting the existing ways to comply with any previously applicable applications and requirements; train personnel to be able to respond to a collection of information; search data sources; complete and review the collection of information; and transmit, or otherwise disclose the information. An agency may not conduct or sponsor, and a person is not required to respond to, a collection of information unless it displays a currently valid OMB control number. The OMB control number for EPA's regulations are listed in 40 CFR part 9 and 48 CFR chapter 15.

To comment on the Agency's need for this information, the accuracy of the provided burden estimates, and any suggested methods for minimizing respondent burden, including the use of automated collection techniques, EPA has established a public docket for this ICR under Docket Number EPA-HQ-2016-0010, which is available for online viewing at www.regulations.gov, or in person viewing at the Office of Mission Support Docket in the EPA Docket Center (EPA/DC), EPA William Jefferson Clinton West Building, Room 3334, 1301 Constitution Avenue, NW, Washington, DC. The EPA Docket Center Public Reading Room is open from 8:30 a.m.  -  4:30 p.m., Monday through Friday, excluding legal holidays. The telephone number for the Reading Room is<PHONE_NUMBER>, and the telephone number for the Office of Mission Support Docket is<PHONE_NUMBER>. An electronic version of the public docket is available at www.regulations.gov. This site can be used to submit or view public comments, access the index listing of the contents of the public docket, and to access those documents in the public docket that are available electronically. Also, you can send comments to the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, Office of Management and Budget, 725 17[th] Street, NW, Washington, D.C. 20503, Attention: Desk Officer for EPA. Please include the EPA Docket ID Number EPA-HQ-2016-0010, OMB Control No. 2080-0082 in any correspondence.


[Federal Register Volume 78, Number 78 (Tuesday, April 23, 2013)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 23869-23872]
[FR Doc No: 2013-09539]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Coast Guard

33 CFR Part 165

[Docket No. USCG-2013-0033]
RIN 1625-AA00

Safety Zone; Redwood City 4th of July Fireworks Show; Port of
Redwood City, Redwood City, CA

AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS.

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking.

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

SUMMARY: The Coast Guard proposes to establish a temporary safety zone
in the navigable waters of the Port of Redwood City near Redwood City,
CA in support of the Redwood City 4th of July Fireworks Show on July 4,
2013. This safety zone is necessary to ensure the safety of
participants and spectators from the dangers associated with the
pyrotechnics. The safety zone will temporarily restrict vessel movement
within the designated area on July 4, 2013, from 9:30 p.m. until 10
p.m.

DATES: Comments and related material must be received by the Coast
Guard on or before May 23, 2013.

ADDRESSES: You may submit comments identified by docket number USCG-
2013-0033 using any one of the following methods:
    (1) Federal eRulemaking Portal: http://www.regulations.gov.
    (2) Fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    (3) Mail: Docket Management Facility (M-30), U.S. Department of
Transportation, West Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140, 1200 New
Jersey Avenue SE., Washington, DC 20590-0001.
    (4) Hand delivery: Same as mail address above, between 9 a.m. and 5
p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays. The telephone
number is<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    To avoid duplication, please use only one of these four methods.
See the ``Public Participation and Request for Comments'' portion of
the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section below for instructions on
submitting comments.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: If you have questions on this
temporary rule, call Lieutenant Junior Grade Joshua V. Dykman at 415-
399-3585, or email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>If you have questions
on viewing or submitting material to the docket, contact the Program
Manager, Docket Operations, telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Table of Acronyms

DHS Department of Homeland Security
FR Federal Register
NPRM Notice of Proposed Rulemaking

A. Public Participation and Request for Comments

    We encourage you to participate in this rulemaking by submitting
comments and related materials. All comments received will be posted
without change to http://www.regulations.gov and will include any
personal information you have provided.

1. Submitting Comments

    If you submit a comment, please include the docket number for this
rulemaking (USCG-2013-0033), indicate the specific section of this
document to which each comment

applies, and provide a reason for each suggestion or recommendation.
You may submit your comments and material online (via http://www.regulations.gov) or by fax, mail, or hand delivery, but please use
only one of these means. If you submit a comment online via
www.regulations.gov, it will be considered received by the Coast Guard
when you successfully transmit the comment. If you fax, hand deliver,
or mail your comment, it will be considered as having been received by
the Coast Guard when it is received at the Docket Management Facility.
We recommend that you include your name and a mailing address, an email
address, or a telephone number in the body of your document so that we
can contact you if we have questions regarding your submission.
    To submit your comment online, go to http://www.regulations.gov,
type the docket number (USCG-2013-0033) in the ``Search'' box and click
``Search.'' Click on ``Submit a Comment'' on the line associated with
this rulemaking.
    If you submit your comments by mail or hand delivery, submit them
in an unbound format, no larger than 8\1/2\ by 11 inches, suitable for
copying and electronic filing. If you submit comments by mail and would
like to know that they reached the Facility, please enclose a stamped,
self-addressed postcard or envelope. We will consider all comments and
material received during the comment period and may change the rule
based on your comments.

2. Viewing Comments and Documents

    To view comments, as well as documents mentioned in this preamble
as being available in the docket, go to http://www.regulations.gov,
type the docket number (USCG-2013-0033) in the ``SEARCH'' box and click
``SEARCH.'' Click on Open Docket Folder on the line associated with
this rulemaking. You may also visit the Docket Management Facility in
Room W12-140 on the ground floor of the Department of Transportation
West Building, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., Washington, DC 20590,
between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal
holidays.

3. Privacy Act

    Anyone can search the electronic form of comments received into any
of our dockets by the name of the individual submitting the comment (or
signing the comment, if submitted on behalf of an association,
business, labor union, etc.). You may review a Privacy Act notice
regarding our public dockets in the January 17, 2008, issue of the
Federal Register (73 FR 3316).

4. Public Meeting

    We do not plan to hold public meetings on this proposed rule. But
you may submit a request for one, using one of the methods specified
under ADDRESSES. Please explain why you believe a public meeting would
be beneficial. If we determine that one would aid this rulemaking, we
will hold one at a time and place announced by a later notice in the
Federal Register.

B. Basis and Purpose

    The legal basis for the proposed rule is 33 U.S.C. 1231; 46 U.S.C.
Chapter 701, 3306, 3703; 50 U.S.C. 191, 195; 33 CFR 1.05-1, 6.04-1,
6.04-6, 160.5; Public Law 107-295, 116 Stat. 2064; Department of
Homeland Security Delegation No. 0170.1, which collectively authorize
the Coast Guard to establish safety zones.
    Redwood City will sponsor the Redwood City 4th of July Fireworks
Show on July 4, 2013, on Wharf 4 in the Port of Redwood City, CA in
position 37[deg]30'34'' N, 122[deg]12'42'' W (NAD 83) as depicted in
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) Chart 18651.
Upon the commencement of the fireworks display, the safety zone will
encompass the navigable waters around and under the launch site within
a radius of 560 feet. The fireworks display is meant for entertainment
purposes. This restricted area around the launch site is necessary to
protect spectators, vessels, and other property from the hazards
associated with the pyrotechnics.

C. Discussion of the Proposed Rule

    The proposed safety zone will encompass the navigable waters around
the land based launch site on Wharf 4 in the Port of Redwood City, CA.
Upon the commencement of the fireworks display, scheduled to take place
from 9:30 p.m. to 10 p.m. on July 4, 2013, the safety zone will
encompass the navigable waters around the fireworks launch site within
a radius 560 feet from position 37[deg]30'34'' N, 122[deg]12'42'' W
(NAD 83) for the Redwood City 4th of July Fireworks. At the conclusion
of the fireworks display the safety zone shall terminate.
    The effect of the temporary safety zone will be to restrict
navigation in the vicinity of the launch site until the conclusion of
the scheduled display. Except for persons or vessels authorized by the
Coast Guard Patrol Commander, no person or vessel may enter or remain
in the restricted area. These regulations are needed to keep spectators
and vessels away from the immediate vicinity of the launch site to
ensure the safety of participants, spectators, and transiting vessels.

D. Regulatory Analyses

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

1. Regulatory Planning and Review

    This rule is not a significant regulatory action under section 3(f)
of Executive Order 12866, Regulatory Planning and Review, as
supplemented by Executive Order 13563, Improving Regulation and
Regulatory Review, and does not require an assessment of potential
costs and benefits under section 6(a)(3) of Executive Order 12866 or
under section 1 of Executive Order 13563. The Office of Management and
Budget has not reviewed it under those Orders.
    We expect the economic impact of this rule does not rise to the
level of necessitating a full Regulatory Evaluation. The safety zone is
limited in duration, and is limited to a narrowly tailored geographic
area. In addition, although this rule restricts access to the waters
encompassed by the safety zone, the effect of this rule will not be
significant because the local waterway users will be notified via
public Broadcast Notice to Mariners to ensure the safety zone will
result in minimum impact. The entities most likely to be affected are
waterfront facilities, commercial vessels, and pleasure craft engaged
in recreational activities.

2. Impact on Small Entities

    The Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980 (RFA), 5 U.S.C. 601-612, as
amended, requires federal agencies to consider the potential impact of
regulations on small entities during rulemaking. The Coast Guard
certifies under 5 U.S.C. 605(b) that this rule will not have a
significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities.
    This rule may affect owners and operators of waterfront facilities,
commercial vessels, and pleasure craft engaged in recreational
activities and sightseeing. This safety zone would not have a
significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities
for the following reasons. This safety zone would be activated, and
thus subject to enforcement, for a limited duration. When the safety
zone is activated, vessel traffic could pass safely around the safety
zone. The maritime public will be advised in advance of this

safety zone via Broadcast Notice to Mariners.

3. Assistance for Small Entities

    Under section 213(a) of the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement
Fairness Act of 1996 (Pub. L. 104-121), we want to assist small
entities in understanding this rule. 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,
above.
    Small businesses may send comments on the actions of Federal
employees who enforce, or otherwise determine compliance with, Federal
regulations to the Small Business and Agriculture Regulatory
Enforcement Ombudsman and the Regional Small Business Regulatory
Fairness Boards. The Ombudsman evaluates these actions annually and
rates each agency's responsiveness to small business. If you wish to
comment on actions by employees of the Coast Guard, call 1-888-REG-FAIR
(1-888-734-3247). The Coast Guard will not retaliate against small
entities that question or complain about this rule or any policy or
action of the Coast Guard.

4. Collection of Information

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

5. Federalism

    A rule has implications for federalism under Executive Order 13132,
Federalism, if it has a substantial direct effect on 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 determined
that this rule does not have implications for federalism.

6. Protest Activities

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

7. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act

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

8. Taking of Private Property

    This rule will not cause a taking of private property or otherwise
have taking implications under Executive Order 12630, Governmental
Actions and Interference with Constitutionally Protected Property
Rights.

9. Civil Justice Reform

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

10. Protection of Children

    We have analyzed this rule under Executive Order 13045, Protection
of Children from Environmental Health Risks and Safety Risks. This rule
is not an economically significant rule and does not create an
environmental risk to health or risk to safety that may
disproportionately affect children.

11. Indian Tribal Governments

    This rule does not have tribal implications under Executive Order
13175, Consultation and Coordination with Indian Tribal Governments,
because it 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.

12. Energy Effects

    This action is not a ``significant energy action'' under Executive
Order 13211, Actions Concerning Regulations That Significantly Affect
Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use.

13. Technical Standards

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

14. Environment

    We have analyzed this rule under Department of Homeland Security
Management Directive 023-01 and Commandant Instruction M16475.lD, which
guide the Coast Guard in complying with the National Environmental
Policy Act of 1969 (NEPA) (42 U.S.C. 4321-4370f), and have 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 of limited size and
duration. This rule is categorically excluded from further review under
paragraph 34(g) and 35(b) of Figure 2-1 of the Commandant Instruction.
An environmental analysis checklist supporting this determination and a
Categorical Exclusion Determination are available in the docket where
indicated under ADDRESSES. We seek any comments or information that may
lead to the discovery of a significant environmental impact from this
rule.

List of Subjects in 33 CFR Part 165

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

    For the reasons discussed in the preamble, the Coast Guard proposes
to amend 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. 1226, 1231; 46 U.S.C. Chapter 701; 50
U.S.C. 191, 195; 33 CFR 1.05-1(g), 6.04-1, 6.04-6, and 160.5; Pub.
L. 107-295, 116 Stat. 2064; Department of Homeland Security
Delegation No. 0170.1.

0
2. Add Sec.  165-T11-546 to read as follows:

Sec.  165-T11-546  Safety Zone; Redwood City 4th of July Fireworks
Show, Port of Redwood City, Redwood City, CA.

    (a) Location. This safety zone is established in the navigable
waters of the Port of Redwood City near Redwood City, CA as depicted in
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) Chart 18651.
From 9:30 p.m. until 10 p.m. on July 4, 2013, the temporary safety zone
will encompass the navigable waters around the fireworks launch site in
position 37[deg]30'34'' N, 122[deg]12'42'' W (NAD 83) within a radius
of 560 feet.
    (b) Enforcement period. The zone described in paragraph (a) of this
section will be enforced from 9:30 p.m. through 10 p.m. on July 4,
2013. The Captain of the Port San Francisco (COTP) will notify the
maritime community of periods during which this zone will be enforced
via Broadcast Notice to Mariners in accordance with 33 CFR 165.7.

    (c) Definitions. As used in this section, ``designated
representative'' means a Coast Guard Patrol Commander, including a
Coast Guard coxswain, petty officer, or other officer on a Coast Guard
vessel or a Federal, State, or local officer designated by or assisting
the COTP in the enforcement of the safety zone.
    (d) Regulations. (1) Under the general regulations in 33 CFR
165.23, entry into, transiting or anchoring within this safety zone is
prohibited unless authorized by the COTP or a designated
representative.
    (2) The safety zone is closed to all vessel traffic, except as may
be permitted by the COTP or a designated representative.
    (3) Vessel operators desiring to enter or operate within the safety
zone must contact the COTP or a designated representative to obtain
permission to do so. Vessel operators given permission to enter or
operate in the safety zone must comply with all directions given to
them by the COTP or a designated representative. Persons and vessels
may request permission to enter the safety zone on VHF-23A or through
the 24-hour Command Center at telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>.

    Dated: April 1, 2013.
Cynthia L. Stowe,
Captain, U.S. Coast Guard, Captain of the Port San Francisco.
[FR Doc. 2013-09539 Filed 4-22-13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 9110-04-P


[Federal Register Volume 85, Number 172 (Thursday, September 3, 2020)]
[Notices]
[Pages 55008-55009]
[FR Doc No: 2020-19486]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

Combined Notice of Filings #1

    Take notice that the Commission received the following exempt
wholesale generator filings:
    Docket Numbers: EG20-239-000.
    Applicants: Greensville County Solar Project, LLC.
    Description: Notice of Self-Certification of Exempt Wholesale
Generator Status of Greensville County Solar Project, LLC.
    Filed Date: 8/28/20.
    Accession Number: 20200828-5193.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 9/18/20.

    Take notice that the Commission received the following electric
rate filings:
    Docket Numbers: ER15-1471-010; ER16-915-003; ER15-1672-009; ER10-
2861-008; ER19-2287-001; ER16-2010-004; ER19-2289-001; ER19-2294-001;
ER12-1308-011; ER16-711-007; ER16-2561-004; ER13-1504-009; ER19-2305-
001.
    Applicants: Blue Sky West, LLC, Comanche Solar PV, LLC, Evergreen
Wind Power II, LLC, Fountain Valley Power, L.L.C. Goal Line L.P.,
Hancock Wind, LLC, KES Kingsburg, L.P, Mesquite Power, LLC, Palouse
Wind, LLC, Pio Pico Energy Center, LLC, Sunflower Wind Project, LLC,
SWG Arapahoe, LLC, Valencia Power, LLC.
    Description: Notice of Non-Material Change in Status of Blue Sky
West, LLC, et al.
    Filed Date: 8/28/20.
    Accession Number: 20200828-5159.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 9/18/20.

    Docket Numbers: ER19-1741-001; ER17-1603-002; ER17-1037-003; ER17-
2245-002; ER14-2140-009; ER14-2141-009.
    Applicants: Dominion Energy South Carolina, Inc., Dominion Energy
Generation Marketing, Inc, Innovative Solar 37, LLC, Moffett Solar 1,
LLC, Mulberry Farm, LLC, Selmer Farm, LLC.
    Description: Updated Market Power Analysis, et al. of the Dominion
Southeast MBR Sellers.
    Filed Date: 8/27/20.
    Accession Number: 20200827-5260.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 10/26/20.

    Docket Numbers: ER20-939-001.
    Applicants: PJM Interconnection, L.L.C.
    Description: Compliance filing: Compliance to Revise Tariff in
Docket No. EL18-26, AD18-8, ER20-939 to be effective 4/6/2020.
    Filed Date: 8/28/20.
    Accession Number: 20200828-5187.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 9/18/20.

    Docket Numbers: ER20-1719-001.
    Applicants: PPL Electric Utilities Corporation, PJM
Interconnection, L.L.C.
    Description: Compliance filing: PPL Electric submits Compliance
Filing in ER20-1719 re: Order 864 to be effective 1/27/2020.
    Filed Date: 8/27/20.
    Accession Number: 20200827-5199.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 9/17/20.

    Docket Numbers: ER20-1942-002.
    Applicants: Midcontinent Independent System Operator, Inc.
    Description: Tariff Amendment: 2020-08-28_Deficiency Response to
Conventional Resource Deliverability Filing to be effective 8/12/2020.
    Filed Date: 8/28/20.
    Accession Number: 20200828-5107.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 9/18/20.

    Docket Numbers: ER20-2318-001.
    Applicants: Milford Solar I, LLC.
    Description: Tariff Amendment: Amendment to 1 to be effective 8/11/
2020.
    Filed Date: 8/28/20.
    Accession Number: 20200828-5130.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 9/18/20.

    Docket Numbers: ER20-2759-000.
    Applicants: Virginia Electric and Power Company.
    Description: Request for Limited Waiver, or Alternatively Remedial
Relief, et al. of Virginia Electric and Power Company.
    Filed Date: 8/27/20.
    Accession Number: 20200827-5204.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 9/17/20.

    Docket Numbers: ER20-2760-000.
    Applicants: PJM Interconnection, L.L.C.
    Description: Sec.  205(d) Rate Filing: Original WMPA, Service
Agreement No. 5752; Queue No. AF2-432 to be effective 8/18/2020.
    Filed Date: 8/28/20.
    Accession Number: 20200828-5018.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 9/18/20.

    Docket Numbers: ER20-2761-000.
    Applicants: Southwest Power Pool, Inc.
    Description: Sec.  205(d) Rate Filing: 1628R18 Western Farmers
Electric Cooperative NITSA NOA to be effective 8/1/2020.
    Filed Date: 8/28/20.
    Accession Number: 20200828-5025.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 9/18/20.

    Docket Numbers: ER20-2762-000.
    Applicants: PJM Interconnection, L.L.C.
    Description: Sec.  205(d) Rate Filing: Revisions to Sch. 12-Appx A:
July 2020 RTEP, 30-Day Comment Period Requested to be effective 11/26/
2020.

    Filed Date: 8/28/20.
    Accession Number: 20200828-5120.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 9/18/20.

    Docket Numbers: ER20-2763-000.
    Applicants: Golden Spread Electric Cooperative, Inc.
    Description: Sec.  205(d) Rate Filing: WPC Sched B Modification
Filing to be effective 11/1/2020.
    Filed Date: 8/28/20.
    Accession Number: 20200828-5111.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 9/18/20.

    Docket Numbers: ER20-2764-000.
    Applicants: Midcontinent Independent System Operator, Inc, Northern
States Power Company, a Minnesota corporation.
    Description: Sec.  205(d) Rate Filing: 2020-08-28_SA 3552 NSP-GRE-
OTP-WMMPA-CMMPA T-T (Steep Bank) to be effective 9/30/2019.
    Filed Date: 8/28/20.
    Accession Number: 20200828-5115.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 9/18/20.

    Docket Numbers: ER20-2765-000.
    Applicants: Alabama Power Company.
    Description: Sec.  205(d) Rate Filing: SEPA Network Agreement
Amendment Filing (Revision No. 8) to be effective 8/1/2020.
    Filed Date: 8/28/20.
    Accession Number: 20200828-5116.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 9/18/20.

    Docket Numbers: ER20-2766-000.
    Applicants: Alabama Power Company.
    Description: Sec.  205(d) Rate Filing: SEPA Network Agreement
Amendment Filing (Revision No. 9) to be effective 7/31/2020.
    Filed Date: 8/28/20.
    Accession Number: 20200828-5117.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 9/18/20.

    Docket Numbers: ER20-2767-000.
    Applicants: New York Independent System Operator, Inc, New York
State Electric & Gas Corporation.
    Description: Sec.  205(d) Rate Filing: Joint filing of SGIA among
NYISO, NYSEG and Puckett Solar, SA 2545 to be effective 8/18/2020.
    Filed Date: 8/28/20.
    Accession Number: 20200828-5128.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 9/18/20.

    Docket Numbers: ER20-2768-000.
    Applicants: Greensville County Solar Project, LLC.
    Description: Baseline eTariff Filing: Application for Market-Based
Rate Authoritization to be effective 10/21/2020.
    Filed Date: 8/28/20.
    Accession Number: 20200828-5131.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 9/18/20.

    Docket Numbers: ER20-2769-000.
    Applicants: Tri-State Generation and Transmission Association, Inc
    Description: Tariff Cancellation: Notice of Cancellation of Service
Agreement No. 606 to be effective 12/31/2019.
    Filed Date: 8/28/20.
    Accession Number: 20200828-5148.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 9/18/20.

    Docket Numbers: ER20-2770-000.
    Applicants: Tri-State Generation and Transmission Association, Inc.
    Description: Sec.  205(d) Rate Filing: Amendment to Service
Agreement No. 813 to be effective 2/25/2020.
    Filed Date: 8/28/20.
    Accession Number: 20200828-5151.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 9/18/20.

    Docket Numbers: ER20-2771-000.
    Applicants: Guzman Western Slope LLC.
    Description: Baseline eTariff Filing: Baseline new to be effective
8/29/2020.
    Filed Date: 8/28/20.
    Accession Number: 20200828-5152.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 9/18/20.

    Take notice that the Commission received the following electric
securities filings:

    Docket Numbers: ES20-53-000.
    Applicants: Montana-Dakota Utilities Co.
    Description: Amendment to Application [Exbibits, C, D & E] Under
Section 204 of the Federal Power Act for Authorization to Issue
Securities, et al. of Montana-Dakota Utilities Co.
    Filed Date: 8/27/20.
    Accession Number: 20200827-5227.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 9/1/20.

    The filings are accessible in the Commission's eLibrary system
(https://elibrary.ferc.gov/idmws/search/fercgensearch.asp) by querying
the docket number.
    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.
    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: August 28, 2020.
Nathaniel J. Davis, Sr.,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2020-19486 Filed 9-2-20; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 79, Number 51 (Monday, March 17, 2014)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Page 14633]
[FR Doc No: 2014-05738]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Federal Emergency Management Agency

44 CFR Part 67

[Docket ID FEMA-2014-0002; Internal Agency Docket No. FEMA-B-1179]

Proposed Flood Elevation Determinations for Bennington County,
Vermont (All Jurisdictions)

AGENCY: Federal Emergency Management Agency, DHS.

ACTION: Proposed rule; withdrawal.

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

SUMMARY: The Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) is withdrawing
its proposed rule concerning proposed flood elevation determinations
for Bennington County, Vermont (All Jurisdictions).

DATES: This withdrawal is effective on March 17, 2014.

ADDRESSES: You may submit comments, identified by Docket No. FEMA-B-
1179, to Luis Rodriguez, Chief, Engineering Management Branch, Federal
Insurance and Mitigation Administration, Federal Emergency Management
Agency, 500 C Street SW., Washington, DC 20472,<PHONE_NUMBER>, or
(email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Luis Rodriguez, Chief, Engineering
Management Branch, Federal Insurance and Mitigation Administration,
Federal Emergency Management Agency, 500 C Street SW., Washington, DC
20472,<PHONE_NUMBER>, or (email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: On April 6, 2011, FEMA published a proposed
rulemaking at 76 FR 19020-19021, proposing flood elevation
determinations along one or more flooding sources in Bennington County,
Vermont. Because FEMA has or will be issuing a Revised Preliminary
Flood Insurance Rate Map, and if necessary a Flood Insurance Study
report, featuring updated flood hazard information, the proposed
rulemaking is being withdrawn. A Notice of Proposed Flood Hazard
Determinations will be published in the Federal Register and in the
affected community's local newspaper.

    Authority:  42 U.S.C. 4104; 44 CFR 67.4.

    Dated: January 31, 2014.
Roy E. Wright,
Deputy Associate Administrator for Mitigation, Department of Homeland
Security, Federal Emergency Management Agency.
[FR Doc. 2014-05738 Filed 3-14-14; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 9110-12-P


[Federal Register Volume 84, Number 105 (Friday, May 31, 2019)]
[Notices]
[Pages 25332-25333]
[FR Doc No: 2019-11330]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-85935; File No. SR-MRX-2019-08]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; Nasdaq MRX, LLC; Order Approving a
Proposed Rule Change To Adopt Complex Order Functionality

May 24, 2019.

I. Introduction

    On April 12, 2019, Nasdaq MRX, LLC (``MRX'' or ``Exchange'') 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 proposal to adopt rules to provide
for the trading of Complex Orders. The proposed rule change was
published for comment in the Federal Register on April 23, 2019.\3\ The
Commission received no comment letters regarding the proposed rule
change. This order approves the proposed rule change.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1).
    \2\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4.
    \3\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 85671 (April 17,
2019), 84 FR 16907 (``Notice'').
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

II. Description of the Proposed Rule Change

    MRX proposes to adopt rules governing the trading of Complex
Orders.\4\ The proposed rules address, among other things, the order
types, auction and crossing mechanisms, trading increments, priority,
execution, opening process, risk protections, obvious error provisions,
and data feeds for Complex Orders. MRX states that the proposed Complex
Order functionality is identical to the Complex Order functionality
currently available on Nasdaq ISE, LLC (``ISE''), and that the proposed
rules are identical to corresponding ISE rules.\5\ As described more
fully in the Notice,\6\ MRX proposes to, among other things: (1)

Adopt new MRX Rule 722 to describe the availability of certain order
types for Complex Orders and the priority and execution of Complex
Orders; \7\ (2) add a defined term, ``Professional Customer,'' in MRX
Rule 100(a)(54A); \8\ (3) amend MRX Rule 714 to exclude Complex Order
transactions from the anti-internalization protection; \9\ (4) amend
MRX Rule 715 to define ``legging orders'' and ``QCC with Stock Orders''
and to revise the Ouch to Trade Options and Specialized Quote Feed
protocols to include complex instruments; \10\ (5) add a Complex
Facilitation Mechanism and Complex Solicited Order Mechanism to MRX
Rule 716; \11\ (6) amend MRX Rule 718(a)(5) to adopt a new Nasdaq MRX
Spread Feed that will provide information regarding Complex Orders;
\12\ (7) amend MRX Rule 720, relating to the nullification of trades
and obvious errors, to address transactions in Complex Orders; \13\ (8)
revise MRX Rule 721 to provide for Complex Customer Cross Orders,
Complex Qualified Contingent Cross Orders, and Qualified Contingent
Cross Orders with Stock; \14\ (9) add a new Complex Price Improvement
Mechanism to MRX Rule 723; \15\ and (10) adopt new MRX Rule 724 to
establish various risk protections for Complex Orders.\16\ The proposal
also includes non-substantive and technical changes related to the
adoption of the Complex Order functionality.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ The term ``Complex Order'' includes Complex Options Orders,
Stock-Option Orders, and Stock-Complex Orders. Complex Options
Orders, Stock-Option Orders, and Stock-Complex Orders are orders for
Complex Options Strategies, Stock-Option Strategies, and Stock-
Complex Strategies, respectively. See proposed MRX Rule 722(a)(5). A
Complex Options Strategy is the simultaneous purchase and/or sale of
two or more different options series in the same underlying
security, for the same account, in a ratio that is equal to or
greater than one-to-three (.333) and less than or equal to three-to-
one (3.00) and for the purpose of executing a particular investment
strategy. Only those Complex Options Strategies with no more than
the applicable number of legs, as determined by the Exchange on a
class-by-class basis, are eligible for processing. A Stock-Option
Strategy is the purchase or sale of a stated number of units of an
underlying stock or a security convertible into the underlying stock
(``convertible security'') coupled with the purchase or sale of
options contract(s) on the opposite side of the market representing
either (A) the same number of units of the underlying stock or
convertible security, or (B) the number of units of the underlying
stock necessary to create a delta neutral position, but in no case
in a ratio greater than eight-to-one (8.00), where the ratio
represents the total number of units of the underlying stock or
convertible security in the option leg to the total number of units
of the underlying stock or convertible security in the stock leg. A
Stock-Complex Strategy is the purchase or sale of a stated number of
units of an underlying stock or a security convertible into the
underlying stock (``convertible security'') coupled with the
purchase or sale of a Complex Options Strategy on the opposite side
of the market representing either (A) the same number of units of
the underlying stock or convertible security, or (B) the number of
units of the underlying stock necessary to create a delta neutral
position, but in no case in a ratio greater than eight-to-one
(8.00), where the ratio represents the total number of units of the
underlying stock or convertible security in the option legs to the
total number of units of the underlying stock or convertible
security in the stock leg. Only those Stock-Complex Strategies with
no more than the applicable number of legs, as determined by the
Exchange on a class-by-class basis, are eligible for processing. See
proposed MRX Rules 722(a)(1), (2), and (3).
    \5\ See Notice, 84 FR at 16907.
    \6\ See note 3, supra.
    \7\ The Exchange represents that proposed MRX Rule 722 is
identical to ISE Rule 722. See Notice at 16907. MRX also proposes to
amend MRX Rules 702 (Trading Halts) and 710 (Minimum Trading
Increments) to account for Complex Orders. The Exchange represents
that MRX Rules 702 and 710, as proposed to be amended, are identical
to ISE Rules 702 and 710, respectively. See id. at 16908 and 16910.
    \8\ The Exchange represents that proposed MRX Rule 100(a)(54A)
is identical to ISE Rule 100(a)(54A). See id. at 16910.
    \9\ The Exchange represents that proposed MRX Rule 714(b)(3)(A)
is identical to ISE Rule 714(b)(3)(A). See id.
    \10\ The Exchange represents that the proposed definitions of
``legging orders'' and ``QCC with Stock Orders'' in proposed MRX
Rules 715(k) and (t) are identical to ISE Rules 715(k) and (t),
respectively. In addition, the Exchange represents that the proposed
amendment to the Ouch to Trade Options and Specialized Quote Feed
protocols in proposed MRX Rule 715, Supplementary Material .03(b)
and (c) are identical to ISE Rule 715, Supplementary Material .03(b)
and (c). See id.
    \11\ The Exchange represents that the proposed Complex
Facilitation Mechanism and Complex Solicited Order Mechanism in MRX
Rules 716(c) and (e) are identical to ISE Rules 716(c) and (e),
respectively. In addition, proposed MRX Rules 716(f) and (g),
addressing concurrent auctions, are identical to ISE Rules 716(f)
and (g). See id. at 16908-9.
    \12\ The Exchange represents that proposed MRX Rule 718(a)(5) is
identical to ISE Rule 718(a)(5). See id. at 16910. The Exchange also
proposes to amend the MRX Pricing Schedule to indicate that the
Nasdaq MRX Spread Feed will be available at no cost. See id. and MRX
Options Pricing Schedule, Sections 6 and 7.
    \13\ The Exchange represents that MRX Rule 720, as proposed to
be amended, is identical to ISE Rule 720. See id.
    \14\ The Exchange represents that these orders are identical to
orders available on ISE. See id. at 16909.
    \15\ The Exchange represents that the Complex Price Improvement
Mechanism in proposed MRX Rule 723(e) is identical to ISE Rule
723(e). See id.
    \16\ MRX proposes to adopt the following Complex Order risk
protections: Price Limits, Vertical Spread Protections, Calendar
Spread Protections, Butterfly and Box Spread Protections, Limit
Order Price Protections, Size Limitations, and Price Level
Protections. The Exchange represents that proposed MRX Rule 724 is
identical to ISE Rule 724. See id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

III. Discussion and Commission Findings

    After careful review, the Commission finds that the proposed rule
change is consistent with the requirements of the Act,\17\ and the
rules and regulations thereunder applicable to a national securities
exchange.\18\ In particular, the Commission finds that the proposed
rule change is consistent with Section 6(b)(5) of the Act,\19\ which
requires, among other things, that the rules of a national securities
exchange be designed to prevent fraudulent and manipulative acts and
practices, to promote just and equitable principles of trade, to remove
impediments to and perfect the mechanism of a free and open market and
a national market system, and, in general, to protect investors and the
public interest, and that the rules are not designed to permit unfair
discrimination between customers, issuers, brokers, or dealers. The
Commission believes that the proposed rules are consistent with the Act
because they are substantially identical to ISE's rules governing the
trading of Complex Orders, which the Commission has reviewed
previously. Because they are substantially identical to ISE's Complex
Order rules, MRX's proposed rules do not raise new or novel regulatory
issues. The Commission believes that the proposed rules could assist
market participants in making informed decisions regarding the trading
of Complex Orders on MRX, including the order types, priority, auction
and crossing mechanisms, and risk protections available for Complex
Orders traded on MRX.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \17\ 15 U.S.C. 78f.
    \18\ In approving this proposed rule change, the Commission has
considered the proposed rule's impact on efficiency, competition,
and capital formation. See 15 U.S.C. 78c(f).
    \19\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

IV. Conclusion

    It is therefore ordered, pursuant to Section 19(b)(2) of the
Act,\20\ that the proposed rule change (SR-MRX-2019-08) is approved.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \20\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(2).

    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets,
pursuant to delegated authority.\21\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \21\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Eduardo A. Aleman,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2019-11330 Filed 5-30-19; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//-//W3C//DTD HTML 3.2//EN">

<META name="generator" content="Document">
<META name="creation-date" content="08/04/2008 03:15:26 ">
<TITLE>Document</TITLE>

18440
Federal Register/Vol. 73, No. 66 /Friday, April 4, 2008 /Rules and Regulations
contain aircraft executing Standard
Instrument Approach Procedures
(SIAPs). Two new Standard Instrument
Approach Procedures (SIAPs) are being
developed for the New Stuyahok
Airport. This action revises existing
Class E airspace upward from 700 feet
(ft.) and 1,200 ft. above the surface at
New Stuyahok Airport, New Stuyahok,
AK.
EFFECTIVE DATE:
0901 UTC, June 5, 2008.
The Director of the Federal Register
approves this incorporation by reference
action under title 1, Code of Federal
Regulations, part 51, subject to the
annual revision of FAA Order 7400.9
and publication of conforming
amendments.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Gary
Rolf, AALñ538G, Federal Aviation
Administration, 222 West 7th Avenue,
Box 14, Anchorage, AK 99513ñ7587;
telephone number (907) 271ñ5898; fax:
(907) 271ñ2850; e-mail:
<a href="http://mailto:gary.ctr.rolf<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Internet address:
http://www.alaska.faa.gov/at.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
History
On Friday, February 1, 2008, the FAA
proposed to amend part 71 of the
Federal Aviation Regulations (14 CFR
part 71) to revise Class E airspace
upward from 700 ft. above the surface
and from 1,200 ft. above the surface at
New Stuyahok, AK (73 FR 6057). The
action was proposed in order to create
Class E airspace sufficient in size to
contain aircraft while executing SIAPs
for the New Stuyahok Airport. The
Notice of Proposed Rulemaking
contained airport location data, which
has since been updated. The revised
airport location coordinates are listed in
this rule. Class E controlled airspace
extending upward from 700 ft. above the
surface and from 1,200 ft. above the
surface in the New Stuyahok Airport
area is revised by this action.
Interested parties were invited to
participate in this rulemaking
proceeding by submitting written
comments on the proposal to the FAA.
No comments were received. The rule is
adopted as proposed.
The area will be depicted on
aeronautical charts for pilot reference.
The coordinates for this airspace docket
are based on North American Datum 83.
The Class E airspace areas designated as
700/1,200 ft. transition areas are
published in paragraph 6005 of FAA
Order 7400.9R, Airspace Designations
and Reporting Points, signed August 15,
2007, and effective September 15, 2007,
which is incorporated by reference in 14
CFR 71.1. The Class E airspace
designations listed in this document
will be published subsequently in the
Order.
The Rule
This amendment to 14 CFR part 71
revises Class E airspace at the New
Stuyahok Airport, Alaska. This Class E
airspace is revised to accommodate
aircraft executing new SIAPs, and will
be depicted on aeronautical charts for
pilot reference. The intended effect of
this rule is to provide adequate
controlled airspace for Instrument Flight
Rules (IFR) operations at the New
Stuyahok Airport, New Stuyahok,
Alaska.
The FAA has determined that this
regulation only involves an established
body of technical regulations for which
frequent and routine amendments are
necessary to keep them operationally
current. It, thereforeó(1) is not a
‘‘significant regulatory action’’ under
Executive Order 12866; (2) is not a
‘‘significant rule’’ under DOT
Regulatory Policies and Procedures (44
FR 11034; February 26, 1979); and (3)
does not warrant preparation of a
regulatory evaluation as the anticipated
impact is so minimal. Since this is a
routine matter that will only affect air
traffic procedures and air navigation, it
is certified that this rule will not have
a significant economic impact on a
substantial number of small entities
under the criteria of the Regulatory
Flexibility Act.
The FAAís authority to issue rules
regarding aviation safety is found in
Title 49 of the United States Code.
Subtitle 1, Section 106 describes the
authority of the FAA Administrator.
Subtitle VII, Aviation Programs,
describes in more detail the scope of the
agencyís authority.
This rulemaking is promulgated
under the authority described in
Subtitle VII, Part A, Subpart 1, Section
40103, Sovereignty and use of airspace.
Under that section, the FAA is charged
with prescribing regulations to ensure
the safe and efficient use of the
navigable airspace. This regulation is
within the scope of that authority
because it creates Class E airspace
sufficient in size to contain aircraft
executing instrument procedures for the
New Stuyahok Airport and represents
the FAAís continuing effort to safely
and efficiently use the navigable
airspace.
List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 71
Airspace, Incorporation by reference,
Navigation (air).
Adoption of the Amendment
ٱ
In consideration of the foregoing, the
Federal Aviation Administration
amends 14 CFR part 71 as follows:
PART 71—DESIGNATION OF CLASS A,
CLASS B, CLASS C, CLASS D, AND
CLASS E AIRSPACE AREAS;
AIRWAYS; ROUTES; AND REPORTING
POINTS
ٱ
1. The authority citation for 14 CFR
part 71 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 49 U.S.C. 106(g), 40103, 40113,
40120; E.O. 10854, 24 FR 9565, 3 CFR, 1959ñ
1963 Comp., p. 389.
§71.1
[Amended]
ٱ
2. The incorporation by reference in
14 CFR 71.1 of Federal Aviation
Administration Order 7400.9R, Airspace
Designations and Reporting Points,
signed August 15, 2007, and effective
September 15, 2007, is amended as
follows:
* * * * *
Paragraph 6005
Class E Airspace Extending
Upward from 700 feet or More Above the
Surface of the Earth.
* * * * *
AAL AK E5
New Stuyahok, AK [Revised]
New Stuyahok, New Stuyahok Airport, AK
(Lat. 59
°
27
′
06
″
N., long. 157
°
22
′
23
″
W.)
That airspace extending upward from 700
feet above the surface within a 6.9-mile
radius of the New Stuyahok Airport; and that
airspace extending upward from 1,200 feet
above the surface within a 71-mile radius of
the New Stuyahok Airport.
* * * * *
Issued in Anchorage, AK, on March 24,
2008.
Anthony M. Wylie,
Manager, Alaska Flight Services Information
Area Group.
[FR Doc. E8ñ6921 Filed 4ñ3ñ08; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910–13–P
DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND
HUMAN SERVICES
Food and Drug Administration
21 CFR Parts 210 and 211
[Docket No. FDA–2008–N–0179] (formerly
Docket No. 2007N–0280)
Amendment to the Current Good
Manufacturing Practice Regulations for
Finished Pharmaceuticals; Withdrawal
AGENCY:
Food and Drug Administration,
HHS.
ACTION:
Direct final rule; withdrawal.
SUMMARY:
The Food and Drug
Administration (FDA) is withdrawing a
VerDate Aug<31>2005
13:41 Apr 03, 2008
Jkt 214001
PO 00000
Frm 00008
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
E:\FR\FM\04APR1.SGM
04APR1

18441
Federal Register/Vol. 73, No. 66 /Friday, April 4, 2008 /Rules and Regulations
direct final rule that published in the
Federal Register of December 4, 2007
(72 FR 68064), to amend certain
regulations as the first phase of an
incremental approach to modernize or
clarify some of the current good
manufacturing practice (CGMP)
regulations for finished
pharmaceuticals, as well as harmonize
some of the CGMP requirements with
those of other foreign regulators and
other FDA regulations. The comment
period closed February 19, 2008. FDA is
withdrawing the direct final rule
because the agency received significant
adverse comments. FDA will consider
the comments received under our usual
procedures for notice and comment in
connection with the notice of proposed
rulemaking that was published in the
Federal Register of December 4, 2007,
as a companion to the direct final rule
(72 FR 68113).
DATES:
The direct final rule published at
72 FR 68064 on December 4, 2007, is
withdrawn as of April 4, 2008.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Mary Malarkey, Center for Biologics
Evaluation and Research (HFMñ
600), Food and Drug
Administration, 1401 Rockville
Pike, Rockville, MD 20852ñ1448,
301
–827–6190, or
Dennis Bensley, Center for Veterinary
Medicine (HFVñ140), Food and
Drug Administration, 7500 Standish
Pl., Rockville, MD 20855, 240ñ276ñ
8268, or
Brian Hasselbalch, Center for Drug
Evaluation and Research (HFDñ
320), Food and Drug
Administration, 10903 New
Hampshire Ave., Silver Spring, MD
20993, 301ñ796ñ3279.
Authority: Therefore, under the
Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act,
and under authority delegated to the
Commissioner of Food and Drugs, the
direct final rule published on December
4, 2007 (72 FR 68064) is withdrawn.
Dated: March 24, 2008.
Jeffrey Shuren,
Associate Commissioner for Policy and
Planning.
[FR Doc. E8ñ7107 Filed 4ñ3ñ08; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4160–01–S
DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND
HUMAN SERVICES
Food and Drug Administration
21 CFR Parts 510, 520, 526, and 558
Animal Drugs, Feeds, and Related
Products; Withdrawal of Approval of
NADAs; Technical Amendment
AGENCY:
Food and Drug Administration,
HHS.
ACTION:
Final rule; technical
amendment.
SUMMARY:
The Food and Drug
Administration (FDA) is amending the
animal drug regulations by removing
those portions that reflect approval of
seven new animal drug applications
(NADAs) because FDA is withdrawing
approval of the NADAs.
DATES:
This rule is effective April 4,
2008.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Pamela K. Esposito, Center for
Veterinary Medicine (HFVñ212), Food
and Drug Administration, 7519 Standish
Pl., Rockville, MD 20855, 240ñ276ñ
9067; e-mail:
<a href="http://mailto:pamela.esposito<EMAIL_ADDRESS>SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
The
following sponsors have requested that
FDA withdraw approval of the seven
NADAs listed below because the
products are no longer manufactured or
marketed:
Sponsor
NADA Number Product (Drug)
21 CFR Cite Affected
(Sponsor Drug Labeler Code)
Eon Labs Manufacturing, Inc.,
227–15 North Conduit Ave.,
Laurelton, NY 11413
NADA 65–063,
Tetracycline capsules
520.2345a (000185)
NADA 65–345,
Chloramphenicol capsules
520.390b (000185)
G.C. Hanford Manufacturing Co.,
P.O. Box 1017,
Syracuse, NY 13201
NADA 65–465,
AQUA-MAST
(penicillin G procaine)
526.1696a (010515)
International Nutrition, Inc.,
7706 ‘‘I’’ Plaza,
Omaha, NE 68127
NADA 95–551,
TYLAN 5 Premix
(tylosin phosphate)
558.625 (043733)
NADA 109–688,
HYGROMIX 2.4 Premix
(hygromycin B)
558.274 (043733)
NADA 109–816,
TYLAN 10 SULFA-G Premix
(tylosin phosphate and sulfamethazine)
558.630 (043733)
Pfizer, Inc.,
235 East 42d St.,
New York, NY 10017
NADA 103–758,
TERAMIX–10 Premix
(oxytetracycline)
Not codified
Following the withdrawal of approval
of these NADAs, Eon Labs
Manufacturing, Inc., is no longer
sponsor of an approved application.
Therefore, 21 CFR 510.600(c) is
amended to remove entries for this
sponsor.
As provided below, the animal drug
regulations are amended to reflect the
withdrawal of approvals. The
regulations for penicillin G procaine
VerDate Aug<31>2005
13:41 Apr 03, 2008
Jkt 214001
PO 00000
Frm 00009
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
E:\FR\FM\04APR1.SGM
04APR1


[Federal Register Volume 85, Number 228 (Wednesday, November 25, 2020)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 75280-75282]
[FR Doc No: 2020-25307]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration

49 CFR Chapter III

[Docket No. FMCSA-2020-0194]

Transportation Intermediaries Association Petition for Rulemaking
Concerning Property Broker Transaction Records and Regulatory Guidance
Concerning Dispatch Services

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

ACTION: Petition for rulemaking; request for public comments.

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

SUMMARY: FMCSA requests public comments on the Transportation
Intermediaries Association (TIA) petition for rulemaking concerning the
rights of parties to a brokered transaction to review the records of
the transaction and its request that the Agency issue regulatory
guidance concerning dispatch services. TIA believes transparency in
broker transactions is provided through other means in today's market
place and that the regulatory guidance would ensure that interested
parties can distinguish between a dispatch service and an authorized
broker.

DATES: Comments must be submitted by January 25, 2021.

ADDRESSES: You may submit comments identified by Docket Number FMCSA-
2020-0194 using any of the following methods:
     Federal eRulemaking Portal: http://www.regulations.gov.
Follow the online instructions for submitting comments.
     Mail: Docket Operations, 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: Docket Operations, West
Building, Ground Floor, Room W12-140, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE,
Washington, DC 20590, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m. ET, Monday through
Friday, except Federal holidays. To be sure someone is there to help
you, please call<PHONE_NUMBER> or<PHONE_NUMBER> before visiting
Docket Operations.
     Fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    To avoid duplication, please use only one of these four methods.
See the ``Public Participation and Request for Comments'' portion of
the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section for instructions on submitting
comments.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ms. La Tonya Mimms, Chief, Driver and
Carrier Operations, Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration, 1200
New Jersey Avenue SE, Washington, DC 20590-0001, by telephone at (202)
366-4001, or by email at<EMAIL_ADDRESS>If you have questions on
viewing or submitting material to the docket, contact Docket Services,
(202) 366-9826.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

A. Submitting Comments

    If you submit a comment, please include the docket number for this
document (Docket No. FMCSA-2020-0194), indicate the specific section of
this document to which each comment

applies, and provide a reason for each suggestion or recommendation.
You may submit your comments and material online or by fax, mail, or
hand delivery, but please use only one of these means. FMCSA recommends
that you include your name and a mailing address, an email address, or
a telephone number in the body of your document so that FMCSA can
contact you if there are questions regarding your submission.
    To submit your comment online, go to http://www.regulations.gov,
put the docket number, FMCSA-2020-0194, in the keyword box, and click
``Search.'' When the new screen appears, click on the ``Comment Now!''
button and type your comment into the text box on the following screen.
Choose whether you are submitting your comment as an individual or on
behalf of a third party and then submit.
    If you submit your comments by mail or hand delivery, submit them
in an unbound format, no larger than 8\1/2\ by 11 inches, suitable for
copying and electronic filing. If you submit comments by mail and would
like to know that they reached the facility, please enclose a stamped,
self-addressed postcard or envelope.
    FMCSA will consider all comments and material received during the
comment period.
Confidential Business Information
    Confidential Business Information (CBI) is commercial or financial
information that is both customarily and actually treated as private by
its owner. Under the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA, 5 U.S.C. 552),
CBI is exempt from public disclosure. If your comments responsive to
the notice contain commercial or financial information that is
customarily treated as private, that you actually treat as private, and
that is relevant or responsive to the notice, it is important that you
clearly designate the submitted comments as CBI. Please mark each page
of your submission that constitutes CBI as ``PROPIN'' to indicate it
contains proprietary information. FMCSA will treat such marked
submissions as confidential under the FOIA, and they will not be placed
in the public docket for this document. Submissions containing CBI
should be sent to Mr. Brian Dahlin, Chief, Regulatory Analysis
Division, Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration, 1200 New Jersey
Avenue SE, Washington, DC 20590. Any comments FMCSA receives which are
not specifically designated as CBI will be placed in the public docket
for this document.

B. Viewing Comments and Documents

    To view comments, as well as any documents mentioned in this
preamble as being available in the docket, go to http://www.regulations.gov. Insert the docket number, FMCSA-2020-0194 in the
keyword box, and click ``Search.'' Next, click the ``Open Docket
Folder'' button and choose the document to review. If you do not have
access to the internet, you may view the docket online by visiting
Docket Operations in Room W12-140 on the ground floor of the DOT West
Building, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE, Washington, DC 20590-0001, between
9 a.m. and 5 p.m. ET, Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays.
To be sure someone is there to help you, please call<PHONE_NUMBER> or
(202) 366-9826 before visiting Docket Operations.

C. Privacy Act

    In accordance with 5 U.S.C. 553(c), DOT solicits comments from the
public to better inform its rulemaking process. DOT posts these
comments, without edit, including any personal information the
commenter provides, to www.regulations.gov, as described in the system
of records notice (DOT/ALL-14 FDMS), which can be reviewed at
www.transportation.gov/privacy.

I. Background

A. Brokers' Records of Transactions; History of Current Requirements

    Section 371.3(c) of title 49 of the CFR states that ``[e]ach party
to a brokered transaction has the right to review the record of the
transaction required to be kept by these rules.'' The current
requirements under 49 CFR 371.3(c) were adopted by the Interstate
Commerce Commission (ICC) on October 17, 1980 (45 FR 68941), at 49 CFR
1045.3(c). Prior to 1980, the broker records requirements under 49 CFR
1045.3 did not include a specific provision concerning the rights of
parties to a brokered transaction to review the record of the
transaction. In its May 12, 1980 (45 FR 31140) notice of proposed
rulemaking concerning multiple broker regulations, the ICC explained
that the proposed change to section 1045(c) would allow the agency to
``. . . eliminate more complex rules found at sections 1045.5, 1045.6,
and 1045.10.'' Those requirements related to charges for brokerage
services, charges for non-brokerage services, and duties and
obligations of brokers, respectively.
    With the termination of the ICC in 1995, the regulatory oversight
of brokers was transferred to the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA)
and the requirements under 49 CFR 1045.3 were redesignated, without
change, under 49 CFR 371.3 (61 FR 54707; October 21, 1996).
Subsequently, with the establishment of FMCSA in 2000, all motor
carrier oversight responsibilities and regulations were transferred
from FHWA to FMCSA.

B. Petition for Rulemaking

    TIA requested that FMCSA rescind 49 CFR 371.3(c) concerning the
rights of parties to a brokered transaction to review the records of
the transaction. TIA wrote, ``The Interstate Commerce Commission's
(ICC) commentary in the Federal Register notice published on May 12,
1980 offers an interesting perspective on the purpose of the broker
transaction (emphasis added):

    The amount of the broker's fee is not regulated by the
Commission. This means that a broker must engage in a bargaining
process with its principals. The amount of commission that a
principal agrees to pay will vary according to the benefits it
perceives it will gain from the transaction. No party is obligated
to deal with a broker or pays its commissions. A party may either
choose to do without the brokers' services or to look for another
broker who will offer the service at a lower price. In this regard,
we note that the property broker industry is a highly competitive
one. Our goal in regulating transactions between brokers, carriers,
and shippers is to remove all unnecessary restrictions which might
impede the free operation of the marketplace.''

    TIA argues that 49 CFR 371.3(c) is in direct conflict with the
original intent of the ICC to ensure that ``all unnecessary
restrictions which might impede the free operation of the marketplace''
are removed. TIA stated, ``In today's marketplace brokers are not
commissioned sales agents of motor carriers. As noted above brokers pay
motor carriers regardless of the rate that the shipper pays the broker.
The need to verify commissions no longer exists.''
    TIA asserts that motor carrier transportation on the spot market is
one of the most transparent market places in the world. Load boards,
the internet, and rate quotes in person-to-person communications within
the industry provide the rate transparency that was intended by 49 CFR
371.3 when commissions paid by carriers to brokers were common. Motor
carriers have sufficient access to current market rates without
inspecting brokers' shipment records to find out what the brokers'
gross margins are on a load-by-load basis.

C. TIA Request for Regulatory Guidance Concerning Dispatch Services

    TIA believes that some ``dispatch services'' are essentially
unlicensed brokers that handle financial

transactions for freight transportation services but do not meet the
statutory licensing or financial security requirements applicable to
brokers registered with FMCSA. TIA describes dispatch services as
entities that provide a service on behalf of a motor carrier, where
they assist on booking loads and other services.
    TIA believes the Agency should publish regulatory guidance
explaining that the legal duties of a dispatch service allow them to be
an agent for one motor carrier, and that anything further requires a
brokerage license and compliance with the financial responsibility
requirements applicable to brokers. TIA believes this is especially
necessary when the dispatch service is handling payment from the
shipper and then making payment to the motor carrier. According to TIA,
this guidance would ultimately enable private legal action to be taken
for violations, which would allow the public and the Agency both to
enforce the provisions of this regulation. A copy of TIA's letter
petitioning the Agency to initiate rulemaking and to issue regulatory
guidance is included in the docket for this document.

D. Request for Public Comments

    Petitions for rulemaking are governed by DOT regulations codified
at 49 CFR 5.13 and FMCSA regulations at 49 CFR 389.31 and 389.33. While
these regulations do not require FMCSA to publish a notice in the
Federal Register seeking public comments, FMCSA believes that taking
this action would provide a means of engaging stakeholders in the
process for assessing the need for a rulemaking. FMCSA therefore
requests public comment on TIA's petition for rulemaking to rescind 49
CFR 371.3 and the association's request that the Agency issue
regulatory guidance concerning ``dispatch services.'' Commenters are
encouraged to provide responses to the following questions:
    1. To what extent would brokers' disclosure of the records of
individual transactions to individual motor carriers under 49 CFR
371.3(c) place brokers and their shipper clients at risk of having
proprietary information concerning freight descriptions, transportation
rates and routes disclosed to their competitors?
    2. For authorized brokers, how often do motor carriers exercise
their right under 49 CFR 371.3(c) to review the record of the
transaction, and are there motor carriers who make requests on such a
frequent basis that they could, if working with other motor carriers,
learn certain proprietary information concerning shippers' rates and
routes?
    3. In the absence of 49 CFR 371.3(c), what information concerning
brokered transactions would authorized brokers share with the shippers
and for-hire carriers?
    4. To what extent do shippers engage in discussions with brokers
about the rates the authorized motor carriers will be paid?
    5. How often do shippers enter into negotiations about interstate
transportation services with an entity that is neither an interstate
motor carrier registered with FMCSA nor a broker registered with FMCSA?
    6. Would the issuance of regulatory guidance concerning ``dispatch
services'' provide an effective deterrent to unauthorized brokerage
services, or would additional actions by FMCSA be required to address
the challenges described by TIA?
    7. Is there sufficient clarity in the current definitions of
``broker,'' ``bona fide agents,'' and ``brokerage or brokerage
service'' under 49 CFR 371.2 to enable interested parties to identify
dispatch services that are actually carrying out the functions of a
registered broker and to file a complaint with FMCSA for subsequent
investigation?

    Issued under authority delegated in 49 CFR 1.87.
James W. Deck,
Deputy Administrator.
[FR Doc. 2020-25307 Filed 11-24-20; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-EX-P


[Federal Register Volume 87, Number 9 (Thursday, January 13, 2022)]
[Notices]
[Page 2150]
[FR Doc No: 2022-00499]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

Combined Notice of Filings

    Take notice that the Commission has received the following Part 284
Natural Gas Pipeline Rate filings:

Filings Instituting Proceedings

    Docket Numbers: RP22-473-000.
    Applicants: Rover Pipeline LLC.
    Description: Sec.  4(d) Rate Filing: Summary of Negotiated Rate
Capacity Release Agreements on 1-4-22 to be effective 1/1/2022.
    Filed Date: 1/4/22.
    Accession Number: 20220104-5078.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. ET 1/18/22.

    Docket Numbers: RP22-474-000.
    Applicants: Dominion Energy Questar Pipeline, LLC.
    Description: Sec.  4(d) Rate Filing: Statement of Negotiated Rates
V 19.0.0, Ovintiv TSA No. 6742 to be effective 1/1/2022.
    Filed Date: 1/4/22.
    Accession Number: 20220104-5114.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. ET 1/18/22.

    Docket Numbers: RP22-475-000.
    Applicants: Rover Pipeline LLC.
    Description: Sec.  4(d) Rate Filing: Summary of Negotiated Rate
Capacity Release Agreements on 1-5-22 to be effective 1/5/2022.
    Filed Date: 1/5/22.
    Accession Number: 20220105-5043.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. ET 1/18/22.

    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.
    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: https://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/efiling/filing-req.pdf. For other information, call<PHONE_NUMBER>
(toll free). For TTY, call<PHONE_NUMBER>.

    Dated: January 5, 2022.
Debbie-Anne A. Reese,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2022-00499 Filed 1-12-22; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P