[Federal Register: April 11, 2008 (Volume 73, Number 71)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Page 19780-19785]
[DOCID:fr11ap08-16]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Coast Guard

33 CFR Parts 150 and 165

[Docket No. USCG-2007-0087]
RIN 1625-AA00, 1625-AA11, and 1625-AA87

Regulated Navigation Areas, Safety Zones, Security Zones, and
Deepwater Port Facilities; Navigable Waters of the Boston Captain of
the Port Zone

AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS.

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking.

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

SUMMARY: The Coast Guard proposes to establish regulated navigation
areas around a recently constructed deepwater port facility in the
waters of the Atlantic Ocean near the entrance to Boston Harbor and to
establish safety and security zones around liquefied natural gas
carriers (LNGCs) calling on these deepwater port facilities. The
purpose of these regulated navigation areas is to protect vessels and
mariners from the potential safety hazards associated with deepwater
port operations, and to protect the LNGCs and deepwater port
infrastructure from security threats or other subversive acts. All
vessels, with the exception of LNGCs and deepwater port support
vessels, would be prohibited from anchoring or otherwise deploying
equipment that could become entangled in submerged infrastructure
within 1000 meters of the submerged turret loading (STL) buoys
associated with the deepwater port, and would be

prohibited from entering waters within 500 meters of the deepwater port
STL buoys or the LNGCs using them. Additionally, this proposed rule
would make minor amendments to the existing LNG security regulations
for the Boston Captain of the Port (COTP) Zone to reflect multi-agency
enforcement of those regulations.

DATES: Comments and related material must reach the Coast Guard on or
before May 12, 2008.

ADDRESSES: You may submit comments identified by Coast Guard docket
number USCG-2007-0087 to the Docket Management Facility at the U.S.
Department of Transportation. To avoid duplication, please use only one
of the following methods:
    (1) Online: http://www.regulations.gov.
    (2) 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.
    (3) Hand Delivery: Room W12-140 on the Ground Floor of the West
Building, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., Washington, DC 20590, between 9
a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays. The
telephone number is<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    (4) Fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: If you have questions on this proposed
rule, call LCDR Heather Morrison, Coast Guard Sector Boston, at 617-
223-3028, e-mail<EMAIL_ADDRESS>If you have questions on
viewing or submitting material to the docket, call Renee V. Wright,
Program Manager, Docket Operations, telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Public Participation and Request for Comments

    We encourage you to participate in this rulemaking by submitting
comments and related materials. All comments received will be posted,
without change, to http://www.regulations.gov and will include any
personal information you have provided. We have an agreement with the
Department of Transportation (DOT) to use the Docket Management
Facility. Please see DOT's ``Privacy Act'' paragraph below.

Submitting Comments

    If you submit a comment, please include the docket number for this
rulemaking (USCG-2007-0087), indicate the specific section of this
document to which each comment applies, and give the reason for each
comment. We recommend that you include your name and a mailing address,
an e-mail address, or a phone number in the body of your document so
that we can contact you if we have questions regarding your submission.
You may submit your comments and material by electronic means, mail,
fax, or delivery to the Docket Management Facility at the address under
ADDRESSES; but please submit your comments and material by only one
means. If you submit them by mail or delivery, submit them in an
unbound format, no larger than 8\1/2\ by 11 inches, suitable for
copying and electronic filing. If you submit them 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. We may change this
proposed rule in view of them.

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 at
any time, click on ``Search for Dockets,'' and enter the docket number
for this rulemaking (USCG-2007-0087) in the Docket ID box, and click
enter. You may also visit the Docket Management Facility in Room W12-
140 on the ground floor of the DOT West Building, 1200 New Jersey
Avenue SE., Washington, DC 20590, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday
through Friday, except Federal holidays.

Privacy Act

    Anyone can search the electronic form of all 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 the Department of
Transportation's Privacy Act Statement in the Federal Register
published on April 11, 2000 (65 FR 19477), or you may visit http://
DocketsInfo.dot.gov.

Public Meeting

    We do not now plan to hold a public meeting. But you may submit a
request for one to the Docket Management Facility at the address under
ADDRESSES explaining why one would be beneficial. If we determine that
one would aid this rulemaking, we will hold one at a time and place
announced by a later notice in the Federal Register.

Background and Purpose

    On May 14, 2007, the Maritime Administration (MARAD), in accordance
with the Deepwater Port Act of 1974, as amended, issued a license to
Excelerate Energy to own, construct, and operate a natural gas
deepwater port, ``Northeast Gateway.'' Northeast Gateway Deepwater Port
(NEGDWP) is located in the Atlantic Ocean, approximately 13 nautical
miles south-southeast of the City of Gloucester, Massachusetts, in
Federal waters. The coordinates for its two submerged turret loading
(STL) buoys are: STL Buoy A, Latitude 42[deg]23'38'' N, Longitude
070[deg]35'31'' W and STL Buoy B, Latitude 42[deg]23'56'' N, Longitude
070[deg]37'00'' W. The NEGDWP can accommodate the mooring, connecting,
and offloading of two liquefied natural gas carriers (LNGCs) at one
time. The NEGDWP operator plans to offload LNGCs by regasifying the
liquefied natural gas (LNG) on board the vessels. The regasified
natural gas is then transferred through two submerged turret loading
buoys, via a flexible riser leading to a seabed pipeline that ties into
the Algonquin Gas Transmission Pipeline for transfer to shore.
    In order to protect mariners from the hazards associated with
submerged deepwater port infrastructure and to ensure safety and
security at and around LNGCs engaged in regasification and transfer
operations at deepwater ports, the Coast Guard proposes to exercise its
authority under the Ports and Waterway Safety Act (33 U.S.C. 1221, et
seq.) to establish regulated navigation areas (RNAs) around the primary
components of NEGDWP. The RNAs would prohibit vessels from anchoring or
otherwise deploying equipment that could become entangled in submerged
infrastructure within 1000 meters of the STL buoys associated with
NEGDWP facilities. Specifically, in addition to anchoring, vessels
would be precluded from engaging in commercial fishing in the RNAs
using nets, dredges, or traps.
    Under the authority of the Port and Waterways Safety Act (33 U.S.C.
1226) and the Magnuson Act (50 U.S.C. 191), the Coast Guard also
proposes to place safety and security zones within the corresponding
RNAs that would prohibit vessels from entering all waters within a 500-
meter radius of the same STL buoys. The Coast Guard considers the RNAs
that would be established by this rule as meeting the requirement and
intent of the Deepwater Port Act of 1974, as amended, and as codified
at 33 U.S.C. 1509(d). Accordingly, in addition to amending 33 CFR part
165 (Regulated Navigation Areas and Limited Access

Areas), this rulemaking would also amend a corresponding section in 33
CFR part 150 (Deepwater Ports: Operations). The proposed amendments to
33 CFR part 150 include amending that part to reflect a ship's routing
measure--an ``area to be avoided''--that is being concurrently
established in consultation with the International Maritime
Organization. The area to be avoided will be reflected on nautical
charts of the affected area along with the restricted navigation areas
that would be established by this proposed rulemaking.
    This proposed rule would also promote safety and security of LNG
transfer operations by amending the existing regulations regarding
LNGCs in the Boston Captain of the Port (COTP) Zone, to place safety
and security zones around LNGCs while they are anchored, moored, or
otherwise engaged in regasification and transfer procedures with
deepwater ports within the navigable waters of the United States in the
Boston COTP Zone.
    Regulations already exist that provide for safety and security
zones around LNGCs while transiting, anchored, or moored in other
portions of the Boston COTP Zone. These regulations can be found at 33
CFR 165.110. The current regulations provide for safety and security
zones for LNGCs transiting the Boston COTP Zone, anchored in the Broad
Sound, or moored at the Distrigas LNG facility in Everett,
Massachusetts. This rule would amend those regulations to add safety
and security zones around vessels calling at deepwater ports in the
Boston COTP Zone and within the navigable waters of the United States,
as defined in 33 CFR 2.36(a) (i.e., out to 12 nautical miles from the
territorial sea baseline). The proposed rule would add definitions to
make the rule more clear. The proposed rule would eliminate the
definition of ``navigable waters of the United States'' currently found
at 33 CFR 165.110(a) as that paragraph is duplicative of the standard
definition found at 33 CFR 2.36(a). Without these proposed changes, the
security zone around a transiting LNGC would cease to exist once the
vessel moored to NEGDWP. This proposed rule would eliminate that
potential gap in security coverage.
    Finally, this proposed rule would amend the language describing who
may enforce the safety and security zones surrounding LNGCs in the
Boston COTP Zone to better reflect recently executed Memoranda of
Agreement between the Coast Guard and the Commonwealth of
Massachusetts, the City of Boston, and other local municipalities.
Under the terms of these agreements, State and local law enforcement
officers may enforce, on behalf of the Coast Guard, maritime safety and
security zones implemented by the Coast Guard under the authority of
the Magnuson Act and the Port and Waterways Safety Act when falling
within their respective jurisdictions. Copies of these agreements are
available in the public docket for this rule where indicated in the
ADDRESSES section, above.

Discussion of Proposed Rule

    The Coast Guard would establish a regulated navigation area in
which vessels may not anchor within 1000 meters of the STL buoys for
NEGDWP as described above. Additionally, safety and security zones
within the RNA would be established to prohibit vessels, other than
LNGCs and support vessels as defined in 33 CFR 148.5, from entering
waters within 500 meters of the aforementioned STL buoys.
    The Coast Guard also proposes to establish safety and security
zones encompassing all waters within a 500-meter radius of vessels
carrying LNG while they are anchored, moored, or attached to or
otherwise engaged in regasification or transfer procedures with
deepwater ports.
    Additionally, the Coast Guard intends to amend 33 CFR Part 150 to
reflect a recommendatory ship's routing measure--an ``area to be
avoided''--that is being concurrently established with, but separate
and apart from, this rulemaking in consultation with the International
Maritime Organization.
    Finally, this proposed rule would alter the existing language of
the regulations for LNGCs operating in the Boston COTP Zone to reflect
the fact that federal, state, and local, law enforcement personnel may
enforce such zones within their respective jurisdictions on behalf of
the COTP.

Regulatory Evaluation

    This proposed rule is not a ``significant regulatory action'' under
section 3(f) of Executive Order 12866, Regulatory Planning and Review,
and does not require an assessment of potential costs and benefits
under section 6(a)(3) of that Order. The Office of Management and
Budget has not reviewed it under that Order.
    The USCG and MARAD are responsible for processing license
applications to own, construct, and operate deepwater ports. To meet
the requirements of the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969
(NEPA), the Coast Guard, in cooperation with MARAD, prepared an
Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) in conjunction with reviewing the
NEGDWP licensing application. Among other things, the EIS assessed the
potential economic impacts associated with the construction and
operation of NEGDWP, including the no anchoring and limited access
areas that would be implemented by this rule. That EIS is available in
the public docket for the licensing application (USCG-2005-22219) at
http://www.regulations.gov.

Small Entities

    Under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601-612), we have
considered whether this proposed rule would have a significant economic
impact on a substantial number of small entities. 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 proposed
rule would not have a significant economic impact on a substantial
number of small entities. This rule will affect the following entities,
some of which may be small entities: The owners or operators of vessels
intending to transit or fish within 1000 meters of the STL Buoys for
NEGDWP. The impact on small entities is expected to be minimal because
vessels wishing to transit the Atlantic Ocean in the vicinity of the
deepwater port may do so, provided they remain more than 500 meters
from NEGDWP's STL Buoys and any LNGC vessels calling on the deepwater
port, and provided they refrain from anchoring or deploying nets,
dredges, or traps, within 1000 meters of the STL Buoys. Vessels wishing
to fish in the area may do so in nearby and adjoining areas when
otherwise permitted by applicable fisheries regulations.
    If you think that your business, organization, or governmental
jurisdiction qualifies as a small entity and that this rule would have
a significant economic impact on it, please submit a comment (see
ADDRESSES) explaining why you think it qualifies and how and to what
degree this rule would economically affect it.

Assistance for Small Entities

    Under section 213(a) of the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement
Fairness Act of 1996 (Pub. L. 104-121), we want to assist small
entities in understanding this proposed rule so that they can better
evaluate its effects on them and participate in the rulemaking. 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 LCDR Heather Morrison, Coast
Guard Sector Boston, at<PHONE_NUMBER>, e-mail:
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>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.

Collection of Information

    This proposed rule would call for no new collection of information
under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501-3520).

Federalism

    A rule has implications for federalism under Executive Order 13132,
Federalism, if it has a substantial direct effect on State or local
governments and would either preempt State law or impose a substantial
direct cost of compliance on them. We have analyzed this proposed rule
under that Order and have determined that it does not have implications
for federalism.

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 or more in any
one year. Though this proposed rule would not result in such an
expenditure, we do discuss the effects of this rule elsewhere in this
preamble.

Taking of Private Property

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

Civil Justice Reform

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

Protection of Children

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

Indian Tribal Governments

    This proposed 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.

Energy Effects

    We have analyzed this proposed rule under Executive Order 13211,
Actions Concerning Regulations That Significantly Affect Energy Supply,
Distribution, or Use. We have determined that it is not a ``significant
energy action'' under that order because it is not a ``significant
regulatory action'' under Executive Order 12866 and is not likely to
have a significant adverse effect on the supply, distribution, or use
of energy. The Administrator of the Office of Information and
Regulatory Affairs has not designated it as a significant energy
action. Therefore, it does not require a Statement of Energy Effects
under Executive Order 13211.

Technical Standards

    The National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act (NTTAA) (15
U.S.C. 272 note) directs agencies to use voluntary consensus standards
in their regulatory activities unless the agency provides Congress,
through the Office of Management and Budget, with an explanation of why
using these standards would be inconsistent with applicable law or
otherwise impractical. Voluntary consensus standards are technical
standards (e.g., specifications of materials, performance, design, or
operation; test methods; sampling procedures; and related management
systems practices) that are developed or adopted by voluntary consensus
standards bodies.
    This proposed rule does not use technical standards. Therefore, we
did not consider the use of voluntary consensus standards.

Environment

    We have analyzed this rule under Commandant Instruction M16475.1D,
which guides the Coast Guard in complying with the National
Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (NEPA) (4321-4370f), and have made a
preliminary determination that this action is not likely to have a
significant effect on the human environment. A preliminary
``Environmental Analysis Check List'' supporting this preliminary
determination is 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 proposed
rule.

List of Subjects

33 CFR Part 150

    Harbors, Marine safety, Navigation (water), Occupational safety and
health, Oil pollution, and Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.

33 CFR Part 165

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

Words of Issuance and Proposed Regulatory Text

    For the reasons discussed in the preamble, the Coast Guard proposes
to amend 33 CFR Parts 150 and 165 as follows:

PART 150--DEEPWATER PORTS: OPERATIONS

    1. The authority citation for Part 150 continues to read as
follows:

    Authority: 33 U.S.C. 1231, 1321(j)(1)(C), (j)(5), (j)(6),
(m)(2); 33 U.S.C. 1509(a); E.O. 12777, sec. 2; E.O. 13286, sec. 34,
68 FR 10619; Department of Homeland Security Delegation No.
0170.1(70), (73), (75), (80).

    2. In Sec.  150.940, add paragraph (c) to read as follows:

Sec.  150.940  Safety zones for specific deepwater ports.

* * * * *
    (c) Northeast Gateway Deepwater Port (NEGDWP).
    (1) Location. The safety zones for the NEGDWP consist of circular
zones, each with a 500-meter radius and centered on each of the
deepwater port's two submerged turret loading (STL) buoys. STL Buoy
``A'' is centered at the following coordinates: 42[deg]23'38'' N,
070[deg]35'31'' W. STL Buoy ``B'' is centered at the following
coordinates: 42[deg]23'56'' N, 070[deg]37'00'' W. Each safety zone
encompasses, within the respective 500-meter circles, the primary
components of NEGDWP, including a submerged loading turret (buoy) and a
pipeline end manifold (STL/PLEM). Each safety zone is located
approximately 13 miles south-southeast of the City of Gloucester,
Massachusetts, in Federal waters.
    (2) No anchoring area. Two mandatory no anchoring areas for NEGDWP
are established for all waters within circles of 1,000-meter radii

centered on the submerged turret loading buoy positions set forth in
paragraph (c)(1) of this section.
    (3) Area to be avoided. An area to be avoided (ATBA) that is
approximately 2.8625 square nautical miles in size has been established
surrounding the safety zones and no anchoring areas described in
paragraphs (c)(1) and (2), of this section, and is bounded as follows:
    Starting at point (i) 42[deg]24'17'' N, 070[deg]35'16'' W; then a
rhumb line to point (ii) 42[deg]24'35'' N, 070[deg]36'46'' W; then an
arc with a 1250 m radius centered at point (iii) 42[deg]23'56'' N,
070[deg]37'00'' W, to a point (iv) 42[deg]23'17'' N, 070[deg]37'15'' W;
then a rhumb line to point (v) 42[deg]22'59'' N, 070[deg]35'45'' W;
then an arc with a 1250 m radius centered at point (vi) 42[deg]23'38''
N, 070[deg]35'31'' W, to start.
    (4) Regulations. (i) In accordance with the general regulations set
forth in 33 CFR 165.23 and elsewhere in this part, no person or vessel
may enter the waters within the boundaries of the safety zones
described in paragraph (c)(1) of this section unless previously
authorized by the Captain of the Port (COTP) Boston, or his/her
authorized representative.
    (ii) Notwithstanding paragraph (c)(4)(i) of this section, tankers
and support vessels, as defined in 33 CFR 148.5, operating in the
vicinity of NEGDWP are authorized to enter and move within such zones
in the normal course of their operations following the requirements set
forth in 33 CFR 150.340 and 150.345, respectively.
    (iii) All other vessel operators desiring to enter or operate
within the safety zones described in paragraph (c)(1) of this section
must contact the COTP or the COTP's authorized representative to obtain
permission by calling the Sector Boston Command Center at<PHONE_NUMBER>.
Vessel operators given permission to enter or operate in the safety
zone must comply with all directions given to them by the COTP or the
COTP's authorized representative.
    (iv) No vessel, other than a support vessel or tanker calling on
NEGDWP, may anchor in the area described in paragraph (c)(2) of this
section.

PART 165--WATERWAYS SAFETY; REGULATED NAVIGATION AREAS AND LIMITED
ACCESS AREAS

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

    Authority: 33 U.S.C. 1226, 1231; 46 U.S.C. Chapter 701, 3306,
3703; 50 U.S.C. 191, 195; 33 CFR 1.05-1, 6.04-1, 6.04-6, 160.5; Pub.
L. 107-295, 116 Stat. 2064; Department of Homeland Security
Delegation No. 0170.1.

    4. In Sec.  165.110, revise paragraphs (a), (c)(2), and (c)(3); and
add paragraph (b)(4) to read as follows:

Sec.  165.110  Safety and Security Zone; Liquefied Natural Gas Carrier
Transits and Anchorage Operations, Boston, Massachusetts.

    (a) Definitions. As used in this section--
    Authorized representative means a Coast Guard commissioned,
warrant, or petty officer or a Federal, State, or local law enforcement
officer designated by or assisting the Captain of the Port (COTP)
Boston.
    Deepwater port means any facility or structure meeting the
definition of deepwater port in 33 CFR 148.5.
    Support vessel means any vessel meeting the definition of support
vessel in 33 CFR 148.5.
    (b) * * *
    (4) Vessels calling on a deepwater port. All waters within a 500-
meter radius of any LNGC engaged in regasification or transfer, or
otherwise moored, anchored, or affixed to a deepwater port listed in 33
CFR 150.490 and falling within the waters of the Boston COTP Zone, as
defined in 33 CFR 3.05-10.
    (c) * * *
    (2) No person or vessel may enter the waters within the boundaries
of the safety and security zones described in paragraph (b) of this
section unless previously authorized by the COTP Boston, or his/her
authorized representative. However, LNGCs and support vessels, as
defined in 33 CFR 148.5, operating in the vicinity of NEGDWP are
authorized to enter and move within such zones in the normal course of
their operations following the requirements set forth in 33 CFR 150.340
and 150.345, respectively.
    (3) All vessels operating within the safety and security zones
described in paragraph (b) of this section must comply with the
instructions of the COTP or his/her authorized representative.
    5. Add Sec.  165.117 to read as follows:

Sec.  165.117  Regulated Navigation Areas, Safety and Security Zones:
Deepwater Ports, First Coast Guard District.

    (a) Location. (1) Regulated navigation areas. All waters within a
1,000-meter radius of the geographical positions set forth in paragraph
(a)(3) of this section are designated as regulated navigation areas.
    (2) Safety and security zones. All waters within a 500-meter radius
of the geographic positions set forth in paragraph (a)(3) of this
section are designated as safety and security zones.
    (3) Coordinates. (i) The geographic coordinates forming the loci
for the regulated navigation areas, safety, and security zones for
Northeast Gateway Deepwater Port are: 42[deg]23'38'' N, 070[deg]35'31''
W; and 42[deg]23'56'' N, 070[deg]37'00'' W.
    (ii) [Reserved]
    (b) Definitions. As used in this section--
    Authorized representative means a Coast Guard commissioned,
warrant, or petty officer or a Federal, State, or local law enforcement
officer designated by or assisting the Captain of the Port (COTP)
Boston.
    Deepwater port means any facility or structure meeting the
definition of deepwater port in 33 CFR 148.5.
    Dredge means fishing gear consisting of a mouth frame attached to a
holding bag constructed of metal rings or mesh.
    Support vessel means any vessel meeting the definition of support
vessel in 33 CFR 148.5.
    Trap means a portable, enclosed device with one or more gates or
entrances and one or more lines attached to surface floats used for
fishing. Also called a pot.
    (c) Applicability. This section applies to all vessels operating in
the regulated navigation areas set forth in paragraph (a) of this
section, except--
    (1) Those vessels conducting cargo transfer operations with the
deepwater ports whose coordinates are provided in paragraph (a)(3) of
this section,
    (2) Support vessels operating in conjunction therewith, and
    (3) Coast Guard vessels or other law enforcement vessels operated
by or under the direction of an authorized representative of the COTP
Boston.
    (d) Regulations. (1) No vessel may anchor or engage in commercial
fishing using nets, dredges, or traps (pots) in the regulated
navigation areas set forth in paragraph (a)(1) of this section.
    (2) In accordance with the general regulations in Sec. Sec.  165.23
and 165.33 of this part, entry into or movement within the safety and
security zones designated in paragraph (a)(2) of this section is
prohibited unless authorized by the COTP Boston, or his/her authorized
representative.
    (3) Notwithstanding paragraph (d)(2) of this section, tankers and
support vessels, as defined in 33 CFR 148.5, operating in the vicinity
of NEGDWP are authorized to enter and move within such zones in the
normal course of their operations following the requirements set forth
in 33 CFR 150.340 and 150.345, respectively.
    (4) All vessels operating within the safety and security zones
described in paragraph (a)(2) of this section must

comply with the instructions of the COTP or his/her authorized
representative.

    Dated: March 26, 2008.
T.V. Skuby,
Captain, U.S. Coast Guard, Acting Commander, First Coast Guard
District.
 [FR Doc. E8-7676 Filed 4-10-08; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4910-15-P


[Federal Register Volume 79, Number 73 (Wednesday, April 16, 2014)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Page 21413]
[FR Doc No: 2014-08564]

========================================================================
Proposed Rules
                                                Federal Register
________________________________________________________________________

This section of the FEDERAL REGISTER contains notices to the public of
the proposed issuance of rules and regulations. The purpose of these
notices is to give interested persons an opportunity to participate in
the rule making prior to the adoption of the final rules.

========================================================================

Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 73 / Wednesday, April 16, 2014 /
Proposed Rules

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 25

[Docket No. FAA-2013-0109; Notice No. 13-03 and Docket No. FAA-2013-
0142; Notice No. 13-04]
RIN 2120-AK13, 2120-AK12

Harmonization of Airworthiness Standards--Miscellaneous
Structures Requirements and Harmonization of Airworthiness Standards--
Gust and Maneuver Load Requirements; Corrections

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Proposed rules; corrections.

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

SUMMARY: The Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) is correcting notice
numbers that appear in the heading of two notices of proposed
rulemakings published in the Federal Register. The publications are
``Harmonization of Airworthiness Standards--Miscellaneous Structures
Requirements'' (78 FR 13835, March 1, 2013) and ``Harmonization of
Airworthiness Standards--Gust and Maneuver Load Requirements'' (78 FR
31851, May 28, 2013). These actions address regulatory differences
between the airworthiness standards of the FAA and the European
Aviation Safety Agency, without affecting current industry design
practices.

DATES: Effective on April 16, 2014.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ralen Gao, Office of Rulemaking, ARM-
209, Federal Aviation Administration, 800 Independence Avenue SW.,
Washington, DC 20591; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax<PHONE_NUMBER>;
email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The FAA published a notice of proposed
rulemaking (NPRM) in the Federal Register on March 1, 2013 (78 FR
13835) regarding certain airworthiness standards for transport category
airplanes that would eliminate regulatory differences between the
airworthiness standards of the FAA and the European Aviation Safety
Agency (EASA). This document corrects an inadvertent notice number that
appears in the heading of the publication of that NPRM.
    The FAA published an NPRM in the Federal Register on May 28, 2013
(78 FR 31851), regarding certain airworthiness standards that would
eliminate regulatory differences between the airworthiness standards of
the FAA and the European Aviation Safety Agency (EASA). This document
corrects an inadvertent notice number that appears in the heading of
the publication of that NPRM. This incorrect notice number also
appeared in the heading of two related correction documents published
on June 24, 2013 and July 16, 2013.

Corrections

    In FR Doc. 2013-04812, beginning on page 13835 in the Federal
Register of March 1, 2013, make the following correction:
    On page 13835, in the first column heading, change the notice
number from ``25-137'' to ``13-03''.
    In FR Doc. 2013-12445, beginning on page 31851 in the Federal
Register of May 28, 2013, make the following correction:
    On page 31851, in the first column heading, change the notice
number from ``25-139'' to ``13-04''.
    In FR Doc. C1-2013-12445, beginning on page 37722 in the Federal
Register of June 24, 2013, make the following correction:
    On page 37722, in the third column heading, change the notice
number from ``25-139'' to ``13-04''.
    Finally, in FR Doc. C2-2013-12445, beginning on page 42480 in the
Federal Register of July 16, 2013, make the following correction:
    On page 42480, in the first column second heading, change the
notice number from ``25-139'' to ``13-04''.

    Issued in Washington, DC, on April 10, 2014.
Lirio Liu
Director, Office of Rulemaking.
[FR Doc. 2014-08564 Filed 4-15-14; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


[Federal Register Volume 79, Number 173 (Monday, September 8, 2014)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 53133-53134]
[FR Doc No: 2014-21266]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES

Food and Drug Administration

21 CFR Parts 310, 314, 329, and 600

[Docket No. FDA-2008-N-0334]
RIN 0910-AF96

Postmarketing Safety Reports for Human Drug and Biological
Products; Electronic Submission Requirements; Correction

AGENCY: Food and Drug Administration, HHS.

ACTION: Final rule; correction.

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

SUMMARY: The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) is correcting a final
rule entitled ``Postmarketing Safety Reports for Human Drug and
Biological Products; Electronic Submission Requirements'' that appeared
in the Federal Register of June 10, 2014 (79 FR 33072). The document
amended FDA's postmarketing safety reporting regulations for human drug
and biological products to require that persons subject to mandatory
reporting requirements submit safety reports in an electronic format
that FDA can process, review, and archive. The document was published
with an incorrect RIN number. This document corrects the error.

DATES: Effective date: September 8, 2014.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Jean Chung, Center for Drug Evaluation
and Research, Food and Drug Administration, 10903 New Hampshire Ave.,
Bldg. 22, Rm. 4466, Silver Spring, MD 20993-0002,<PHONE_NUMBER>; or
Stephen Ripley, Center for Biologics Evaluation and Research, Food and
Drug Administration, 10903 New Hampshire Ave., Bldg. 71, Rm. 7268,
Silver Spring, MD 20993-0002,<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: In the Federal Register of June 10, 2014, in
FR Doc. 2014-13480, the following correction is made:
    1. On page 33073, in the third column, the RIN number heading is
corrected to read ``RIN 0910-AF96''.

    Dated: September 2, 2014.
Leslie Kux,
Assistant Commissioner for Policy.
[FR Doc. 2014-21266 Filed 9-5-14; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4164-01-P


[Federal Register: May 17, 2010 (Volume 75, Number 94)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Page 27494-27495]
[DOCID:fr17my10-28]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 71

[Docket No. FAA-2010 0182; Airspace Docket No. 10-ASW-4]

Proposed Amendment of Class E Airspace; Pauls Valley, OK

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM).

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

SUMMARY: This action proposes to amend Class E airspace at Pauls
Valley, OK. Additional controlled airspace is necessary to accommodate
new Standard Instrument Approach Procedures (SIAPs) at Pauls Valley
Municipal Airport. The FAA is taking this action to enhance the safety
and management of Instrument Flight Rules (IFR) operations at the
airport.

DATES: Comments must be received on or before July 1, 2010.

ADDRESSES: Send comments on this proposal to the U.S. Department of
Transportation, Docket Operations, 1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE., West
Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140, Washington, DC 20590-0001. You
must identify the docket number FAA-2010 0182/Airspace Docket No. 10-
ASW-4, at the beginning of your comments. You may also submit comments
through the Internet at http://www.regulations.gov. You may review the
public docket containing the proposal, any comments received, and any
final disposition in person in the Dockets Office between 9 a.m. and 5
p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays. The Docket Office
(telephone 1-800-647-5527), is on the ground floor of the building at
the above address.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Scott Enander, Central Service Center,
Operations Support Group, Federal Aviation Administration, Southwest
Region, 2601 Meacham Blvd., Fort Worth, TX 76137; telephone: 817-321-
7716.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Comments Invited

    Interested parties are invited to participate in this proposed
rulemaking by submitting such written data, views, or arguments, as
they may desire. Comments that provide the factual basis supporting the
views and suggestions presented are particularly helpful in developing
reasoned regulatory decisions on the proposal. Comments are
specifically invited on the overall regulatory, aeronautical, economic,
environmental, and energy-related aspects of the proposal.
Communications should identify both docket numbers and be submitted in
triplicate to the address listed above. Commenters wishing the FAA to
acknowledge receipt of their comments on this notice must submit with
those comments a self-addressed, stamped postcard on which the
following statement is made: ``Comments to Docket No. FAA-2010 0182/
Airspace Docket No. 10-ASW-4.'' The postcard will be date/time stamped
and returned to the commenter.

Availability of NPRMs

    An electronic copy of this document may be downloaded through the
Internet at http://www.regulations.gov. Recently published rulemaking
documents can also be accessed through the FAA's Web page at http://
www.faa.gov/airports_airtraffic/air_traffic/publications/airspace_
amendments/.
    You may review the public docket containing the proposal, any
comments received and any final disposition in person in the Dockets
Office (see ADDRESSES section for address and phone number) between 9
a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays. An
informal docket may also be examined during normal business hours at
the office of the Central Service Center, 2601 Meacham Blvd., Fort
Worth, TX 76137.
    Persons interested in being placed on a mailing list for future
NPRMs should contact the FAA's Office of Rulemaking<PHONE_NUMBER>, to
request a copy of Advisory Circular No. 11-2A, Notice of Proposed
Rulemaking Distribution System, which describes the application
procedure.

The Proposal

    This action proposes to amend Title 14, Code of Federal Regulations
(14 CFR), Part 71 by adding additional Class E airspace extending
upward from 700 feet above the surface for SIAPs at Pauls Valley
Municipal Airport, Pauls Valley, OK. Adjustments to the geographic
coordinates would be made in

accordance with the FAA's National Aerospace Charting Office.
Controlled airspace is needed for the safety and management of IFR
operations at the airport.
    Class E airspace areas are published in Paragraph 6005 of FAA Order
7400.9T, dated August 27, 2009, and effective September 15, 2009, which
is incorporated by reference in 14 CFR 71.1. The Class E airspace
designation listed in this document would be published subsequently in
the Order.
    The FAA has determined that this proposed regulation only involves
an established body of technical regulations for which frequent and
routine amendments are necessary to keep them operationally current.
It, therefore, (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 U.S. Code. Subtitle 1, 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 would add additional controlled airspace at Pauls Valley
Municipal Airport, Pauls Valley, OK.

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 71

    Airspace, Incorporation by reference, Navigation (Air).

The Proposed Amendment

    In consideration of the foregoing, the Federal Aviation
Administration proposes to amend 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

    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]

    2. The incorporation by reference in 14 CFR 71.1 of FAA Order
7400.9T, Airspace Designations and Reporting Points, signed August 27,
2009, and effective September 15, 2009, is amended as follows:

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

* * * * *

ASW OK E5 Pauls Valley, OK [Amended]

Pauls Valley Municipal Airport, OK
    (Lat. 34[deg]42'34'' N., long. 97[deg]13'24'' W.)
Pauls Valley NDB
    (Lat. 34[deg]42'55'' N., long. 97[deg]13'44'' W.)

    That airspace extending upward from 700 feet above the surface
within a 6.6-mile radius of Pauls Valley Municipal Airport and
within 2.6 miles each side of the 169[deg] bearing from the Pauls
Valley NDB extending from the 6.6-mile radius to 7.6 miles south of
the airport, and within 4 miles each side of the 000[deg] bearing
from the airport extending from the 6.6-mile radius to 11.5 miles
north of the airport.

    Issued in Fort Worth, TX, on May 7, 2010.
Anthony D. Roetzel,
Manager, Operations Support Group, ATO Central Service Center.
[FR Doc. 2010-11712 Filed 5-14-10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4901-13-P


[Federal Register: July 15, 2009 (Volume 74, Number 134)]
[Notices]
[Page 34323-34324]
[DOCID:fr15jy09-75]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Project No. 12662-002]

Renewable Resources, Inc.; Notice of Application Tendered for
Filing With the Commission, Soliciting Additional Study Requests, and
Establishing Procedual Schedule for Licensing and Deadline for
Submission of Final Amendments

July 8, 2009.
    Take notice that the following hydroelectric application has been
filed with the Commission and is available for public inspection.
    a. Type of Application: Exemption From Licensing.
    b. Project No.: P-12662-002.
    c. Date Filed: July 1, 2009.
    d. Applicant: Renewable Resources, Inc.
    e. Name of Project: Swift River Mill Hydroelectric Project.
    f. Location: On the Pawcatuck River in Washington County, Rhode
Island. The project would not occupy lands of the United States.

    g. Filed Pursuant to: Public Utilities Regulatory Policies Act of
1978, 16 U.S.C. 2705, 2708
    h. Applicant Contact: Edward Carapezza, P.O. Box 365, Hopkinton, RI
02833,<PHONE_NUMBER>
    i. FERC Contact: Tom Dean,<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    j. Cooperating Agencies: We are asking Federal, State, and local
agencies and Indian tribes with jurisdiction and/or special expertise
with respect to environmental issues to cooperate with us in the
preparation of the environmental document. Agencies who would like to
request cooperating status should follow the instructions for filing
comments described in item l below.
    k. Pursuant to Section 4.32(b)(7) of 18 CFR of the Commission's
regulations, if any resource agency, Indian Tribe, or person believes
that an additional scientific study should be conducted in order to
form an adequate factual basis for a complete analysis of the
application on its merit, the resource agency, Indian Tribe, or person
must file a request for a study with the Commission not later than 60
days from the date of filing of the application, and serve a copy of
the request on the applicant.
    l. Deadline for filing additional study requests and requests for
cooperating agency status: August 31, 2009.
    All documents (original and eight copies) should be filed with:
Kimberly D. Bose, Secretary, Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888
First Street, NE., Washington, DC 20426.
    Additional study requests and requests for cooperating agency
status may be filed electronically via the Internet in lieu of paper.
The Commission strongly encourages electronic filings. See 18 CFR
385.2001(a)(1)(iii) and the instructions on the Commission's Web site
at (http://www.ferc.gov) under the ``eFiling'' link.
    m. This application is not ready for environmental analysis at this
time.
    n. Description of Project: The Swift River Mill Project would
consist of: (1) The existing 10-foot-high, 112-foot-long Swift River
Mill dam impounding; (2) an existing 36-acre reservoir with a normal
water surface elevation of 26 feet National Geodetic Vertical Datum;
(3) an existing fish ladder facility; (4) an existing 8.5-foot-wide,
40-foot-long power canal, and an existing 10-foot-wide, 40-foot-long
power canal leading to; (5) an existing 16.5-foot-wide, 100-foot-long
power canal connecting; (6) an existing mill building containing two
new turbine generating units with a total installed capacity of 360
kilowatts (kW) discharging water to; (7) an existing 16-foot-wide, 40-
foot-long tailrace; and (8) appurtenant facilities. Project power would
be transmitted through a new underground 300-foot-long, 480 kilovolt
transmission line.
    In addition to above, the project would also consist of two new
vortex water aerator turbine generating units with a combined installed
capacity of 30 kW, one unit located on the west bank and one unit
located on the east bank of the Pawcatuck River just downstream of the
Swift River Mill dam. The project would have an average annual
generation of about 2,870 megawatt-hours.
    o. A copy of the application is available for review at the
Commission in the Public Reference Room or may be viewed on the
Commission's Web site at http://www.ferc.gov using the ``eLibrary''
link. Enter the docket number excluding the three digits in the docket
number field to access the document. For assistance, please contact
FERC Online Support at<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or toll free at (866)
208-3676, or for TTY, contact<PHONE_NUMBER>. A copy is also available
for inspection and reproduction at the address in item h above.
    You may also register online at http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/
esubscription.asp to be notified via e-mail of new filings and
issuances related to this or other pending projects. For assistance,
contact FERC Online Support.
    p. With this notice, we are initiating consultation with the
Connecticut State Historic Preservation Officer (SHPO), as required by
section 106, National Historic Preservation Act, and the regulations of
the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation, 36 CFR 800.4.
    q. Procedural schedule and final amendments: The application will
be processed according to the following Hydro Licensing Schedule.
Revisions to the schedule will be made as appropriate. The Commission
staff proposes to issue one environmental assessment rather than issue
a draft and final EA. Comments, terms and conditions, recommendations,
prescriptions, and reply comments, if any, will be addressed in an EA.
Staff intents to give at least 30 days for entities to comment on the
EA, and will take into consideration all comments received on the EA
before final action is taken on the license application.
    Issue Acceptance Letter or Deficiency Letter--October 2009.
    Issue Scoping Document--January 2010.
    Notice of application is ready for environmental analysis--February
2010.
    Notice of the availability of the EA--July 2010.
    Final amendments to the application must be filed with the
Commission no later than 30 days from the issuance date of the notice
of ready for environmental analysis.

Kimberly D. Bose,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. E9-16719 Filed 7-14-09; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register: March 2, 2009 (Volume 74, Number 39)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Page 9049]
[DOCID:fr02mr09-3]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES

Food and Drug Administration

21 CFR Part 522

[Docket No. FDA-2009-N-0665]

Implantation or Injectable Dosage Form New Animal Drugs;
Ivermectin

AGENCY:  Food and Drug Administration, HHS.

ACTION:  Final rule.

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

SUMMARY:  The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) is amending the animal
drug regulations to reflect approval of a supplemental abbreviated new
animal drug application (ANADA) filed by IVX Animal Health, Inc. The
supplemental ANADA adds claims for persistent effectiveness against
various species of external and internal parasites when cattle are
treated with a 1-percent ivermectin solution by subcutaneous injection.

DATES:  This rule is effective March 2, 2009.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:  John K. Harshman, Center for
Veterinary Medicine (HFV-104), Food and Drug Administration, 7500
Standish Pl., Rockville, MD 20855,<PHONE_NUMBER>, e-mail:
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: IVX Animal Health, Inc., 3915 South 48th
Street Ter., St. Joseph, MO 64503, filed a supplement to ANADA 200-228
that provides for use of PHOENECTIN (ivermectin) Injection 1% for the
treatment and control of parasites in cattle. The supplemental ANADA
adds claims for persistent effectiveness against various species of
external and internal parasites of cattle. The supplemental ANADA is
approved as of January 23, 2009, and the regulations are amended in 21
CFR 522.1192 to reflect the approval.
    In accordance with the freedom of information provisions of 21 CFR
part 20 and 21 CFR 514.11(e)(2)(ii), a summary of safety and
effectiveness data and information submitted to support approval of
this application may be seen in the Division of Dockets Management
(HFA-305), Food and Drug Administration, 5630 Fishers Lane, rm. 1061,
Rockville, MD 20852, between 9 a.m. and 4 p.m., Monday through Friday.
    The agency has determined under 21 CFR 25.33(a)(1) that this action
is of a type that does not individually or cumulatively have a
significant effect on the human environment. Therefore, neither an
environmental assessment nor an environmental impact statement is
required.
    This rule does not meet the definition of ``rule'' in 5 U.S.C.
804(3)(A) because it is a rule of ``particular applicability.''
Therefore, it is not subject to the congressional review requirements
in 5 U.S.C. 801-808.

List of Subjects in 21 CFR Part 522

    Animal drugs.

0
Therefore, under the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act and under
authority delegated to the Commissioner of Food and Drugs and
redelegated to the Center for Veterinary Medicine, 21 CFR part 522 is
amended as follows:

PART 522--IMPLANTATION OR INJECTABLE DOSAGE FORM NEW ANIMAL DRUGS

0
1. The authority citation for 21 CFR part 522 continues to read as
follows:

    Authority: 21 U.S.C. 360b.

Sec.  522.1192  [Amended]

0
2. In Sec.  522.1192, in paragraph (b)(2), remove ``No. 055529'' and in
its place add ``Nos. 055529 and 059130''; and remove paragraph (b)(3).

    Dated: February 18, 2009.
Steven D. Vaughn,
Director, Office of New Animal Drug Evaluation, Center for Veterinary
Medicine.
[FR Doc. E9-4304 Filed 2-27-09; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4160-01-S


effect timbre include: the relative strength of the tonal and noise
character of the sound (pitch strength and

tonality); the number of harmonics (harmonic richness); and the
relative level of high frequencies and low frequencies components
(sharpness and dullness). Temporal characteristics include the
musical concepts of ``attack, sustain, and decay'' as well as
``vibrato'' or modulations. A violin, a muted bell, and a voice can
all create a sound at the same pitch and loudness, but the violin
will have a short attack, long sustain, and moderate decay. The
muted bell will have a short attack, a short sustain, and a short
decay. The voice will have a long attack, a moderate sustain, and a
moderate decay. The violin and voice can be expressed either with or
without vibrato (modulations).
    Temporal effects on timbre can also be considered outside of the
musical context. Humans can perceive sounds as being constant,
changing or impulsive. A sound is perceived to be constant when the
physical aspects, such as the tonal frequencies and levels, are
unvarying and steady. An example would be standing next to an idling
vehicle. Since the car is stationary and the engine speed is
constant, the sound emitted from the engine does not vary
significantly (assuming a well-functioning engine). Slow changes in
pitch or loudness at a rate of about [frac12] second or longer lead
to the perception of a changing sound. A good example of a changing
sound is that of a siren on an emergency vehicle. If the rate of
change is very quick, for example over a time less than [frac12]
second, the sound will be perceived as impulsive. Sound with a very
high rate of change such as gun fire and individual combustions
produce impulsive sounds.
    It is rare that humans hear only one sound at a time. This is
because one sound may overshadow, very closely resemble, or
interfere with the perception of another sound that does not share
the same physical characteristics. When one sound interferes with
the perception of another sound, it is called masking. The masking
threshold is the point at which one sound's audibility or
detectability is lost because of the masking sound. It can be
measured in the laboratory by presenting subjects with different
target sounds (stimuli) of different amplitudes and frequencies in
combination with various masking sounds, and testing the subjects to
determine under which conditions they can detect the targets. The
level of the masking sound is used as an indicator of the amount
masking the sound provided for the stimulus.

How is sound quantified?

    Sound is most commonly quantified in decibels (dB). A decibel is
a logarithmic unit of magnitude based on the ratio of two powers. In
terms of acoustics, the ratio, commonly referred to as the sound
pressure level, is between the mean-squared acoustic pressure
relative to a reference mean-squared acoustic pressure. The
reference for sound pressure level measurements in air is typically
20 micro-Pascals. However, when sounds are processed electronically,
standard practice is to represent their intensity on a dB scale
where 0 is the maximum amplitude that can be handled without
distortion. In this frame of reference, levels are usually negative
numbers.
    Usually, acoustic equipment used for measurements is A-weighted
to approximate the frequency response of human hearing (see Figure
2) to sounds of moderate loudness.
    The distribution of acoustic energy in a sound can be
represented graphically with a full spectrum plot, like that shown
in Figure 3, or more compactly by breaking the spectrum into a
relatively small number of bands, usually 30 for a one-third octave
analysis, shown in Figure 4.

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP14JA13.036

    Due to the breadth of this spectrum, octave bands and one-third
octave band scales were created to facilitate identifying the
specific frequency of sounds. Octave bands separate the range of
human audible frequencies into ten bands and the one-third octave
bands split each of the ten octave bands into three bands. Each
scale in the breakdown provides more information about the sound
being analyzed. An octave band is split by the interval between two
frequencies and identified by the center frequency within the bands:
31.5 Hz, 63 Hz, 125 Hz, 250 Hz, 500 Hz, 1 kHz, 2 kHz, 4 kHz, 8, kHz
and 16 kHz. Since there are ten octaves, there are 30 one-third
octave bands. A one-third octave band extends from one-sixth of an
octave below the center frequency to one-sixth above an octave
frequency. The measurement of how humans perceive the loudness of a
sound is dependent on the sound pressure level and

can be used as a way to determine the annoyance qualities of a
sound. The values from a one-third-octave analysis can also be
easily presented in tabular form (Table 1), while those from a full-
spectrum cannot.

Table 8--Example of One-Third-Octave Data in Tabular Form: Summary of Ambient Levels during ICE Measurements, A-
                                              weighted Level, dB(A)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                  Linear average
    \1/3\ octave band center       (\1/3\ octave  Min (overall A- Max (overall A-   Min (\1/3\      Max (\1/3\
          frequency, Hz                band)         weighted)       weighted)     octave band)    octave band)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
100 to 20k......................            49.6            46.1            53.4            45.3            54.7
100.............................            34.6            30.7            34.1            30.7            38.4
125.............................            35.5            32.4            36.8            32.4            42.1
160.............................            36.1            32.1            37.9            32.0            41.5
200.............................            36.9            32.7            37.9            32.7            41.2
250.............................            36.5            33.9            38.1            33.1            40.7
315.............................            36.5            32.5            37.6            32.1            41.5
400.............................            36.0            31.9            38.1            31.8            39.7
500.............................            36.7            33.6            39.8            33.1            41.1
630.............................            38.2            34.4            41.7            34.0            42.2
800.............................            40.2            36.0            46.1            35.8            46.1
1k..............................            41.1            36.4            46.4            36.4            46.4
12.5k...........................            40.0            35.3            45.1            35.3            45.1
16k.............................            37.6            32.9            43.1            32.9            43.1
2k..............................            34.7            30.3            37.8            30.3            37.8
2.5k............................            34.5            32.8            35.4            30.8            42.1
3.15k...........................            35.5            36.9            37.1            30.0            39.6
4k..............................            34.0            33.0            34.3            28.3            40.2
5k..............................            29.0            25.0            29.8            24.3            32.8
6.3k............................            25.7            22.3            26.9            19.7            31.7
8k..............................            20.2            16.6            22.4            14.1            24.2
10k.............................            14.4            10.3            17.3             7.6            18.3
12.5k...........................             8.9             5.0            11.7             3.2            13.0
16k.............................             3.1             0.7             5.6            -0.8             8.7
20k.............................            -1.9            -3.1            -0.4            -3.5             2.0
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Summary

    The acoustic science described above was intended to provide
novices enough knowledge to understand the data and discussions put
forth in the NPRM. Sound is a form of energy that is created when a
medium vibrates, creating pressure variations (compressions and
rarefactions of molecules) within a medium (such as air) which
creates a pattern called a wave. Sound pressure over time creates
peaks and valleys which make up the wavelength. The difference in
acoustic pressure from the ambient pressure (no contraction of the
medium) to the peak or valley of a wavelength is called the
amplitude; the higher the amplitude, the louder the sound. The
period of a wave is the time it takes for a cycle (a peak and a
valley) to complete; a longer period indicates a lower pitch. The
frequency of a sound is the number of complete wave cycles that pass
by a given point in space every second; the higher the frequency,
the higher the pitch.
    The wavelength, amplitude, period and frequency are physical
attributes of a sound wave that affect the human perception of
loudness, pitch and timbre. These perceptions can be quantified
using psychoacoustics. Psychoacoustics is the study of how humans
perceive sound and forms the basis for extracting objective data
from the physical characteristics of acoustic pressure (sound).
Using the physical characteristics and psychoacoustic analysis, a
sound is usually measured in decibels (dBs) within an octave.
Octaves can be further broken down into one-third octave bands which
provide more information about the spectral content of sound being
analyzed. After reading this primer, the reader should understand
what ``sound'' is, identify its different components, and understand
how humans perceive sound and how each of these contributes to
measuring sound.

References

[1] Christopher L. Morfey, Dictionary of Acoustics, Academic Press,
2001.
[2] ANSI S1.1-1994, Acoustical Terminology, American National
Standards Institute, 1994.
[3] CEI IEC 50(801), International Electrotechnical Vocabulary--
Chapter 801: Acoustics and Electroacoustics, International
Electrotechnical Commission, 2nd Edition, 1994.
[4] ANSI S3.20-1973, Psychoacoustical Terminology, American National
Standards Institute, 1973.
[5] Brian C. J. Moore, An Introduction to the Psychology of Hearing,
Academic Press, 4th Edition, 1997.
[6] Lawrence E. Kinsler, Austin R. Frey, Alan B. Coppens, and James
V. Sanders, Fundamentals of Acoustics, John Wiley and Sons, 3rd
Edition, 1982.
[7] E. Zwicker and H. Fastl, Psychoacoustics: Facts and Models,
Springer, 2nd Edition, 1999.
[8] Leo L. Beranek, Acoustical Measurements, American Institute of
Physics, 1988.
[9] Garay-Vega, Lisandra; Hastings, Aaron; Pollard, John K.;
Zuschlag, Michael; and Stearns, Mary D., Quieter Cars and the Safety
of Blind Pedestrians: Phase 2, John A. Volpe National Transportation
Systems Center, DOT HS 811 496 October 2011, available at http://www.nhtsa.gov/DOT/NHTSA/NVS/Crash%20Avoidance/Technical%20Publications/2011/811496.pdf.

    Issued in Washington, DC on January 7, 2013, under authority
delegated in 49 CFR 1.95.
Christopher J. Bonanti,
Associate Administrator for Rulemaking.

[FR Doc. 2013-00359 Filed 1-9-13; 4:15 pm]
BILLING CODE 4910-59-P


[Federal Register: July 17, 2006 (Volume 71, Number 136)]
[Notices]
[Page 40491-40492]
[DOCID:fr17jy06-46]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[P-12646-001]

City of Broken Bow; Notice of Application Tendered for Filing
With the Commission, Soliciting Additional Study Requests, and
Establishing Procedures for Relicensing and a Deadline for Submission
of Final Amendments

July 7, 2006.
    Take notice that the following hydroelectric application has been
filed with the Commission and is available for public inspection.
    a. Type of Application: Original Major License.
    b. Project No.: 12646-001.
    c. Date filed: July 6, 2006.
    d. Applicant: City of Broken Bow.
    e. Name of Project: Pine Creek Lake Dam Hydropower Project.
    f. Location: On the Little River in McCurtain County, Oklahoma. The
project would be located at the United States Army Corps of Engineers'
(Corps) Pine Creek Lake Dam and would occupy several acres of land
administered by the Corps.
    g. Filed Pursuant to: Federal Power Act 16 U.S.C. 791(a)-825(r).
    h. Applicant Contact: Olen Hill, City Manager, City of Broken Bow,
Oklahoma; 210 North Broadway; Broken Bow, Oklahoma 74728; (405) 584-
2282.
    i. FERC Contact: Carolyn Holsopple at<PHONE_NUMBER>, or
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
    j. Cooperating Agencies: We are asking Federal, state, local, and
tribal agencies with jurisdiction and/or special expertise with respect
to environmental issues to cooperate with us in the preparation of the
environmental document. Agencies who would like to request cooperating
status should follow the instructions for filing comments described in
item (l) below.
    k. Pursuant to section 4.32(b)(7) of 18 CFR of the Commission's
regulations, if any resource agency, Indian Tribe, or person believes
that an additional scientific study should be conducted in order to
form an adequate factual basis for a complete analysis of the
application on its merit, the resource agency, Indian Tribe, or person
must file a request for a study with the Commission not later than 60
days from the date of filing of the application, and serve a copy of
the request on the applicant.
    l. Deadline for Filing Additional Study Requests and Requests for
Cooperating Agency Status: 60 days from the filing date shown in
paragraph (c), or September 4, 2006.
    All documents (original and eight copies) should be filed with:
Magalie R. Salas, Secretary, Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888
First Street, NE., Washington, DC 20426.
    Additional study requests may be filed electronically via the
Internet in lieu of paper. The Commission strongly encourages
electronic filing. See 18 CFR 385.2001(a)(1)(iii) and the instructions
on the Commission's Web site (http://www.ferc.gov) under the ``e-

Filing'' link. After logging into the e-Filing system, select ``Comment
on Filing'' from the Filing Type Selection screen and continue with the
filing process.''
    m. Status: This application is not ready for environmental analysis
at this time.
    n. Description of Project: The proposed project, using the existing
Pine Creek Dam and Reservoir, would consist of: (1) A diversion
structure connecting to the existing outlet conduit; (2) a penstock
connecting the diversion structure to the powerhouse; (3) a 112-foot-
wide by 73-foot-long powerhouse containing two turbine-generator units,
having a totaled installed capacity of 6.4 megawatts; (4) a tailrace
returning flows to the Little River; (5) a one-mile-long, 14.4-kilovolt
transmission line or a 6.5-mile-long, 13.8 kilovolt transmission line
connecting to an existing distribution line; and (6) appurtenant
facilities. The project would have an average annual generation of
16,200 megawatt-hours.
    o. A copy of the application is available for review at the
Commission in the Public Reference Room or may be viewed on the
Commission's Web site at http://www.ferc.gov using the ``eLibrary''

link. Enter the docket number, excluding the last three digits in the
docket number field (P-12646), to access the document. For assistance,
contact FERC Online Support at<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or toll-free
at 1-866-208-3676, or for TTY,<PHONE_NUMBER>. A copy is also available
for inspection and reproduction at the address in item (h) above.
    You may also register online at http://www.ferc.gov/esubscribenow.htm

to be notified via e-mail of new filings and issuances related to this
or other pending projects. For assistance, contact FERC Online Support.
    p. With this notice, we are initiating consultation with the
OKLAHOMA STATE HISTORIC PRESERVATION OFFICER (SHPO), as required by
section 106, National Historic Preservation Act, and the regulations of
the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation, 36 CFR 800.4.
    q. Procedural schedule and final amendments: The application will
be processed according to the following Hydro Licensing Schedule.
Revisions to the schedule will be made if the Commission determines it
necessary to do so:

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                   Action                           Tentative date
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Issue Deficiency Letter.....................  September 2006.
Request Additional Information..............  November 2006.
Issue Acceptance letter.....................  December 2006.
Issue Scoping Document 1 for comments.......  February 2007.
Request Additional Information (if            April 2007.
 necessary).
Issue Scoping Document 2....................  May 2007.
Notice that application is ready for          July 2007.
 environmental analysis.
Notice of the availability of the draft EA..  January 2008.
Notice of the availability of the final EA    April 2008.
 (if necessary).
Ready for Commission's decision on the        April 2008.
 application.
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Final amendments to the application must be filed with the
Commission no later than 30 days from the issuance date of this notice.

Magalie R. Salas,
Secretary.
 [FR Doc. E6-11180 Filed 7-14-06; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


OSHA Quick Card

Person in the Water (PIW) –

Prevention, Recovery, and Survival

As a worker in the Maritime Industry, you and your co-workers are exposed to the risk of falling into the water while performing some jobs.  Linesmen, persons working aloft, lashers, and those involved in log operations are at greatest risk.  Many Marine Terminals and Shipyards are located in cold water areas where, in addition to drowning, hypothermia can lead to death.  You should understand the risks of cold water emersion, be aware of methods to prevent going “over the side”, and know how to increase your odds of survival if YOU wind up in the water.

Prevention: (Most important)

Read and understand your terminal or shipyard PIW procedures;

Wear a PFD whenever falling in water is a possibility;

Know the location of recovery tools (life rings, ladders, etc.);

Ensure edges are guarded with railings; and

Be sure to utilize fall prevention equipment when working aloft.

Recovery: (if you see someone fall in the water)

Keep victim in sight ;

Alert others; (management, supervision, ship's crew)

Throw floatation devices;

Guide the victim to a recovery point; and

Follow directions from first responders.

Survival: (if YOU fall in the water)

If possible, cover nose and mouth;

Don't panic – allow breathing to return to normal;

Look for floating items – keep head above water;

Discard objects that may weigh you down (tool belt); and

Assume Heat Elimination Lessening Posture (H.E.L.P) to conserve heat if there is no structure within close reach or short swimming distance.

If you have questions, ask your immediate supervisor.

.

S

P

A

N

I

S

H

T

R

A

N

S

L

A

T

I

O

N

Version 2 - 24FEB2012


[Federal Register Volume 78, Number 12 (Thursday, January 17, 2013)]
[Notices]
[Pages 3931-3934]
[FR Doc No: 2013-00869]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-68626; File No. SR-NASDAQ-2012-149]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; The NASDAQ Stock Market LLC;
Notice of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of a Proposed Rule Change
To Modify NASDAQ's Order Execution Rebates and Investor Support Program

January 11, 2013.
    Pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934
(``Act''),\1\, and Rule 19b-4 \2\ thereunder, notice is hereby given
that on December 31, 2012, The NASDAQ Stock Market LLC (``NASDAQ'' or
``Exchange'') filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission
(``SEC'' or ``Commission'') the proposed rule change as described in
Items I, II and III, below, which Items have been prepared by NASDAQ.
The Commission is publishing this notice to solicit comments on the
proposed rule change from interested persons.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

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

    NASDAQ is proposing (i) to amend its schedule of execution rebates
under Rule 7018(a), and (ii) to modify the Investor Support Program
(the ``ISP'') under Rule 7014. While changes pursuant to this proposal
are effective upon filing, the Exchange will implement the proposed
rule on January 2, 2013.
    The text of the proposed rule change is available on the Exchange's
Web site at http://www.nasdaq.cchwallstreet.com, at the principal
office of the Exchange, and at the Commission's Public Reference Room.

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

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

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

1. Purpose
    NASDAQ is proposing (i) to amend its schedule of execution rebates
under Rule 7018(a), and (ii) to modify the ISP under Rule 7014. As a
general matter, the changes are designed to increase and broaden
incentives for participation in NASDAQ by liquidity providers.
Execution Rebates
    NASDAQ is making a number of changes to its general schedule of
rebates for execution of securities priced at $1 or more per share, as
set forth in Rule 7018(a). Overall, the changes are aimed at providing
greater incentives for the entry of liquidity-providing orders in
NASDAQ. Specifically, NASDAQ is proposing to make the following
changes:
     Currently, NASDAQ pays a credit of $0.0029 per share
executed with respect to displayed quotes/orders for a member with
shares of liquidity provided in all securities through one or more of
its NASDAQ Market Center market participant identifiers (``MPIDs'')
that represent more than 0.50% of Consolidated Volume \3\ during the
month. NASDAQ is modifying this rebate tier to decrease the threshold
to more than 0.45% of Consolidated Volume. This change reverses a price
increase made by NASDAQ in September 2012.\4\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ ``Consolidated Volume'' is defined as ``the total
consolidated volume reported to all consolidated transaction
reporting plans by all exchanges and trade reporting facilities.''
    \4\ Securities Exchange Act Release No. 67849 (September 13,
2012), 77 FR 58190 (September 19, 2012) (SR-NASDAQ-2012-103).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

     Similarly, NASDAQ is restoring a rebate tier that was
eliminated in September 2012.\5\ Under the restored tier, NASDAQ will
pay a credit of $0.0029 per share executed with respect to displayed
quotes/orders for a member with shares of liquidity accessed in all
securities through one or more of its MPIDs that represent more than
0.65% of Consolidated Volume during the month, and that provides a
daily average of at least 2 million shares of liquidity in all
securities through one or more of its NASDAQ Market Center MPIDs during
the month.\6\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ Id.
    \6\ Along with the rule language providing for this new rebate
tier, NASDAQ is also including language applicable to rebates for
midpoint pegged orders and midpoint post-only orders (``midpoint
orders''), and non-displayed orders. This language is being added
simply to make it clear that existing rebates for these orders apply
to members qualifying for the new tier with respect to their
displayed orders.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

     NASDAQ currently pays a credit of $0.0029 per share
executed with respect to displayed quotes/orders for a member with
shares of liquidity provided in all securities through one or more of
its NASDAQ Market Center MPIDs representing more than 0.25% of
Consolidated Volume during the month, and with an average daily volume
during the month of more than 100,000 contracts of liquidity accessed
or provided through one or more of its NASDAQ Options Market MPIDs.
NASDAQ is proposing to decrease the Consolidated Volume requirement for
this tier to shares representing more than 0.15% of Consolidated
Volume, thereby reversing another change made in September 2012.\7\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ Supra n.4.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

     NASDAQ is also introducing a new rebate tier of $0.00305
per share executed with respect to displayed quotes/orders for a member
that either (i) provides shares of liquidity in all securities through
one of its MPIDs that represent 1.60% or more of Consolidated Volume
during the month, or (ii) provides shares of liquidity in all
securities through one or more of its MPIDs that represent 1.60% or
more of Consolidated Volume during the month, and provides liquidity
through one of its MPIDs that represent 0.75% or more of Consolidated
Volume during the month.\8\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \8\ As discussed in Securities Exchange Act Release No. 64003
(March 2, 2011), 76 FR 12784 (March 8, 2011) (SR-NASDAQ-2011-028),
some pricing incentives in NASDAQ's fee and rebate schedule require
members to achieve certain volume thresholds through a single MPID
to avoid providing excessive encouragement to members to aggregate
the activity of several firms to which they provide sponsored access
(some of whom may not themselves be members of NASDAQ) for the sole
purpose of earning a higher rebate.
     Along with the rule language providing for this new rebate
tier, NASDAQ is also including language applicable to rebates for
midpoint orders and non-displayed orders. This language is being
added simply to make it clear that existing rebates for these orders
apply to members qualifying for the new tier with respect to their
displayed orders. NASDAQ is also making a conforming change to move
the location of the definition of ``midpoint orders''.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

     Similarly, NASDAQ is introducing a new rebate tier of
$0.0030 per share executed with respect to displayed quotes/orders for
a member that either (i) provides shares of liquidity in all securities
through one of its MPIDs that represent 1.20% or more of Consolidated
Volume during the month, or (ii) provides shares of liquidity in all
securities through one or more of its MPIDs that represent 1.20% or
more of Consolidated Volume during the month, and provides liquidity
through one of its MPIDs that represent 0.75% or more of Consolidated
Volume during the month.\9\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \9\ Along with the rule language providing for this new rebate
tier, NASDAQ is also including language applicable to rebates for
midpoint orders and non-displayed orders. This language is being
added simply to make it clear that existing rebates for these orders
apply to members qualifying for the new tier with respect to their
displayed orders.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Investor Support Program
    The ISP enables NASDAQ members to earn a monthly fee credit for
providing additional liquidity to NASDAQ and increasing the NASDAQ-
traded volume of what are generally considered to be retail and
institutional investor orders in exchange-traded securities (``targeted
liquidity''). However, in order to partially offset the cost of the
broad rebate incentives discussed above, NASDAQ is partially reducing
the rebates payable under the ISP.
    Participants in the ISP are required to designate specific NASDAQ
order entry ports for use under the ISP and to meet specified criteria
focused on market participation, liquidity provision, and high rates of
order execution. Currently, a member that participates in the ISP
receives a credit of $0.00005, $0.0001, or $0.000375 per share with
respect to the number of shares of displayed liquidity provided by the
member that execute at $1 or more per share.\10\ The precise credit
rate is determined by factors designed to measure the degree of the
member's participation in the Nasdaq Market Center and the percentage
of orders that it enters that execute--its ``ISP Execution Ratio''--
which is seen as indicative of retail or institutional participation.
Without making any other modifications to the program, NASDAQ will
reduce the credit paid to market participants that currently qualify
for a $0.000375 per share credit to $0.0002 per share. The specific
requirements for qualifying for the $0.0002 credit are described below.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \10\ A participant in the ISP must designate specific order-
entry ports for use in tabulating certain requirements under the
program.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    As provided in Rule 7014(c)(4), NASDAQ will pay a credit of $0.0002
per share \11\ with respect to shares of displayed liquidity executed
at a price of $1 or more and entered through ISP-designated ports, and
$0.00005 per share with respect to all other shares of displayed
liquidity executed at a price of $1 or more, if the following
conditions are met:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \11\ A reduction from $0.000375 per share.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    (1) The member's Participation Ratio \12\ for the month exceeds its

Baseline Participation Ratio \13\ by at least 0.86%. The requirement
reflects the expectation that in order to earn a higher rebate under
the program, a member participating in the program must increase its
participation in NASDAQ as compared with an historical baseline.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \12\ ``Participation Ratio'' is defined as follows: ``[F]or a
given member in a given month, the ratio of (A) the number of shares
of liquidity provided in orders entered by the member through any of
its Nasdaq ports and executed in the Nasdaq Market Center during
such month to (B) the Consolidated Volume.'' ``Consolidated Volume''
is defined as follows: ``[F]or a given member in a given month, the
consolidated volume of shares of System Securities in executed
orders reported to all consolidated transaction reporting plans by
all exchanges and trade reporting facilities during such month.''
``System Securities'' means all securities listed on NASDAQ and all
securities subject to the Consolidated Tape Association Plan and the
Consolidated Quotation Plan.
    \13\ ``Baseline Participation Ratio'' is defined as follows:
``[W]ith respect to a member, the lower of such member's
Participation Ratio for the month of August 2010 or the month of
August 2011, provided that in calculating such Participation Ratios,
the numerator shall be increased by the amount (if any) of the
member's Indirect Order Flow for such month, and provided further
that if the result is zero for either month, the Baseline
Participation Ratio shall be deemed to be 0.485% (when rounded to
three decimal places).'' ``Indirect Order Flow'' is defined as
follows: ``[F]or a given member in a given month, the number of
shares of liquidity provided in orders entered into the Nasdaq
Market Center at the member's direction by another member with
minimal substantive intermediation by such other member and executed
in the Nasdaq Market Center during such month.''
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    (2) The member's ``ISP Execution Ratio'' for the month must be less
than 10. The ISP Execution Ratio is defined as ``the ratio of (A) the
total number of liquidity-providing orders entered by a member through
its ISP-designated ports during the specified time period to (B) the
number of liquidity-providing orders entered by such member through its
ISP-designated ports and executed (in full or partially) in the Nasdaq
Market Center during such time period; provided that: (i) No order
shall be counted as executed more than once; and (ii) no Pegged Orders,
odd-lot orders, or MIOC or SIOC orders shall be included in the
tabulation.'' \14\ Thus, the definition requires a ratio between the
total number of orders that post to the NASDAQ book and the number of
such orders that actually execute that is low, a characteristic that
NASDAQ believes to be reflective of retail and institutional order
flow.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \14\ These terms have the meanings assigned to them in Rule
4751. MIOC and SIOC orders are forms of ``immediate or cancel''
orders and therefore cannot be liquidity-providing orders.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    (3) The shares of liquidity provided through ISP-designated ports
during the month are equal to or greater than 0.2% of Consolidated
Volume during the month, reflecting the ISP's goals of encouraging
higher levels of liquidity provision.
    (4) At least 40% of the liquidity provided by the member during the
month is provided through ISP-designated ports. This requirement is
designed to mitigate ``gaming'' of the program by firms that do not
generally represent retail or institutional order flow but that
nevertheless are able to channel a portion of their orders that they
intend to execute through ISP-designated ports and thereby receive a
credit with respect to those orders.
2. Statutory Basis
    NASDAQ believes that the proposed rule change is consistent with
the provisions of Section 6 of the Act,\15\ in general, and with
Sections 6(b)(4) and 6(b)(5) of the Act,\16\ in particular, in that it
provides for the equitable allocation of reasonable dues, fees and
other charges among members and issuers and other persons using any
facility or system which NASDAQ operates or controls, and is not
designed to permit unfair discrimination between customers, issuers,
brokers, or dealers.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \15\ 15 U.S.C. 78f.
    \16\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(4) and (5).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Changes to Rebates
    NASDAQ believes that the proposed changes to rebate tiers are
reasonable, because they will increase the rebates payable to eligible
market participants. NASDAQ further believes that the changes are
consistent with an equitable allocation of fees because the modified
rebate schedule will provide increased incentives for provision of
displayed liquidity that NASDAQ believes benefit all market
participants by dampening price volatility and promoting price
discovery. Finally, NASDAQ believes that the changes are not
unreasonably discriminatory because opportunities for enhanced rebates
to liquidity providers will be broadened under the modified schedule.
Specifically:
     The changes to the rebate tiers through which members may
earn a $0.0029 per share executed rebate are reasonable because they
will make it easier for members to receive a rebate at that level, by
lowering the volume requirements for existing tiers and by adding a new
tier through which members may qualify. In addition, the changes are
consistent with an equitable allocation of fees because they reflect an
allocation of rebates to liquidity providers designed to encourage
beneficial market activity, with greater incentives for market
participants to provide liquidity. Finally, the changes are not
unreasonably discriminatory because they increase the availability of
higher rebates without eliminating any of the other means by which a
member may earn a higher rebate under Rule 7018(a).
     The addition of two new rebate tiers focused on members
that provide high levels of liquidity is reasonable because it will
reduce the costs of market participants that make significant
contributions to market quality. The change is consistent with an
equitable allocation of fees because NASDAQ believes that it is
equitable to provide incentives to members that are capable of
providing high levels of liquidity (1.2% to 1.6% of Consolidated
Volume) to participate in NASDAQ to a greater extent, because doing so
has the potential to increase NASDAQ's market quality to the benefit of
all its market participants. Finally, NASDAQ believes that these new
rebate tiers are not unreasonably discriminatory because the rebates
they would provide are not significantly higher than rebates otherwise
available through Rule 7018(a) and Rule 7014, and are being offered to
increase the quality of the NASDAQ market.
Changes to the ISP
    The ISP encourages members to add targeted liquidity that is
executed in the Nasdaq Market Center. NASDAQ believes that the
reduction in the rebates paid under the ISP from $0.000375 to $0.0002
with respect to certain tiers of the ISP is reasonable, because it
provides a means for NASDAQ to reduce costs during a period of
persistently low trading volumes, in addition to partially offsetting
the costs of the general increased rebates instituted by this filing,
but while still maintaining the overall structure of the ISP for the
purpose of providing incentives for retail and institutional investors
to provide targeted liquidity at NASDAQ. The change is consistent with
an equitable allocation of fees: Although the change maintains the
ISP's purpose of paying higher rebates to certain market participants
in order to encourage them to benefit all NASDAQ members through the
submission of targeted liquidity, the change reduces the disparity
between rebates paid to ISP participants and other members for
providing liquidity. In conjunction with the other changes made by this
filing, this may serve to broaden the availability of enhanced rebates.
Similarly, although NASDAQ believes that the price differentiation
inherent in the ISP is fair, because it is designed to benefit all
market participants by drawing targeted liquidity to the Exchange, the
change reduces the level of differentiation between the rebates

paid to ISP participants and those paid to other liquidity providers.
    Finally, NASDAQ notes that it operates in a highly competitive
market in which market participants can readily favor competing venues
if they deem fee levels at a particular venue to be excessive, or
rebate opportunities available at other venues to be more favorable. In
such an environment, NASDAQ must continually adjust its fees to remain
competitive with other exchanges and with alternative trading systems
that have been exempted from compliance with the statutory standards
applicable to exchanges. These competitive forces help to ensure that
NASDAQ's fees are reasonable, equitably allocated, and not unfairly
discriminatory since market participants can largely avoid fees to
which they object by changing their trading behavior.

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

    NASDAQ does not believe that the proposed rule change will result
in any burden on competition that is not necessary or appropriate in
furtherance of the purposes of the Act, as amended. Specifically,
NASDAQ believes that the change, which will generally result in an
increase in the rebates paid to encourage market participants to use
NASDAQ, reflects the high degree of competition in the cash equities
markets and will further enhance that competition by lowering fees and
possibly encouraging NASDAQ's competitors to make competitive
responses. Moreover, the decreased ISP rebate contained in the proposed
rule change will not burden competition because the market for order
execution is extremely competitive and members may readily opt to
disfavor NASDAQ's execution services if they believe that alternatives
offer them better value. Accordingly, NASDAQ believes that the degree
to which fee changes in this market may impose any burden on
competition is extremely limited. Because competitors are free to
modify their own fees in response, and because market participants may
readily adjust their order routing practices, NASDAQ does not believe
that the proposed changes will impair the ability of members or
competing order execution venues to maintain their competitive standing
in the financial markets.

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

    No written comments were either solicited or received.

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

    The foregoing rule change has become effective pursuant to Section
19(b)(3)(A)(ii) of the Act.\17\ At any time within 60 days of the
filing of the proposed rule change, the Commission summarily may
temporarily suspend such rule change if it appears to the Commission
that such action is necessary or appropriate in the public interest,
for the protection of investors, or otherwise in furtherance of the
purposes of the Act. If the Commission takes such action, the
Commission shall institute proceedings to determine whether the
proposed rule should be approved or disapproved.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \17\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A)(ii).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

IV. Solicitation of Comments

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

Electronic Comments

     Use the Commission's Internet comment form (http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml); or
     Send an email to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Please include
File Number SR-NASDAQ-2012-149 on the subject line.

Paper Comments

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

All submissions should refer to File Number SR-NASDAQ-2012-149. This
file number should be included on the subject line if email is used. To
help the Commission process and review your comments more efficiently,
please use only one method. The Commission will post all comments on
the Commission's Internet Web site (http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml). Copies of the submission, all subsequent amendments, all
written statements with respect to the proposed rule change that are
filed with the Commission, and all written communications relating to
the proposed rule change between the Commission and any person, other
than those that may be withheld from the public in accordance with the
provisions of 5 U.S.C. 552, will be available for Web site viewing and
printing in the Commission's Public Reference Room, 100 F Street NE.,
Washington, DC 20549, on official business days between the hours of
10:00 a.m. and 3:00 p.m. Copies of the filing also will be available
for inspection and copying at the principal office of the Exchange. All
comments received will be posted without change; the Commission does
not edit personal identifying information from submissions. You should
submit only information that you wish to make available publicly. All
submissions should refer to File Number SR-NASDAQ-2012-149 and should
be submitted on or before February 7, 2013.

    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets,
pursuant to delegated authority.\18\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \18\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Kevin M. O'Neill,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2013-00869 Filed 1-16-13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011-01-P