[Federal Register Volume 86, Number 45 (Wednesday, March 10, 2021)]
[Notices]
[Pages 13772-13776]
[FR Doc No: 2021-04934]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Investment Company Act Release No. 34220; File No. 812-15140]

Brighthouse Life Insurance Company, et al.

March 4, 2021.
AGENCY:  Securities and Exchange Commission (``Commission'').

ACTION:  Notice.

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

    Notice of application for an order approving the substitution of
certain securities pursuant to section 26(c) of the Investment Company
Act of 1940, as amended (the ``Act'') and an order of exemption
pursuant to section 17(b) of the Act from section 17(a) of the Act.

Applicants: Brighthouse Life Insurance Company (``BLIC''), Brighthouse
Life Insurance Company of NY (``BLIC NY'' and, together with BLIC, the
``Companies''), Brighthouse Fund UL for Variable Life Insurance (``Fund
UL''), Brighthouse Separate Account A (``Separate Account A''),
Brighthouse Separate Account Eleven for Variable Annuities (``Separate
Account Eleven''), and Brighthouse Variable Annuity Account B
(``Variable Account B,'' and together with Fund UL, Separate Account A,
and Separate Account Eleven, the ``Separate Accounts,'' and

collectively with the Companies, the ``Section 26 Applicants''); and
Brighthouse Funds Trust I (``BFT I,'' and collectively with the Section
26 Applicants, the ``Section 17 Applicants'' or ``Applicants'').

Summary of Application: The Section 26 Applicants seek an order
pursuant to section 26(c) of the Act, approving the proposed
substitution (``Substitution'') of Loomis Sayles Growth Portfolio (the
``Replacement Fund''), a series of BFT I, for shares of ClearBridge
Variable Aggressive Growth Portfolio (the ``Existing Fund''), a series
of Legg Mason Partners Variable Equity Trust, held by the Separate
Accounts to fund certain variable annuity insurance contracts and
variable life insurance contracts (collectively, the ``Contracts'').
The Section 17 Applicants seek an order pursuant to section 17(b) of
the Act exempting them from section 17(a) of the Act to the extent
necessary to permit them to engage in certain in-kind transactions in
connection with the Substitution (``In-Kind Transactions'').

Filing Dates: The application was filed on July 6, 2020 and amended on
November 19, 2020, February 10, 2021, and March 3, 2021.

Hearing or Notification of Hearing: An order granting the requested
relief will be issued unless the Commission orders a hearing.
Interested persons may request a hearing by emailing the Commission's
Secretary at<EMAIL_ADDRESS>and serving applicants with a
copy of the request by email. Hearing requests should be received by
the Commission by 5:30 p.m. on March 29, 2021, and should be
accompanied by proof of service on applicants, in the form of an
affidavit or, for lawyers, a certificate of service. Pursuant to rule
0-5 under the Act, hearing requests should state the nature of the
writer's interest, any facts bearing upon the desirability of a hearing
on the matter, the reason for the request, and the issues contested.
Persons who wish to be notified of a hearing may request notification
by emailing the Commission's Secretary.

ADDRESSES:  The Commission<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Applicants: Ms.
Michele Abate<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:  Harry Eisenstein, Senior Special
Counsel, at<PHONE_NUMBER> or Kaitlin C. Bottock, Branch Chief at (202)
551-6825 (Division of Investment Management, Chief Counsel's Office).

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:  The following is a summary of the
application. The complete application may be obtained via the
Commission's website by searching for the file number, or for an
Applicant using the Company name box, at http://www.sec.gov.search/search.htm, or by calling<PHONE_NUMBER>.

Applicants' Representations

    1. BLIC is a stock life insurance company organized under the laws
of the state of Delaware and is an indirect, wholly owned subsidiary of
Brighthouse Financial, Inc., a publicly owned company. BLIC is the
depositor and sponsor of Fund UL, Separate Account A and Separate
Account Eleven.
    2. BLIC NY is a stock life insurance company organized under the
laws of the state of New York and is a wholly owned subsidiary of BLIC.
BLIC NY is the depositor and sponsor of Separate Account B.
    3. The Separate Accounts are registered with the Commission under
the Act as unit investment trusts for the purpose of funding the
Contracts. Each Separate Account is divided into subaccounts that
reflect the investment performance of registered investment companies,
such as BFT I, or series of BFT I (``investment options'').
    4. BFT I is a Delaware statutory trust registered under the 1940
Act as an open-end, management investment company with multiple series,
and its securities are registered under the 1933 Act.
    5. The Contracts are individual variable annuity and variable life
insurance contracts. Each Contract is registered under the Securities
Act of 1933, as amended (the ``1933 Act''). The Contracts allow
Contract owners to allocate premium and Contract value among the
subaccounts investing in a number of investment options, which are
advised and/or sub-advised by investment managers that are affiliated
and unaffiliated with the Section 17 Applicants.
    6. As set forth under each Contract, as well as in the prospectus
for each Contract, the Companies reserve the right to substitute shares
of the underlying fund for shares of another underlying fund.
    7. The Companies, on their own behalf and on behalf of their
Separate Accounts, propose to exercise their contractual rights to
substitute Class A and Class B shares of the Replacement Fund for Class
I and Class II shares of the Existing Fund, respectively.\1\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ The Replacement Fund is a series of BFT I and is advised by
Brighthouse Investment Advisers (``BIA''), an affiliate of the
Companies.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    8. The Section 26 Applicants state that the Substitution is part of
an ongoing effort by the Companies to make their Contracts more
attractive to existing and prospective Contract owners. Additional
information for the Existing Fund and the Replacement Fund, including
investment objectives, principal investment strategies, principal
risks, and performance, as well as the fees and expenses of the
Existing Fund and the Replacement Fund, can be found in the
application.
    9. The Section 26 Applicants state that the Substitution will be
described in supplements to the applicable prospectuses
(``Supplements'') for the Contracts filed with the Commission and
delivered to all affected Contract owners at least 30 days before the
Substitution Date. Each Supplement, among other things, will advise
Contract owners that, for a period beginning 30 days before the
Substitution Date through at least 30 days following the Substitution
Date, Contract owners are permitted to make at least one transfer of
Contract value from the subaccount investing in the Existing Fund or
the Replacement Fund to any other available investment option offered
under their Contracts without the transfer being counted as a transfer
for purposes of transfer limitations and fees that would otherwise be
applicable under the terms of the Contracts. In addition, each
Supplement will disclose the existence and effect of the Multi-Manager
Order (defined below) on which the Replacement Fund relies.\2\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \2\ Pursuant to exemptive orders issued to N ew England Funds
Trust I, et al., Investment Company Act Release. No. 22796 (Aug. 29,
1997) (notice); Investment Company Act Release. No.22824 (Sept. 17,
1997) (order); and Investment Company Act Release. No.23829 (May 10,
1999) (notice); Investment Company Act Release. No. (June 4, 1999)
(amended order) (the ``Multi-Manager Order''), BIA is authorized to
enter into and amend sub- advisory agreements with sub-advisers who
are not affiliated with BIA without shareholder approval under
certain conditions.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    10. The Section 26 Applicants will send the Supplements to all
affected Contract owners. Prospective purchasers and new purchasers of
Contracts will be provided with a Contract prospectus and the
Supplement, as well as the prospectus and any supplements for the
Replacement Fund.
    11. In addition to the Supplement distributed to Contract owners,
within five business days after the Substitution Date, affected
Contract owners will be sent a written confirmation of the completed
Substitution in accordance with Rule 10b-10 under the Securities
Exchange Act of 1934. The confirmation statement will include or be
accompanied by a statement that reiterates the free transfer rights
disclosed in the Supplement. The Companies also will send each Contract

owner a current prospectus for the Replacement Fund to the extent that
they have not previously received a copy.
    12. The Substitution will be effected at the relative net asset
value (``NAV'') in conformity with section 22(c) of the Act and rule
22c-1 thereunder. The Substitution will be effected by having each
subaccount investing in the Existing Fund redeem its Existing Fund
shares in cash and/or in-kind (as described herein) on the Substitution
Date at NAV per share and purchase shares of the Replacement Fund at
NAV per share calculated on the same date.
    13. The Companies or an affiliate will pay all expenses and
transaction costs reasonably related to the Substitution. No costs of
the Substitution will be borne directly or indirectly by Contract
owners. Contract owners will not incur any fees or charges as a result
of the Substitution, nor will their rights or the obligations of the
Companies under the Contracts be altered in any way. The Substitution
will not cause the fees and charges under the Contracts currently being
paid by Contract owners to be greater after the Substitution than
before the Substitution. The charges for optional living benefit riders
may change from time to time and any such changes would be unrelated to
the Substitution. In addition, the Substitution will in no way alter
the tax treatment of affected Contract owners in connection with their
Contracts, and no tax liability will arise for Contract owners as a
result of the Substitution.
    14. The Section 26 Applicants state that the Contract value for
each Contract owner impacted by the Substitution will not change as a
result of the Substitution. In addition, the Section 26 Applicants also
state that the benefits offered by the guarantees under the Contracts
will be the same immediately before and after the Substitution. The
Section 26 Applicants further state that the effect Substitution may
have on the value of the benefits offered by the Contract guarantees
would depend, among other things, on the relative future performance of
the Existing Fund and the Replacement Fund, which the Section 26
Applicants cannot predict. The Section 26 Applicants further note that,
at the time of the Substitution, the Contracts will offer a comparable
variety of investment options with as broad a range of risk/return
characteristics.
    15. The Section 26 Applicants represent that, for a period of two
years following the date the Substitution is effected (the
``Substitution Date''), BLIC, BLIC NY or an affiliate (other than BFT
I) will reimburse, on the last day of each fiscal quarter, the Contract
owners whose subaccounts invest in the Replacement Fund to the extent
the annual net operating expenses (taking into account fee waivers and
expense reimbursements) of each share class of the Replacement Fund for
such period exceed, on an annualized basis, the annual net operating
expenses of the corresponding share class of the Existing Fund for
fiscal year 2019. Further, any amounts waived or reimbursed by BIA will
not be subject to recoupment rights. In addition, the Section 26
Applicants will not increase separate account charges for any Contract
owner on the Substitution Date at any time during the two-year period
following the Substitution Date.

Legal Analysis--Section 26(c) of the Act

    1. The Section 26 Applicants request that the Commission issue an
order pursuant to section 26(c) of the Act approving the Substitution.
Section 26(c) prohibits any depositor or trustee of a unit investment
trust that invests exclusively in the securities of a single issuer
from substituting the securities of another issuer without the approval
of the Commission. Section 26(c) provides that such approval shall be
granted by order from the Commission if the evidence establishes that
the substitution is consistent with the protection of investors and the
purposes of the Act.
    2. The Section 26 Applicants submit that the Substitution is
consistent with the protection of investors and the purposes fairly
intended by the policy and provisions of the Act. In particular, the
Section 26 Applicants point to the following: (a) The Contracts permit
the Substitution, subject to Commission approval and compliance with
applicable laws, upon appropriate notice; (b) the prospectuses or
statements of additional information for the Contracts contain
appropriate disclosure of these rights; (c) the Substitution will be
described in the Supplements delivered to all affected Contract owners
at least 30 days before the Substitution Date; (d) the Supplements also
will advise Contract owners that, for a period beginning at least 30
days before the Substitution Date through at least 30 days following
the Substitution Date, Contract owners are permitted to make at least
one transfer of Contract value from the subaccount investing in the
Existing Fund to any other available subaccounts offered under their
Contract without any transfer charge or limitation and without the
transfer being counted as a transfer for purposes of transfer
limitations and fees that would otherwise be applicable under the terms
of the Contracts; (e) the Replacement Fund and the Existing Fund have
similar or substantially similar investment objectives, principal
investment strategies, and principal risks; and (f) the total net
operating expenses of the Replacement Fund will be the same or lower
than those of the Existing Fund for at least two years following the
Substitution Date. The Section 26 Applicants assert that, based on the
terms noted above, and subject to the conditions set forth below, the
Substitution does not raise the concerns underlying section 26(c).

Legal Analysis--Section 17(a) of the Act

    1. The Section 17 Applicants request an order under section 17(b)
exempting them from the provisions of section 17(a) to the extent
necessary to permit the Section 17 Applicants to carry out the
Substitution. The Section 17 Applicants state that because the
Substitution may be effected, in whole or in part, by means of in-kind
redemptions and purchases, the Substitution may be deemed to involve
one or more purchases or sales of securities or property between
affiliated persons.
    2. Section 17(a)(1) of the Act, in relevant part, prohibits any
affiliated person of a registered investment company, or any affiliated
person of such person, acting as principal, from knowingly selling any
security or other property to that company. Section 17(a)(2) of the Act
generally prohibits the persons described above, acting as principals,
from knowingly purchasing any security or other property from the
registered investment company. ``Affiliated person'' is defined in
section 2(a)(3) of the Act.\3\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ Section 2(a)(3) defines affiliated person as ``(A) any
person directly or indirectly owning, controlling, or holding with
power to vote, 5 per centum or more of the outstanding voting
securities of such other person; (B) any person 5 per centum or more
of whose outstanding voting securities are directly or indirectly
owned, controlled, or held with power to vote, by such other person;
(C) any person directly or indirectly controlling, controlled by, or
under common control with, such other person; (D) any officer,
director, partner, copartner, or employee of such other person; (E)
if such other person is an investment company, any investment
adviser thereof or any member of an advisory board thereof; and (F)
if such other person is an unincorporated investment company not
having a board of directors, the depositor thereof.''
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    3. To effect the Substitution, the Companies will redeem shares of
the Existing Fund either in-kind or in cash, and use the proceeds of
such redemptions to purchase shares of the Replacement Fund. Thus, the
proposed transactions may involve a transfer of portfolio securities by
the Existing Fund to the Companies. Immediately

thereafter, the Companies would purchase shares of the Replacement Fund
with the portfolio securities and/or cash received from the Existing
Fund. This aspect of the Substitution may be considered to involve one
or more sales by the Companies of securities or other property to the
Replacement Fund. Based on the affiliations detailed in the
application, these In-Kind Transactions may be prohibited by section
17(a)(1) and (2) of the Act.
    4. Section 17(b) of the Act, in relevant part, provides that,
notwithstanding subsection (a), any person may file with the Commission
an application for an order exempting a proposed transaction from one
or more provisions of section 17(a). Pursuant to section 17(b), the
Commission shall grant such application and issue such order of
exemption if evidence establishes that: The terms of the proposed
transaction, including the consideration to be paid or received, are
reasonable and fair and do not involve overreaching on the part of any
person concerned; the proposed transaction is consistent with the
policy of each registered investment company concerned, as recited in
its registration statement and reports filed under the Act; and the
proposed transaction is consistent with the general purposes of the
Act.
    5. Accordingly, the Section 17 Applicants seek relief under section
17(b) from section 17(a) for the In-Kind Transactions. The Section 17
Applicants submit that the In-Kind Transactions satisfy the standards
for an order under section 17(b) because: (i) The terms of the In-Kind
Transactions, including the consideration to be paid and received, are
reasonable and fair and do not involve overreaching on the part of any
person concerned because the In-Kind Transactions will comply with rule
17a-7 under the Act, other than the requirement relating to cash
consideration; \4\ (ii) the In-Kind Transactions will be consistent
with the policies of the Existing Fund and Replacement Fund as stated
in their respective registration statements and reports filed with the
Commission; and (iii) the In-Kind Transactions are consistent with the
general purposes of the Act because they do not raise any investor
protection concerns.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ Rule 17a-7 is a conditional exemption from section 17(a) of
the Act that permits purchase and sale transactions among affiliated
investment companies, or between an investment company and a person
that is affiliated solely by reason of having a common (or
affiliated) investment adviser, common directors, and/or common
officers. In the adopting release to the original Rule 17a-7, the
Commission stated that the purpose of the rule was to ``eliminate
filing and processing applications under circumstances where there
appears to be no likelihood that the statutory finding for a
specific exemption under Section 17(b) of the Act could not be
made'' and that the conditions of the rule ``are designed to limit
the exemption to those situations where the Commission, upon the
basis of its experience, considers that there is no likelihood of
overreaching of the investment companies participating in the
transaction.'' Inv. Co. Act Rel. No. 4697 (Sep. 8, 1966) at 2-4.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Applicants' Conditions

    The Section 26 Applicants agree that any order granting the
requested relief will be subject to the following conditions:
    1. The Substitution will not be effected unless the Companies
determine that: (i) The Contracts allow the substitution of shares of
registered open-end investment companies in the manner contemplated by
the application; (ii) the Substitution can be consummated as described
in the application under applicable insurance laws; and (iii) any
regulatory requirements in each jurisdiction where the Contracts are
qualified for sale have been complied with to the extent necessary to
complete the Substitution.
    2. The Companies or their affiliates will pay all expenses and
transaction costs of the Substitution, including legal and accounting
expenses, any applicable brokerage expenses and other fees and
expenses. No fees or charges will be assessed to the Contract owners to
effect the Substitution. The Substitution will not cause the fees and
charges under the Contracts currently being paid by the Contract owners
to be greater after the Substitution than before the Substitution. The
combined current management fee and Rule 12b-1 fee of each share class
of the Replacement Fund involved in the Substitution at all asset
levels will be no higher than that of the corresponding share class of
the Existing Fund at corresponding asset levels.
    3. The Substitution will be effected at the relative NAVs of the
respective shares in conformity with section 22(c) of the Act and Rule
22c-1 thereunder without the imposition of any transfer or similar
charges by the Section 26 Applicants. The Substitution will be effected
without change in the amount or value of any Contracts held by affected
Contract owners.
    4. The Substitution will in no way alter the tax treatment of
affected Contract owners in connection with their Contracts, and no tax
liability will arise for affected Contract owners as a result of the
Substitution.
    5. The obligations of the Companies and the rights of affected
Contract owners under the Contracts will not be altered in any way.
    6. Affected Contract owners will be permitted to make at least one
transfer of Contract value from the subaccount investing in the
Existing Fund (before the Substitution Date) or the Replacement Fund
(after the Substitution Date) to any other available investment option
under the Contract without charge for a period beginning at least 30
days before the Substitution Date through at least 30 days following
the Substitution Date. Except as described in any market timing/short-
term trading provisions of the relevant prospectus, the Companies will
not exercise any right they may have under the Contracts to impose
restrictions on transfers between the subaccounts under the Contracts,
including limitations on the future number of transfers, for a period
beginning at least 30 days before the Substitution Date through at
least 30 days following the Substitution Date.
    7. All affected Contract owners will be notified at least 30 days
before the Substitution Date about: (i) The intended Substitution of
the Existing Fund with the Replacement Fund; (ii) the intended
Substitution Date; and (iii) information with respect to transfers as
set forth in Condition 6 above. In addition, the Companies will deliver
to all affected Contract owners, at least 30 days before the
Substitution Date, a prospectus for the Replacement Fund.
    8. The Companies will deliver to each affected Contract owner
within five business days of the Substitution Date, a written
confirmation which will include: (i) A confirmation that the
Substitution was carried out as previously notified; (ii) a restatement
of the information set forth in the Supplement; and (iii) before and
after account values.
    9. For a period of two years following the Substitution Date, for
Contract owners who were Contract owners as of the Substitution Date,
BLIC, BLIC NY or an affiliate thereof (other than BFT I) will
reimburse, on the last day of each fiscal quarter, the Contract owners
whose subaccounts invest in the Replacement Fund to the extent the
annual net operating expenses (taking into account fee waivers and
expense reimbursements) of each share class of the Replacement Fund for
such period exceed, on an annualized basis, the annual net operating
expenses of the corresponding share class of the Existing Fund for
fiscal year 2019. Further, separate account charges for any Contract
owner on the Substitution Date will not be increased at any time during
the two-year period following the Substitution Date. Any amounts waived
or reimbursed by BIA will not be subject to recoupment rights.

    For the Commission, by the Division of Investment Management,
pursuant to delegated authority.
J. Matthew DeLesDernier,
Assistant Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2021-04934 Filed 3-9-21; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 87, Number 194 (Friday, October 7, 2022)]
[Notices]
[Page 61090]
[FR Doc No: 2022-21865]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES

Food and Drug Administration

[Docket No. FDA-2020-N-0026]

Issuance of Priority Review Voucher; Rare Pediatric Disease
Product

AGENCY: Food and Drug Administration, HHS.

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) is announcing the
issuance of a priority review voucher to the sponsor of a rare
pediatric disease product application. The Federal Food, Drug, and
Cosmetic Act (FD&C Act), as amended by the Food and Drug Administration
Safety and Innovation Act (FDASIA), authorizes FDA to award priority
review vouchers to sponsors of approved rare pediatric disease product
applications that meet certain criteria. FDA is required to publish
notice of the award of the priority review voucher. FDA has determined
that BYLVAY (odevixibat) manufactured by Albireo AB, meets the criteria
for a priority review voucher.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Cathryn Lee, Center for Drug
Evaluation and Research, Food and Drug Administration, 10903 New
Hampshire Ave., Silver Spring, MD 20993-0002,<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: FDA is announcing the issuance of a priority
review voucher to the sponsor of an approved rare pediatric disease
product application. Under section 529 of the FD&C Act (21 U.S.C.
360ff), which was added by FDASIA, FDA will award priority review
vouchers to sponsors of approved rare pediatric disease product
applications that meet certain criteria. FDA has determined that BYLVAY
(odevixibat) manufactured by Albireo AB, meets the criteria for a
priority review voucher. BYLVAY (odevixibat) capsules and oral pellets
are indicated for the treatment of pruritus in patients 3 months of age
and older, with progressive familial intrahepatic cholestasis.
    For further information about the Rare Pediatric Disease Priority
Review Voucher Program and for a link to the full text of section 529
of the FD&C Act, go to https://www.fda.gov/ForIndustry/DevelopingProductsforRareDiseasesConditions/RarePediatricDiseasePriorityVoucherProgram/default.htm. For further
information about BYLVAY (odevixibat), go to the ``[email protected]'' website
at https://www.accessdata.fda.gov/scripts/cder/daf/.

    Dated: September 29, 2022.
Lauren K. Roth,
Associate Commissioner for Policy.
[FR Doc. 2022-21865 Filed 10-6-22; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4164-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 79, Number 234 (Friday, December 5, 2014)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 72157-72159]
[FR Doc No: 2014-28672]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Coast Guard

33 CFR Part 167

[USCG-2014-0941]

Port Access Route Study: In the Chukchi Sea, Bering Strait and
Bering Sea

AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS.

ACTION: Notice of study; request for comments.

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

SUMMARY: This study is a continuation of and an expansion of scope to
the Port Access Route Study (PARS) the Coast Guard announced in 2010.
Based on comments received from the 2010 notice the Coast Guard has
developed a potential vessel routing system for the area. The Coast
Guard requests comments on how consolidating vessel traffic into a
defined vessel routing system may impact or benefit the region. The
goal of the study is to help reduce the risk of marine casualties and
increase the efficiency of vessel traffic in the region. The
recommendations of the study may lead to future rulemaking action or
appropriate international agreements.

DATES: Comments must be received on or before June 3, 2015.

ADDRESSES:
    Schematic of proposed vessel routing system: A chart showing the
Coast Guard's proposed two-way route can be downloaded from http://www.regulations.gov, type ``USCG-2014-0941'' into the search bar and
click search, next to the displayed search results click ``Open Docket
Folder'', which will display all comments and documents associated with
this docket.
    Comment submission: You may submit comments identified by docket
number USCG-2014-0941 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 notice
of study, call or email LT Kody Stitz, Seventeenth Coast Guard District
(dpw); telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>; email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or Mr.
David Seris, Seventeenth Coast Guard District (dpw); telephone (907)
463-2267; email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>If you have questions on
viewing or submitting material to the docket, call Cheryl F. Collins,
Program Manager, Docket Operations, telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Public Participation and Request for Comments

    We encourage you to participate in this study 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.

Submitting Comments

    If you submit a comment, please include the docket number for this
notice of availability (USCG-2014-0941), 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 ``USCG-2014-0941'' into the search bar and click search, next to
the displayed search results click ``Comment Now'', which will open the
comment page for this study. If you submit your comments by mail or
hand delivery, submit them in an unbound format, no larger than 8.5 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.

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 ``USCG-2014-0941'' into the search bar and click search, next to
the displayed search results click ``Open Docket Folder'', which will
display all comments and documents associated with this docket. 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. We have an agreement
with the Department of Transportation to use the Docket Management
Facility.

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).

Public Meeting

    The Coast Guard will hold public meeting(s) if there is sufficient
demand to warrant holding a meeting. You must submit a request for one
on or before Month Day, Year (30 days from publish date) using one of
the four methods specified under ADDRESSES. Please explain why you
believe a public meeting would be beneficial. If we determine that a
public meeting would aid in the study, we will hold a meeting at a time
and place announced by a later notice in the Federal Register.

Definitions

    The following definitions (except ``Regulated Navigation Area'')
are from the International Maritime Organization's (IMO's) publication
``Ships' Routeing'' Tenth Edition 2010 and should help you review this
notice:
    Area to be avoided (ATBA) means a routing measure comprising an
area within defined limits in which either navigation is particularly
hazardous or it is exceptionally important to avoid casualties and
which should be avoided by all ships, or certain classes of ships.
    Deep-water route means a route within defined limits, which has
been accurately surveyed for clearance of sea bottom and submerged
obstacles as indicated on the chart.
    Inshore traffic zone means a routing measure comprising a
designated area between the landward boundary of a traffic separation
scheme and the adjacent coast, to be used in accordance with the
provisions of Rule 10(d), as amended, of the International Regulations
for Preventing Collisions at Sea, 1972 (COLREGS).
    Precautionary area means a routing measure comprising an area
within defined limits where ships must navigate with particular caution
and within which the direction of traffic flow may be recommended.
    Recommended route means a route of undefined width, for the
convenience of ships in transit, which is often marked by centerline
buoys.
    Recommended track is a route which has been specially examined to
ensure so far as possible that it is free of dangers and along which
vessels are advised to navigate.
    Regulated Navigation Area (RNA) means a water area within a defined
boundary for which regulations for vessels navigating within the area
have been established under 33 CFR part 165.
    Roundabout means a routing measure comprising a separation point or
circular separation zone and a circular traffic lane within defined
limits. Traffic within the roundabout is separated by moving in a
counterclockwise direction around the separation point or zone.
    Separation zone or separation line means a zone or line separating
the traffic lanes in which ships are proceeding in opposite or nearly
opposite directions; or separating a traffic lane from the adjacent sea
area; or separating traffic lanes designated for particular classes of
ship proceeding in the same direction.

    Traffic lane means an area within defined limits in which one-way
traffic is established. Natural obstacles, including those forming
separation zones, may constitute a boundary.
    Traffic Separation Scheme (TSS) means a routing measure aimed at
the separation of opposing streams of traffic by appropriate means and
by the establishment of traffic lanes.
    Two-way route means a route within defined limits inside which two-
way traffic is established, aimed at providing safe passage of ships
through waters where navigation is difficult or dangerous.
    Vessel routing system means any system of one or more routes or
routing measures aimed at reducing the risk of casualties; it includes
traffic separation schemes, two-way routes, recommended tracks, areas
to be avoided, no anchoring areas, inshore traffic zones, roundabouts,
precautionary areas, and deep-water routes.

Background and Purpose

Requirement for Port Access Route Studies

    Under the Ports and Waterways Safety Act (PWSA) (33 U.S.C.
1223(c)), the Commandant of the Coast Guard may designate necessary
fairways and traffic separation schemes (TSSs) to provide safe access
routes for vessels proceeding to and from U.S. ports.

Port Access Route Study to Date

    The Coast Guard announced a port access route study in the Federal
Register on November 8, 2010 (75 FR 68568). The purpose of the PARS was
to solicit public comments on whether a vessel routing system such as a
fairway or TSS was needed and if it could increase vessel safety in the
area. The 2010 PARS was limited geographically in scope to a section of
water extending approximately 100 nautical miles north of the Bering
Strait into the Chukchi Sea to approximately 30 nautical miles south of
St. Lawrence Island in the Bering Sea. At that time the Coast Guard did
not propose a specific vessel routing system, but instead sought more
general comments about whether a vessel routing system was needed or
advisable in the study area. The Coast Guard received twenty five
comments, and after reviewing them, determined that a vessel route
needed to be proposed so more specific comments and concerns could be
gathered and evaluated before determining if a routing system would be
beneficial. The Coast Guard further determined that the study area
should include a larger geographic area than was initially studied
before finalizing the study and publishing the results.

Vessel Routing Comments to Date

    The Coast Guard received twenty five public comments during the
open comment period associated with the 2010 announcement. Nearly all
of the comments that addressed vessel routing were supportive of the
Coast Guard creating and implementing some form of vessel routing
measure in the area. Since no specific routing measure was proposed in
2010, the comments received did note that precise concerns and impacts
could only be identified after a specific route or measure was
proposed.

Reopening of the Comment Period

    This Federal Register notice announces the Coast Guard's intent to
continue the PARS started in 2010, expand the study area and release
the Coast Guard's proposed vessel routing system for comment. The Coast
Guard's goal of the study remains the same in that the study is focused
on gathering factual and relevant information to aid the Coast Guard in
reducing the risk of marine casualties and increasing the efficiency of
vessel traffic in the region.
    The study will assess whether the creation of a vessel routing
system is advisable to increase the predictability of vessel movements,
which may decrease the potential for collisions, oil spills, and other
events that could threaten the marine environment.
    Based on comments received to date there is a general sense that a
designated traffic route could improve traffic predictability thereby
reducing marine casualties and oil spills; however, a few comments
received did note that a designated traffic route (depending on
location) could adversely impact subsistence hunting, marine mammals
and other wildlife more so than widely dispersed vessel traffic.
Therefore, the Coast Guard puts forth a potential two-way route as a
starting point for analyzing where to put a vessel traffic route should
one be deemed needed and beneficial to the region.
    The Coast Guard will analyze vessel traffic density, agency and
stakeholder experience in vessel traffic management, navigation, ship
handling, the effects of weather, impacts to subsistence hunting,
impacts to marine mammals and other wildlife concerns into the decision
making process of the study. We encourage you to participate in the
study process by submitting comments in response to this notice.
    The expanded study area is described as an area bounded by a line
connecting the following geographic positions:
     67[deg]30' N, 168[deg]58'37'' W;
     67[deg]30' N, 167[deg]30' W;
     54[deg]50' N, 164[deg]40' W;
     54[deg]03' N, 166[deg]25' W;
     63[deg]20' N, 173[deg]43' W; thence following the Russian
Federation/United States maritime boundary line to the first
geographical position.
    The proposed ship routing measures are described as follows:
    (1) A four nautical mile wide, two-way route extending from Unimak
Pass in the Aleutian Islands that proceeds Northward through the Bering
Sea and Bering Strait before terminating in the Chukchi Sea.
    (2) A four nautical mile wide, two-way route extending from a
location North of the Western side of St. Lawrence Island and near the
U.S./Russian Federation maritime border, then proceeding Northeast to a
junction with the first two way route located to the West of King
Island.
    (3) A total of four precautionary areas, each circular and 8
nautical miles wide in diameter. Three of these precautionary areas
will be located at the starting/ending points of the two-way routes,
and the fourth will be located at the junction of the recommended two-
way routes.
    See the ADDRESSES section for where to obtain a copy of the chart
showing the exact location of the proposed route.
    Timeline, Study Area, and Process of this PARS: The Seventeenth
Coast Guard District will conduct this PARS. The study will continue
upon publication of this notice and may take 24 months to complete.
    We will publish the results of the PARS in the Federal Register. It
is possible that the study may validate the status quo (no routing
measures) and conclude that no changes are necessary. It is also
possible that the study may recommend one or more changes to enhance
navigational safety and the efficiency of vessel traffic management.
The recommendations may lead to future rulemakings or appropriate
international agreements.

    Dated: November 14, 2014.
D. B. Abel,
Rear Admiral, U.S. Coast Guard, Commander, Seventeenth Coast Guard
District.
[FR Doc. 2014-28672 Filed 12-4-14; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 9110-04-P


                             Supporting Statement
                                      for

CG-2554 Private Aids to Navigation Application and CG-4143 Application for Class I Private Aids to Navigation on Artificial Islands and Fixed Structures

                              OMB No.: 1625-0011
           COLLECTION INSTRUMENTS:  Instruction, CG-2554 and CG-4143

JUSTIFICATION

    Circumstances Which Make the Collection of Information Necessary.

Under 14 USC 81, the Coast Guard is authorized to establish aids to navigation.  14 USC 83 prohibits establishment of aids to navigation without permission of the Coast Guard.  33 CFR 66.01-5 provides a means for private individuals to establish privately maintained aids to navigation.  Under 43 USC 1333, the Coast Guard has the authority to promulgate and enforce regulations concerning lights and other warning devices relating to the promotion of safety of life and property on artificial islands, installations, and other devices on the outer continental shelf involved in the exploration, development, removal, or transportation of resources there from.  33 CFR 67.35-1 prescribes the type of aids to navigation that must be installed on artificial islands and fixed structures.

To obtain approval to establish a private aid to navigation, applicants must submit either CG 2554 (Private Aids to Navigation Application) or CG Form 4143 (Application for Class 1 Private Aids to Navigation on Artificial Islands and Fixed Structures).  The forms collect information about the private aid to navigation (type, color, and geographic position), charts or sketches of the desired location, copies of U.S. Army Corps of Engineers permits, and the applicant's contact information.  The information is stored in the Coast Guard's United States Aids to Navigation Information Management System (USAIMS); formerly known as the Integrated Aids to Navigation Information System (I-ATONIS).  USAIMS is the Coast Guard's comprehensive database for managing information about aids to navigation.

This information collection supports the following strategic goals:

Department of Homeland Security
      Preserve and Uphold the Nation's Prosperity and Economic Security

Coast Guard
         Maintain U.S. Waterways and Maritime Resources
         Safeguard U.S. Transportation System
         Protection of Natural Resources

    Purpose of the Information Collection

Applicants range from individuals, owners of small businesses such as a local marina, to the largest corporations in the energy sector. Collecting the applicant's contact information is important because it allows the Coast Guard to communicate with the applicant/owner should there be a discrepancy or mishap involving the permitted private aid to navigation. Certain discrepancies create hazards to navigation and must be responded to and immediately corrected or repaired.

This information is used by the Coast Guard to:

      Determine if a proposed private aid is necessary for navigational purposes.
      Ensure that the proposed aid meets the requirements of the applicable US marking system.
      Notify the maritime public of the location, characteristics, and discrepancy information of private aids to navigation through the issuance of notices to mariners.
      At no time is the applicant's contact information made public.

    Consideration of the Use of Improved Information Technology to Reduce the Burden.

The use of improved information technology has been considered and it has been determined that it will reduce the burden of information collection.  The forms are fillable PDF documents that can be completed, saved, and forwarded to the appropriate Coast Guard district office.  The forms may also be printed and submitted by postal mail.  The forms may also be hand delivered if the applicant is near the district office.  In the First Coast Guard District the Coast Guard is experimenting with an electronic submission utilizing a website.  The website collects the same information as collected on the PDF forms.  At this time, 100% of the respondents in the First Coast Guard District use this website.  Transition to a Coast Guard wide website is under consideration, but no timeline for this transition has been determined.

    Efforts to Identify Duplication.

No other Federal agency is authorized to permit the establishment of private aids to navigation on the navigable waters of the United States.  There is no similar information available which could be used or modified for this purpose.  Each collection is specific and unique.

Depending on the type of private aid to navigation the applicant plans to establish, modify or remove, the applicant would complete one of the two forms.  Each contains necessary information for processing by the Coast Guard.  These private aid forms need to be submitted only when a private aid to navigation is established, modified, relocated, removed, or ownership is changed.

    Methods Used to Minimize the Burden to Small Business.

The burden upon small businesses is minimal because the applications need only be submitted when establishing, modifying, relocating, removing, or changing ownership of a private aid to navigation.

    Consequences to the Federal Program if Collection Were Not Done or Conducted Less Frequently.

The information is only collected when an applicant wishes to establish a private aid to navigation or make changes to a previously approved permit.  Current requirements do not lend themselves to collecting this information less frequently.  If the forms were submitted less frequently or not at all, the Coast Guard would not be able to ensure the private aids to navigation are appropriate, nor would the Coast Guard be able to ensure the public is notified, through the issuance of notices to mariners, of new or changed private aids to navigation, hence compromising safety.

    Special Circumstances that Require Collection to be Conducted in an Inconsistent Manner.

This information collection is conducted in manner consistent with the guidelines in 5 CFR 1320.5(d)(2).

    Solicitation of Comments.

A 60-day Notice will be (published in the Federal Register to obtain public comment on this collection.

    Provide any Payment or Gift to Respondents.

There is no offer of monetary or material value for this information collection.

    Assurances of Confidentiality Provided to Respondents.

There are no assurances of confidentiality provided to the respondents for this information collection.  This information collection request is covered by the General Contacts List Privacy Impact Assessment (PIA) and Mailing and Other Lists System, System of Records Notice (SORN).  Links to the aforementioned PIA and SORN are provided below:

 https://www.dhs.gov/sites/default/files/publications/privacy-pia-dhs-gcl-august2017.pdf
 https://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/FR-2008-11-25/html/E8-28053.htm

The contact information is stored in the USAIMS database.  USAIMS features a centralized database with multi-user access, source on-line updating, user implemented database query capability, database product and report retrieval and delivery to authorized USCG aids to navigation personnel.  Aids to navigation personnel must request and be granted access from the Office of Navigation Systems, Coast Guard Headquarters.  Once granted, a Common Access Card (CAC) is required for access.  As an additional security measure, authorized users must log into USAIMS at least once every 60 days or access will be suspended.

The contact information is only available to Coast Guard aids to navigation personnel and contact is only initiated if the private aid to navigation becomes discrepant or in need of repair.  An approved PTA follows.  In addition to Coast Guard access, several cartographers at the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) have access for the purposes of updating nautical charts with the private aids to navigation information.  NOAA personnel have the same access requirements as Coast Guard personnel.

    Additional Justification for any Questions of a Sensitive Nature.

There are no questions of a sensitive nature.

    Estimate of annual hour and cost burden.

Nationwide, there are approximately 40,000 private aids to navigation.  Annually, about 712 new requests are submitted, of which approximately 391 use form CG-2554 and 321 use form CG-4143.  The type of form used depends on the type of private aid to navigation the applicant wishes to establish or is required to establish, modify, relocate, remove, or change ownership.

CG-2554
It is estimated that it would take an applicant who is equivalent to a GS-11 and who is familiar with the private aids to navigation regulations (33 CFR 66) and with marine navigation approximately one hour to complete the form.  Since approximately 391 CG-2554s are submitted annually, the estimated public burden is 391 hours.  Using a labor cost of $68 per hour (COMDTINST 7310.lM), the estimated annual cost to the public would be approximately $26,588.

CG-4143
It is estimated that it would take an applicant who is equivalent to a GS-11 and who is familiar with the private aids to navigation regulations (33 CFR 67) and with marine navigation approximately one hour to complete the form.  Since approximately 321 CG-4143s are submitted annually, the estimated public burden is 321 hours. Using a labor cost of $68 per hour (COMDTINST 7310.lU), the estimated annual cost to the public would be approximately $21,828.

Therefore, the estimated average annual cost to prepare both forms would be $48,416, as described below:

PERSONNEL
FORM
                                  PER REQUEST
                               TOTAL (PER YEAR)

Hourly Rate*
Hours
Total
# of Requests
Hours
Cost
Equivalent to (GS-11)
CG-2554
                                                                           $68
                                                                              1
                                                                            $68
                                                                            391
                                                                            391
                                                                        $26,588
Equivalent to (GS-11)
CG-4143
                                                                           $68
                                                                              1
                                                                           $68
                                                                            321
                                                                            321
                                                                       $21,828
TOTALS

                                                                            712
                                                                            712
                                                                        $48,416
*Based on hourly rates for government personnel in Enclosure (2) to COMDTINST 7310.1U

13.	Provide an Estimate of the Annualized Capital/Start-up Costs to Respondents.

Applications can be submitted electronically; however, some applicants may elect to submit their application via U.S. mail.  The postal cost for one submission is $0.55 (55cent).  Approximately 43 forms (CG-2554 and CG-4143) were submitted via U.S. mail.  The estimated annual cost for postage is $23.65.

 Estimates of Annualized Cost to the Federal Government.

CG-2554
It is estimated to take Coast Guard personnel approximately 2 hours to completely process a CG-2554.  Form processing includes: (1) review of proposed aid characteristics, (2) review of aid location, (3) distributing information to the public, (4) notifying owner of private aid status, (5) entering the data in USAIMS, and (6) filing.  With approximately 391CG-2554s submitted annually, the estimated burden on the Coast Guard is 782 hours.  Using a labor cost of $68 per hour (COMDTINST 7310.lU), the estimated annual cost to the public would be approximately $53,176.00

CG-4143
It is estimated to take Coast Guard personnel approximately 2 hours to completely process a CG-4143.  Form processing includes: (1) review of proposed aid characteristics, (2) review of aid location, (3) distributing information to the public, (4) notifying owner of private aid status, (5) entering the data in USAIMS, and (6) filing.  With approximately 321 CG-4143's submitted annually, the estimated burden on the Coast Guard is 321 hours.  Using a labor cost of $68 per hour (COMDTINST 7310.lU), the estimated annual cost to the public would be approximately $43,656.00.

Therefore, the estimated annual cost to the Coast Guard for processing 712 forms (CG-2554 and CG-4143) is $96,832 as described below:

PERSONNEL
FORM
                                  PER REQUEST
                               TOTAL (PER YEAR)

Hourly Rate*
Hours
Total
# of Requests
Hours
Cost
GS-11
CG-2554
                                                                           $68
                                                                            2.0
                                                                        $136.00
                                                                            391
                                                                          782.4
                                                                     $53,176.00
GS-11
CG-4143
                                                                           $68
                                                                            2.0
                                                                       $136.00
                                                                            321
                                                                            642
                                                                     $43,656.00
TOTALS

                                                                     $96,832.00
*Based on hourly rates for government personnel in Enclosure (2) to COMDTINST 7310.1U

 Reason for Changes or Adjustments in the Burden.

The change (i.e., decrease) in burden is an ADJUSTMENT due to a decrease in the estimated annual number of responses.  A query of all Coast Guard District offices for applications received in CY 2020 produced these updated totals.  In addition, the reported paygrade for the Coast Guard District personnel processing the forms has been reduced from a GS-12 to a GS-11. This more accurately captures the average paygrade for the government personnel in these positions and resulted in lower per hour costs.  The reporting and recordkeeping requirements, and methodology for calculating burden, remain unchanged, but the processing time for Coast Guard personnel increased from the previous reported 1.4 hours per application to a more accurate 2.0 hours per application.

16.	Plans for Tabulation, Statistical Analysis, and Publication.

This information collection will not be published for statistical purposes.

17.	Approval for Not to Explain the OMB Expiration Date.

Coast Guard will display the expiration date of OMB approval for this information collection.

18.	Exception to the Certification Statement.

Coast Guard does not request an exception to the certification of this information collection.

B.  COLLECTION OF INFORMATION EMPLOYING STATISTICAL METHODS

This information is not collected through the use of statistical methods.


[Federal Register Volume 81, Number 191 (Monday, October 3, 2016)]
[Notices]
[Pages 68078-68079]
[FR Doc No: 2016-23761]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[SEC File No. 270-68, OMB Control No. 3235-0074]

Proposed Collection; Comment Request

Upon Written Request Copies Available From: Securities and Exchange
Commission, Office of FOIA Services, 100 F Street NE., Washington, DC
20549-2736

Extension:
    Regulation C

    Notice is hereby given that, pursuant to the Paperwork Reduction
Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.), the Securities and Exchange
Commission (``Commission'') is soliciting comments on the collection of
information summarized below. The Commission plans to submit this
existing collection of information to the Office of Management and
Budget for extension and approval.
    Regulation C (17 CFR 230.400 through 230.498) under the Securities
Act of 1933 (15 U.S.C. 77a et seq.) provides standard instructions for
persons filing registration statements under the

Securities Act. The information collected is intended to ensure the
adequacy of information available to investors. Regulation C is
assigned one burden hour for administrative convenience because the
regulation simply prescribes the disclosure that must appear in other
filings under the federal securities laws.
    Written comments are invited on: (a) Whether this proposed
collection of information is necessary for the proper performance of
the functions of the agency, including whether the information will
have practical utility; (b) the accuracy of the agency's estimate of
the burden imposed by the collection of information; (c) ways to
enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information collected;
and (d) ways to minimize the burden of the collection of information on
respondents, including through the use of automated collection
techniques or other forms of information technology. Consideration will
be given to comments and suggestions submitted in writing within 60
days of this publication.
    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 control number.
    Please direct your written comment to Pamela Dyson, Director/Chief
Information Officer, Securities and Exchange Commission, c/o Remi
Pavlik-Simon, 100 F Street NE., Washington, DC 20549 or send an email
to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
    Dated: September 27, 2016.
Robert W. Errett,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2016-23761 Filed 9-30-16; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 81, Number 119 (Tuesday, June 21, 2016)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 40188-40190]
[FR Doc No: 2016-14642]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Coast Guard

33 CFR Part 165

[Docket Number USCG-2016-0004]
RIN 1625-AA00

Safety Zone; Misery Challenge, Manchester Bay, Manchester, MA

AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS.

ACTION: Temporary final rule.

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

SUMMARY: The Coast Guard is establishing a temporary safety zone for
certain waters of Manchester Bay to be enforced during the Misery
Challenge marine event, which will involve swimmers, kayakers, and
stand-up paddlers. This safety zone ensures the protection of the event
participants, support vessels, and the maritime public from the hazards
associated with the event. This regulation prohibits persons and
vessels from entering into, transiting through, mooring, or anchoring
within this safety zone during periods of enforcement unless authorized
by the Coast Guard Sector Boston Captain of the Port (COTP) or the
COTP's designated representative.

DATES: This rule is effective from 7:00 a.m. to 12:30 p.m. on July 23,
2016.

ADDRESSES: To view documents mentioned in this preamble as being
available in the docket, go to http://www.regulations.gov, type USCG-
2016-0004 in the ``SEARCH'' box and click ``SEARCH.'' Click on Open
Docket Folder on the line associated with this rule.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: If you have questions on this rule,
call or email, call or email Mr. Mark Cutter, Sector Boston Waterways
Management Division, U.S. Coast Guard; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>, email
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Table of Abbreviations

DHS Department of Homeland Security
U.S.C. United States Code
CFR Code of Federal Regulations
FR Federal Register
NPRM Notice of Proposed Rulemaking
NAD 83 North American Datum of 1983
Sec.  Section

II. Background, Purpose, and Legal Basis

    On October 23, 2015, the Coast Guard was notified of a swimming and
stand up paddling event from 7:30 a.m. to 12 p.m. on July 23, 2016 with
a weather date on July 24, 2016 named the Misery Challenge. The
participants will launch from Tucks Point in Manchester Bay,
Manchester, MA and continue around Greater Misery Island returning to
Tucks Point. In response, on March 2, 2016, the Coast Guard published
an NPRM titled Safety Zone; Misery Challenge, Manchester Bay,
Manchester, MA (81 FR 10820). There we stated why we issued the NPRM,
and invited comments on our proposed regulatory action related to this
event. During the comment period that ended April 1, 2016, we received
no comments.

III. Legal Authority and Need for Rule

    The Coast Guard is issuing this rule under authority in 33 U.S.C.
1231. The COTP Boston has determined that potential hazards associated
with the event on July 23, 2016 will be a safety concern for the
participants and support vessels. The purpose of this rule is to ensure
safety of participants, vessels and the navigable waters in the safety
zone before, during, and after the scheduled event.

IV. Discussion of Proposed Rule

    As noted above, we received no comments on our NPRM published on
March 2, 2016. There are no changes in the regulatory text of this rule
from the proposed rule in the NPRM.
    This rule establishes a safety zone from 7:00 a.m. to 12:30 p.m. on
July 23, 2016 with a weather date on July 24, 2016. The safety zone
will cover all navigable waters within specific geographic locations
specified in the regulatory text on the navigable waters of Manchester
Bay, Manchester, Massachusetts. Vessels not associated with the event
shall maintain a distance of at least 100 yards from the participants.
The duration of the zone is intended to ensure the safety of event
participants, support vessels, and the maritime public before, during,
and after the event scheduled from 7:30 a.m. to 12 p.m. No vessel or
person would be permitted to enter the safety zone without obtaining
permission from the COTP or a designated representative. The regulatory
text appears at the end of this document.

V. Regulatory Analyses

    We developed this rule after considering numerous statutes and
Executive orders related to rulemaking. Below we summarize our analyses
based on a number of these statutes and Executive orders, and we
discuss First Amendment rights of protestors.

A. Regulatory Planning and Review

    Executive Orders 12866 and 13563 direct agencies to assess the
costs and benefits of available regulatory alternatives and, if
regulation is necessary, to select regulatory approaches that maximize
net benefits. Executive Order 13563 emphasizes the importance of
quantifying both costs and benefits, of reducing costs, of harmonizing
rules, and of promoting flexibility. This rule has not been designated
a ``significant regulatory action,'' under Executive Order 12866.
Accordingly, it has not been reviewed by the Office of Management and
Budget.
    We expect the economic impact of this rule to be minimal. This
regulation may have some impact on the public, but that potential
impact will likely be minimal for several reasons. First, this safety
zone will be in effect for only 5 and \1/2\ hours in the morning when
vessel traffic is expected to be light. Second, vessels may enter or
pass through the safety zone during an enforcement period with the
permission of the COTP or the designated representative. Finally, the
Coast Guard

will provide notification to the public through Broadcast Notice to
Mariners well in advance of the event.

B. Impact on Small Entities

    The Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980, 5 U.S.C. 601-612, as
amended, requires federal agencies to consider the potential impact of
regulations on small entities during rulemaking. The term ``small
entities'' comprises small businesses, not-for-profit organizations
that are independently owned and operated and are not dominant in their
fields, and governmental jurisdictions with populations of less than
50,000. The Coast Guard certifies under 5 U.S.C. 605(b) that this rule
will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of
small entities.
    For all of the reasons discussed in the Regulatory Planning and
Review section, this rule would not have a significant economic impact
on a substantial number of 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
section.
    Small businesses may send comments on the actions of Federal
employees who enforce, or otherwise determine compliance with, Federal
regulations to the Small Business and Agriculture Regulatory
Enforcement Ombudsman and the Regional Small Business Regulatory
Fairness Boards. The Ombudsman evaluates these actions annually and
rates each agency's responsiveness to small business. If you wish to
comment on actions by employees of the Coast Guard, call 1-888-REG-FAIR
(1-888-734-3247). The Coast Guard will not retaliate against small
entities that question or complain about this rule or any policy or
action of the Coast Guard.

C. Collection of Information

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

D. Federalism and Indian Tribal Governments

    A rule has implications for federalism under Executive Order13132,
Federalism, if it has a substantial direct effect on the States, on the
relationship between the national government and the States, or on the
distribution of power and responsibilities among the various levels of
government. We have analyzed this rule under that Order and have
determined that it is consistent with the fundamental federalism
principles and preemption requirements described in Executive Order
13132.
    Also, this rule does not have tribal implications under Executive
Order 13175, Consultation and Coordination with Indian Tribal
Governments, because it would not have a substantial direct effect on
one or more Indian tribes, on the relationship between the Federal
Government and Indian tribes, or on the distribution of power and
responsibilities between the Federal Government and Indian tribes. If
you believe this rule has implications for federalism or Indian tribes,
please contact the person listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT
section above.

E. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act

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

F. Environment

    We have analyzed this rule under Department of Homeland Security
Management Directive 023-01 and Commandant Instruction M16475.lD, which
guide the Coast Guard in complying with the National Environmental
Policy Act of 1969 (42 U.S.C. 4321-4370f), and have determined that
this action is one of a category of actions that do not individually or
cumulatively have a significant effect on the human environment. This
rule involves a safety zone lasting 5 and 1/2 hours that would prohibit
entry within 100 yards of the participants and vessels in support of
the event. It is categorically excluded from further review under
paragraph 34(g) 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.

G. Protest Activities

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

List of Subjects in 33 CFR Part 165

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

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

PART 165--REGULATED NAVIGATION AREAS AND LIMITED ACCESS AREAS

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

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

0
2. Add a new Sec.  165.T01-0188 to read as follows:

Sec.  165.T01-0188  Safety Zone--Misery Challenge--Manchester Bay,
Manchester, Massachusetts.

    (a) General. Establish a temporary safety zone:
    (1) Location. The following area is a safety zone: All navigable
waters, from surface to bottom, within 100 yards from the participants
and vessels in support of events in Manchester Bay, Manchester,
Massachusetts, and enclosed by a line connecting the following points
(NAD 83):

    Latitude Longitude
42[deg]34'03'' N. 70[deg]46'42'' W.; thence to
42[deg]33'58'' N. 70[deg]46'33'' W.; thence to
42[deg]32'30'' N. 70[deg]47'43'' W.; thence to
42[deg]32'58'' N. 70[deg]48'40'' W.; thence to point of origin.

    (2) Effective and Enforcement Period. This rule will be effective
on July 23, 2016, from 7:00 a.m. to 12:30 p.m. with a weather date on
July 24, 2016.
    (b) Regulations. While this safety zone is being enforced, the
following regulations, along with those contained in 33 CFR 165.23
apply:
    (1) No person or vessel may enter or remain in this safety zone
without the permission of the Captain of the Port (COTP) or the COTP's
representatives. However, any vessel that is granted permission by the
COTP or the COTP's representatives must proceed through the area with
caution and operate at a speed no faster than that speed

necessary to maintain a safe course, unless otherwise required by the
Navigation Rules.
    (2) Any person or vessel permitted to enter the safety zone shall
comply with the directions and orders of the COTP or the COTP's
representatives. Upon being hailed by a U.S. Coast Guard vessel by
siren, radio, flashing lights, or other means, the operator of a vessel
within the zone shall proceed as directed. Any person or vessel within
the safety zone shall exit the zone when directed by the COTP or the
COTP's representatives.
    (3) To obtain permissions required by this regulation, individuals
may reach the COTP or a COTP representative via VHF channel 16 or 617-
223-5757 (Sector Boston Command Center).
    (c) Penalties. Those who violate this section are subject to the
penalties set forth in 33 U.S.C. 1232 and 50 U.S.C. 1226.
    (d) Notification. Coast Guard Sector Boston will give notice
through the Local Notice to Mariners and Broadcast Notice to Mariners
for the purpose of enforcement of this temporary safety zone. Sector
Boston will also notify the public to the greatest extent possible of
any period in which the Coast Guard will suspend enforcement of this
safety zone.
    (e) COTP Representative. The COTP's representative may be any Coast
Guard commissioned, or petty officer or any federal, state, or local
law enforcement officer who has been designated by the COTP to act on
the COTP's behalf. The COTP's representative may be on a Coast Guard
vessel, a Coast Guard Auxiliary vessel, a state or local law
enforcement vessel, or a location on shore.

    Dated: June 13, 2016.
C.C. Gelzer,
Captain, U.S. Coast Guard, Captain of the Port Boston.
[FR Doc. 2016-14642 Filed 6-20-16; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 9110-04-P


                                    AGENDA
      Meeting of the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act
Scientific Advisory Panel (FIFRA SAP) to Consider and Review Scientific Issues Associated with the Proposed Endocrine Disruptor Screening Program (EDSP) Tier 2 Ecotoxicity Tests

Docket Number: EPA-HQ-OPP-2013-0182		OPP Docket Tel:<PHONE_NUMBER>

                  Please note that all times are approximate
                      (See note at the end of the Agenda)

Tuesday, June 25, 2013

9:00 A.M.	Opening of Meeting and Administrative Procedures  -  Sharlene Matten, Ph.D., Designated Federal Official, Office of Science Coordination and Policy, EPA

9:05 A.M. 	Introduction and Identification of Panel Members  -  Martha Sandy, Ph.D., Session Chair, FIFRA Scientific Advisory Panel

9:15 A.M.	Opening Remarks  -  David Dix, Ph.D., Acting Director, Office of Science Coordination and Policy, EPA, and Steven Bradbury, Ph.D. Director, Office of Pesticide Programs, EPA

9:25 A.M. 	Overview of EDSP and Proposed Tier 2 Ecotoxicity Tests  -  Mary Manibusan, Director, Exposure Assessment Coordination and Policy Division, Office of Science Coordination and Policy, EPA

10:00 A.M.	Break

10:10 A.M.	Japanese Quail Two-generation Toxicity Test  -  Leslie Touart, Ph.D., Exposure Assessment Coordination and Policy Division, Office of Science Coordination and Policy, EPA

11:10 A.M.	Medaka Multigeneration Toxicity Test  -  Rodney Johnson, Ph.D., Mid-Continent Ecology Division, National Health and Environmental Effects Research Laboratory  -  Duluth, Office of Research and Development, EPA

12:10 P.M.	Lunch

1:10 P.M.	Larval Amphibian Growth and Development Assay  - Sigmund Degitz, Ph.D., Mid-Continent Ecology Division, National Health and Environmental Effects Research Laboratory  -  Duluth, Office of Research and Development, EPA

2:10 P.M.	Mysid Two-generation Toxicity Test and Harpacticoid Copepod Development & Reproduction Test  -  Leslie Touart, Ph.D., Exposure Assessment Coordination and Policy Division, Office of Science Coordination and Policy, EPA

3:10 P.M.	Break

3:20 P.M.	Public Comments

5:30 P.M.	Adjournment

Wednesday, June 26, 2013
9:00 A.M.	Opening of Meeting and Administrative Procedures  -  Sharlene Matten, Ph.D., Designated Federal Official, Office of Science Coordination and Policy, EPA

9:05 A.M.	Introduction and Identification of Panel Members  -  Martha Sandy, Ph.D., Session Chair, FIFRA Scientific Advisory Panel

9:10 A.M.	Follow-up from Previous Day's Meeting  -  Mary Manibusan, Director, Exposure Assessment Coordination and Policy Division, Office of Science Coordination and Policy, EPA

9:20 A.M.	Public Comments (cont'd)

10:20 A.M.	Break

10:30 A.M.	Panel Discussion of Charge Questions

            Japanese Quail Two-generation Toxicity Test (JQTT) Charge Questions

12:00 P.M.	Lunch

1:00 P.M.	JQTT Charge Questions (cont'd)

2:30 P.M.	Break

2:40 P.M.	JQTT Charge Questions (cont'd)

3:50 P.M.	Break

4:00 P.M.	Medaka Multigeneration Toxicity Test (MMT) Charge Questions

5:30 P.M.  	Adjournment

Thursday, June 27, 2013

9:00 A.M.	Opening of Meeting and Administrative Procedures  -  Sharlene Matten, Ph.D., Designated Federal Official, Office of Science Coordination and Policy, EPA

9:05 A.M.	Introduction and Identification of Panel Members  -  Martha Sandy, Ph.D., Session Chair, FIFRA Scientific Advisory Panel

9:10 A.M.	Follow-up from Previous Day's Meeting  -  Mary Manibusan, Director, Exposure Assessment Coordination and Policy Division, Office of Science Coordination and Policy, EPA

9:20 A.M.	MMT Test Charge Questions (cont'd)

10:20 A.M.	Break

10:30 A.M.	MMT Test Charge Questions (cont'd)

12:00 P.M. 	Lunch

1:00 P.M.	Larval Amphibian Growth and Development Assay (LAGDA) Charge Questions
2:30 P.M.	Break

2:40 P.M.	LAGDA Charge Questions (cont'd)

3:50 P.M.	Break

4:00 P.M.	LAGDA Charge Questions (cont'd)

5:30 P.M.	Adjournment

Friday, June 28, 2013

9:00 A.M.	Opening of Meeting and Administrative Procedures  -  Sharlene Matten, Ph.D., Designated Federal Official, Office of Science Coordination and Policy, EPA

9:05 A.M.	Introduction and Identification of Panel Members  -  Martha Sandy, Ph.D., Session Chair, FIFRA Scientific Advisory Panel

9:10 A.M.	Follow-up from Previous Day's Meeting  -  Mary Manibusan, Director, Exposure Assessment Coordination and Policy Division, Office of Science Coordination and Policy, EPA

9:20 A.M.	Mysid Two-generation Toxicity Test  (MTTT) and Harpacticoid Copepod Development & Reproduction Test (HCDRT) Charge Questions

10:20 A.M.	Break

10:30 A.M.	MTTT and HCDRT Charge Questions (cont'd)

12:00 P.M.	Lunch

1:00 P.M	MTTT and HCDRT Charge Questions (cont'd)

3:00 P.M.	Adjournment

Please be advised that agenda times are approximate; when the discussion for one topic is completed, discussions for the next topic will begin.  For further information, please contact the Designated Federal Official for this meeting, Dr. Sharlene Matten, telephone:<PHONE_NUMBER>, fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>, or email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>


[Federal Register: October 10, 2008 (Volume 73, Number 198)]
[Notices]
[Page 60308-60309]
[DOCID:fr10oc08-103]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Federal Emergency Management Agency

[FEMA-1794-DR]

Mississippi; Amendment No. 2 to Notice of a Major Disaster
Declaration

AGENCY: Federal Emergency Management Agency, DHS.

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: This notice amends the notice of a major disaster declaration
for the State of Mississippi (FEMA-1794-DR), dated September 22, 2008,
and related determinations.

DATES: Effective Date: October 3, 2008.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Peggy Miller, Disaster Assistance
Directorate, Federal Emergency Management Agency, 500 C Street, SW.,
Washington, DC 20472,<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The notice of a major disaster declaration
for the State of Mississippi is hereby amended to include the following
areas among those areas determined to have been adversely affected by
the catastrophe declared a major disaster by the President in his
declaration of September 22, 2008.

    Adams and Wilkinson Counties for Individual Assistance (already
designated for Public Assistance).

(The following Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance Numbers (CFDA)
are to be used for reporting and drawing funds: 97.030, Community
Disaster Loans; 97.031, Cora Brown Fund; 97.032, Crisis Counseling;
97.033, Disaster Legal Services; 97.034, Disaster Unemployment
Assistance (DUA); 97.046, Fire Management Assistance Grant; 97.048,
Disaster Housing Assistance to Individuals and Households in
Presidentially Declared Disaster Areas; 97.049, Presidentially
Declared Disaster Assistance--Disaster Housing Operations for
Individuals and Households; 97.050 Presidentially Declared Disaster
Assistance to Individuals and Households--Other Needs; 97.036;
Disaster Grants--Public Assistance

(Presidentially Declared Disasters); 97.039, Hazard Mitigation
Grant.)

R. David Paulison,
Administrator, Federal Emergency Management Agency.
[FR Doc. E8-24088 Filed 10-9-08; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 9111-23-P


[Federal Register Volume 77, Number 121 (Friday, June 22, 2012)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 37569-37570]
[FR Doc No: 2012-15279]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 71

[Docket No. FAA-2012-0217; Airspace Docket No. 12-AEA-2]

Establishment of Class D Airspace and Amendment of Class E
Airspace; East Hampton, NY

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: This action establishes Class D airspace and amends existing
Class E airspace at East Hampton, NY, to accommodate the new mobile
airport traffic control tower (ATCT) at East Hampton Airport.
Controlled airspace enhances the safety and management of Instrument
Flight Rules (IFR) operations at the airport. This action also updates
the geographic coordinates of the airport's existing Class E airspace
and eliminates Class E extensions that are no longer required.

DATES: Effective 0901 UTC, July 26, 2012. 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: John Fornito, Operations Support
Group, Eastern Service Center, Federal Aviation Administration, P.O.
Box 20636, Atlanta, Georgia 30320; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

History

    On March 15, 2012, the FAA published in the Federal Register a
Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM) to establish Class D and E
airspace and amend existing Class E airspace at East Hampton, NY, to
accommodate a new air traffic control tower at East Hampton Airport (77
FR 15297). Interested parties were invited to participate in this
rulemaking effort by submitting written comments on the proposal to the
FAA. Two positive comments were received in support of the airspace.
One negative comment letter was received.
    One positive response was received from the Town of East Hampton.
The other positive commenter, the East Hampton Aviation Association,
observed that establishment of Class D airspace would provide greater
safety to IFR operations during bad weather conditions. The FAA agrees
with this observation.
    The negative response comment was received from the Eastern Region
Helicopter Council, Inc. (ERHC). ERHC made several observations in its
comment letter. The FAA does not agree with this commenter's
observations or conclusion. Each of the commenter's observations are
outlined and addressed below.
    The ERHC observed that the purpose of Class D airspace is to
protect IFR operations; that the East Hampton tower will not have radar
capabilities; that the tower will not have the authority to require
helicopters to fly specific arrival/departure flight paths; and that
most helicopter operations already comply with the voluntary noise
abatement procedures; therefore, the commenter concludes that the
airspace changes are not needed.
    The FAA does not agree. The protection provided by Class D airspace
to IFR operations is not based on the tower's ability to use radar to
provide separation. Rather, the airspace establishes higher weather
minima for VFR flights, thus restricting access of VFR flights to the
airspace while IFR operations are in progress.
    The ERHC commented that an unintended consequence of establishing
Class D airspace would be increased noise impact from helicopters that
are forced to wait outside the Class D airspace during adverse weather
conditions.
    While the FAA agrees that one-at-a-time Special VFR operations may
have the potential for creating adverse effects, separation rules for
Special VFR operations in Class D airspace allow for multiple
helicopters to operate in Class D airspace at the same time, as long as
they operate at a safe distance from IFR operations. Use of these rules
requires the helicopter operators to enter into a Letter of Agreement
(LOA) with the FAA. Use of these rules will allow the helicopter
operators to minimize any delays they may experience due to the
airspace, as well as provide a higher level of safety to all operations
in adverse weather conditions.
    The ERHC observed that one purpose of establishing a tower at East
Hampton Airport is for helicopter noise mitigation purposes.
    The FAA does not agree. The purpose of control towers and Class D
airspace is the safe and efficient use of airspace. Class D airspace
provides controlled airspace to contain IFR arrival and departure
operations. Further, Class D enhances safety by setting VFR weather
minima specified in 14 CFR Sec.  91.155 and the communications and
other operating requirements in 14 CFR 91.129.
    The Proposed Rule included a Class E surface area to be in effect
when the control tower is closed. One prerequisite for the
establishment of controlled airspace at the surface of an airport is
the availability of hourly and special weather observations. Currently
this prerequisite is only met during the dates and times when the tower
will be operating. Therefore, the Class E surface area has been removed
from this rule action.
    The current Class E5 Airspace Areas Extending Upward from 700 feet
or More Above the Surface of the Earth (E5) includes two extensions for
the support of IFR approach procedures. The approaches published for
East Hampton Airport have been modified since this airspace was
established and these extensions are no longer required for safe IFR
operations. Therefore, they are being removed as part of the rule.
    Class D and E airspace designations are published in Paragraphs
5000 and 6005, respectively, of FAA Order 7400.9V dated August 9, 2011,
and effective September 15, 2011, which is incorporated by reference in
14 CFR 71.1. The Class D and E airspace designations listed in this
document will be published subsequently in the Order.

The Rule

    This amendment to Title 14, Code of Federal Regulations (14 CFR)
part 71 establishes Class D airspace extending upward from the surface
to and including 2,500 feet MSL within a 4.8-mile radius of East
Hampton Airport, East Hampton, NY. Controlled airspace supports the new
airport traffic control tower for continued safety and management of
IFR operations at East Hampton Airport. This action also amends Class E
airspace extending upward from 700 feet above the surface within a 7.3-
mile radius of the airport. The geographic coordinates of the airport
are adjusted to be in concert with the FAA's current aeronautical
database.
    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.
Therefore, this regulation: (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, when promulgated, will not have a significant
economic impact on a substantial number of small entities under the
criteria of the Regulatory Flexibility Act.
    The FAA's authority to issue rules regarding aviation safety is
found in Title 49 of the United States Code. Subtitle I, Section 106
describes the authority of the FAA Administrator. Subtitle VII,
Aviation Programs, describes in more detail the scope of the agency's
authority.
    This rulemaking is promulgated under the authority described in
Subtitle VII, Part A, Subpart I, Section 40103. Under that section, the
FAA is charged with prescribing regulations to assign the use of
airspace necessary to ensure the safety of aircraft and the efficient
use of airspace. This regulation is within the scope of that authority
as it establishes and amends controlled airspace at East Hampton
Airport, East Hampton, NY.

Environmental Review

    The FAA has determined that this action qualifies for categorical
exclusion under the National Environmental Policy Act in accordance
with FAA Order 1050.1E, ``Environmental Impacts: Policies and
Procedures,'' paragraph 311a. This airspace action is not expected to
cause any potentially significant environmental impacts, and no
extraordinary circumstances exist that warrant preparation of an
environmental assessment.

Lists of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 71

    Airspace, Incorporation by reference, Navigation (air).

Adoption of the Amendment

    In consideration of the foregoing, the Federal Aviation
Administration amends 14 CFR part 71 as follows:

PART 71--DESIGNATION OF CLASS A, B, C, D AND E AIRSPACE AREAS; AIR
TRAFFIC SERVICE ROUTES; AND REPORTING POINTS

0
1. The authority citation for 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, 1959-1963 Comp., p. 389.

Sec.  71.1  [Amended]

0
2. The incorporation by reference in 14 CFR 71.1 of Federal Aviation
Administration Order 7400.9V, Airspace Designations and Reporting
Points, dated August 9, 2011, and effective September 15, 2011, is
amended as follows:

Paragraph 5000 Class D airspace.

* * * * *

AEA NY D East Hampton, NY [NEW]

East Hampton Airport, NY
    (Lat. 40[deg]57'34'' N., long. 72[deg]15'06'' W.)

    That airspace extending upward from the surface up to and
including 2,500 feet MSL within a 4.8-mile radius of East Hampton
Airport. This Class D airspace area is effective during specific
dates and times established in advance by a Notice to Airmen. The
effective date and time will thereafter be continuously published in
the Airport/Facility Directory.

Paragraph 6005 Class E airspace areas extending upward from 700
feet or more above the surface of the earth.

* * * * *

AEA NY E5 East Hampton, NY [AMENDED]

East Hampton Airport, NY
    (Lat. 40[deg]57'34'' N., long. 72[deg]15'06'' W.)

    That airspace extending upward from 700 feet above the surface
within a 7.3-mile radius of East Hampton Airport.

    Issued in College Park, Georgia, on June 14, 2012.
Barry A. Knight,
Manager, Operations Support Group, Eastern Service Center, Air Traffic
Organization.
[FR Doc. 2012-15279 Filed 6-21-12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P