[Federal Register Volume 76, Number 160 (Thursday, August 18, 2011)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 51255-51257]
[FR Doc No: 2011-21027]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Coast Guard

33 CFR Part 165

[Docket No. USCG-2011-0760]
RIN 1625-AA87

Security Zone; Potomac River, Georgetown Channel, Washington, DC

AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS.

ACTION: Temporary final rule.

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

SUMMARY: The Coast Guard is establishing a temporary security zone
encompassing certain waters of the Potomac River, Georgetown Channel,
in Washington, DC, in order to safeguard high-ranking public officials
from terrorist acts and incidents. This action is necessary to ensure
the safety of persons and property, and prevent terrorist acts or
incidents. This rule prohibits vessels and people from entering the
security zone and requires vessels and persons in the security zone to
depart the security zone, unless specifically exempt under the
provisions in this rule or granted specific permission from the Coast
Guard Captain of the Port Baltimore.

DATES: This rule is effective from 6 a.m. until 6 p.m. on August 28,
2011.

ADDRESSES: Documents indicated in this preamble as being available in
the docket are part of docket USCG-2011-0760 and are available online
by going to http://www.regulations.gov, inserting USCG-2011-0760 in the
``Keyword'' box, and then clicking ``Search.'' They are also available
for inspection or copying at the 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, between 9
a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: If you have questions on this
temporary rule, call or e-mail Mr. Ronald L. Houck, at Sector Baltimore
Waterways Management Division, Coast Guard; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>, e-
mail<EMAIL_ADDRESS>If you have questions on viewing the
docket, call Renee V. Wright, Program Manager, Docket Operations,
telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Regulatory Information

    The Coast Guard is issuing this temporary final rule without prior
notice and opportunity to comment pursuant to authority under section
4(a) of the Administrative Procedure Act (APA) (5 U.S.C. 553(b)). This
provision authorizes an agency to issue a rule without prior notice and
opportunity to comment when the agency for good cause finds that those
procedures are ``impracticable, unnecessary, or contrary to the public
interest.'' Under 5 U.S.C. 553(b)(B), the Coast Guard finds that good
cause exists for not publishing a notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM)
with respect to this rule because it is contrary to public interest to
delay the effective date of this rule. The Coast Guard is establishing
the security zone to protect high-ranking government officials,
mitigate potential terrorist acts, and enhance public and maritime
safety and security. The Coast Guard was unable to publish a NPRM due
to the short time period between event planners notifying the Coast
Guard of the event and publication of the security zone. Furthermore,
delaying the effective date would be contrary to the security zone's
intended objectives of protecting high-ranking government officials,
mitigating potential terrorist acts and enhancing public and maritime
safety security.
    Under 5 U.S.C. 553(d)(3), the Coast Guard finds that good cause
exists for making this rule effective less than 30 days after
publication in the Federal Register. Due to the need for immediate
action, the restriction of vessel traffic is necessary to protect life,
property and the environment, therefore, a 30-day notice period is
impracticable. Delaying the effective date would be contrary to the
security zone's intended objectives of protecting high-ranking
government officials, mitigating potential terrorist acts and enhancing
public and maritime safety and security.

Background and Purpose

    The President of the United States will be attending the Martin
Luther King, Jr. National Memorial in Washington, DC dedication
ceremony on August 28, 2011. The ceremony is located along the
waterfront in Washington, DC, in close proximity to navigable waterways
within the Captain of the Port's Area of Responsibility.
    The Coast Guard has given each Coast Guard Captain of the Port the
ability to implement comprehensive port security regimes designed to
safeguard human life, vessels, and waterfront facilities while still
sustaining the flow of commerce. The Captain of the Port Baltimore is
establishing this security zone to protect high-ranking government
officials, mitigate potential terrorist acts, and enhance public and
maritime safety and security in order to safeguard life, property, and
the environment on or near the navigable waters.

Discussion of Rule

    Through this regulation, the Coast Guard will establish a security
zone. The security zone will be in effect from 6 a.m. until 6 p.m. on
August 28, 2011. The security zone will include all navigable waters of
the Potomac River, Georgetown Channel, within 75 yards from eastern
shore measured perpendicularly to the shore between the Theodore
Roosevelt Memorial Bridge and the Arlington Memorial

Bridge, and within 150 yards from eastern shore measured
perpendicularly to the shore from the Arlington Memorial Bridge to the
George Mason Memorial Bridge (the most western bridge of the 5-span,
Fourteenth Street Bridge Complex), including all waters of the
Georgetown Channel Tidal Basin, located in Washington, DC. This
location is entirely within the Area of Responsibility of the Captain
of the Port Baltimore, as set forth at 33 CFR 3.25-15.
    This rule requires that entry into, attempted entry into, or
remaining in this security zone is prohibited unless authorized by the
Coast Guard Captain of the Port Baltimore. Except for persons or
vessels authorized by the Captain of the Port Baltimore, no person or
vessel may enter or remain in the regulated area during the enforcement
period. All vessels underway within the security zone at the time it is
in effect are to depart the zone immediately. To seek permission to
transit the area, the Captain of the Port Baltimore can be contacted at
telephone number<PHONE_NUMBER> or on Marine Band Radio, VHF-FM channel
16 (156.8 MHz). Coast Guard vessels enforcing the security zone can be
contacted on Marine Band Radio, VHF-FM channel 16 (156.8 MHz). The
Coast Guard will issue Broadcast Notices to Mariners to further
publicize the security zone.

Regulatory Analyses

    We developed this rule after considering numerous statutes and
executive orders related to rulemaking. Below we summarize our analyses
based on 13 of these statutes or executive orders.

Regulatory Planning and Review

    This 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. Although this security zone restricts
vessel traffic from transiting through the affected area, vessels may
transit safely around the zone. Furthermore, the effect of this
regulation will not be significant due to the limited size and duration
that the regulated area will be in effect. In addition, notifications
will be made to the maritime community via marine information
broadcasts so mariners may adjust their plans accordingly.

Small Entities

    Under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601-612), we have
considered whether this 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 rule will
not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small
entities. This rule may affect the following entities, some of which
might be small entities: The owners or operators of vessels intending
to operate or transit through or within the security zone during the
enforcement period. The security zone will not have a significant
economic impact on a substantial number of small entities for the
following reasons. The security zone is of limited size and duration.
Vessel traffic may safely transit around the zone. Before the effective
period, maritime advisories will be widely available to the maritime
community.

Assistance for Small Entities

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

Collection of Information

    This rule calls 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 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 rule will not result in such an expenditure, we
do discuss the effects of this rule elsewhere in this preamble.

Taking of Private Property

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

Indian Tribal Governments

    This rule does not have tribal implications under Executive Order
13175, Consultation and Coordination with Indian Tribal Governments,
because it does not have a substantial direct effect on one or more
Indian tribes, on the relationship between the Federal Government and
Indian tribes, or on the distribution of power and responsibilities
between the Federal Government and Indian tribes.

Energy Effects

    We have analyzed this 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 rule does not use technical standards. Therefore, we did not
consider the use of voluntary consensus standards.

Environment

    We have analyzed this rule under Department of Homeland Security
Management Directive 023-01 and Commandant Instruction M16475.lD, which
guide the Coast Guard in complying with the National Environmental
Policy Act of 1969 (NEPA) (42 U.S.C. 4321-4370f), and have concluded
this action is one of a category of actions which do not individually
or cumulatively have a significant effect on the human environment.
This rule is categorically excluded, under figure 2-1, paragraph
(34)(g), of the Instruction. This rule involves establishing a
temporary security zone. An environmental analysis checklist and a
categorical exclusion determination are available in the docket where
indicated under ADDRESSES.

List of Subjects in 33 CFR Part 165

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

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

PART 165--REGULATED NAVIGATION AREAS AND LIMITED ACCESS AREAS

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

    Authority:  33 U.S.C. 1231; 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.

0
2. Add Sec.  165.T05-0760 to read as follows:

Sec.  165.T05-0760  Security Zone; Potomac River, Georgetown Channel,
Washington, DC.

    (a) Location. The following area is a security zone: All waters of
the Potomac River, Georgetown Channel, within 75 yards from eastern
shore measured perpendicularly to the shore between the Theodore
Roosevelt Memorial Bridge and the Arlington Memorial Bridge, and within
150 yards from eastern shore measured perpendicularly to the shore from
the Arlington Memorial Bridge to the George Mason Memorial Bridge (the
most western bridge of the 5-span, Fourteenth Street Bridge Complex),
including all waters of the Georgetown Channel Tidal Basin, located in
Washington, DC.
    (b) Definitions. As used in this section:
    Captain of the Port Baltimore means the Commander, U.S. Coast Guard
Sector Baltimore, Maryland.
    Designated representative means any Coast Guard commissioned,
warrant, or petty officer who has been authorized by the Captain of the
Port Baltimore to assist in enforcing the security zone described in
paragraph (a) of this section.
    (c) Regulations. The general security zone regulations found in 33
CFR 165.33 apply to the security zone created by this temporary
section, Sec.  165.T05-0760.
    (1) All persons are required to comply with the general regulations
governing security zones found in 33 CFR 165.33.
    (2) Entry into or remaining in this zone is prohibited unless
authorized by the Coast Guard Captain of the Port Baltimore. All
vessels underway within this security zone at the time it is
implemented are to depart the zone.
    (3) Persons desiring to transit the area of the security zone must
first obtain authorization from the Captain of the Port Baltimore or
his designated representative. To seek permission to transit the area,
the Captain of the Port Baltimore and his designated representatives
can be contacted at telephone number<PHONE_NUMBER> or on Marine Band
Radio, VHF-FM channel 16 (156.8 MHz). The Coast Guard vessels enforcing
this section can be contacted on Marine Band Radio, VHF-FM channel 16
(156.8 MHz). Upon being hailed by a U.S. Coast Guard vessel, or other
Federal, State, or local agency vessel, by siren, radio, flashing
light, or other means, the operator of a vessel shall proceed as
directed. If permission is granted, all persons and vessels must comply
with the instructions of the Captain of the Port Baltimore or his
designated representative and proceed at the minimum speed necessary to
maintain a safe course while within the zone.
    (4) Enforcement. The U.S. Coast Guard may be assisted in the patrol
and enforcement of the zones by Federal, State, and local agencies.
    (d) Enforcement period. This section will be enforced from 6 a.m.
until 6 p.m. on August 28, 2011.

    Dated: August 4, 2011.
Mark P. O'Malley,
Captain, U.S. Coast Guard, Captain of the Port Baltimore.
[FR Doc. 2011-21027 Filed 8-17-11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 9110-04-P


[Federal Register Volume 81, Number 227 (Friday, November 25, 2016)]
[Notices]
[Pages 85277-85280]
[FR Doc No: 2016-28308]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-79352; File No. SR-ISE-2016-26]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; International Securities Exchange,
LLC; Notice of Filing of Proposed Rule Change To Reduce the Response
Times in the Block Mechanism, Facilitation Mechanism, Solicited Order
Mechanism and Price Improvement Mechanism

November 18, 2016.
    Pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934
(the ``Act'') \1\, and Rule 19b-4 thereunder,\2\ notice is hereby given
that on November 8, 2016, the International Securities Exchange, LLC
(the ``Exchange'' or the ``ISE'') filed with the Securities and
Exchange Commission (``Commission'') the proposed rule change as
described in Items I and II below, which Items have been prepared by
the self-regulatory organization. The Commission is publishing this
notice to solicit comments on the proposed rule change from interested
persons.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

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

    The Exchange proposes to amend Rules 716 (Block Trades) and 723
(Price Improvement Mechanism for Crossing Transactions) to reduce the
response times in the Block Order Mechanism, Facilitation Mechanism,
Solicited Order Mechanism, and Price Improvement Mechanism. The text of
the proposed rule change is available on the Exchange's Web site at
http://www.ise.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 self-regulatory organization
included statements concerning the purpose of, and basis for, the
proposed rule change and discussed any comments it received on the
proposed rule change. The text of these statements may be examined at
the places specified in Item IV below. The Exchange has prepared
summaries, set forth in sections A, B, and C below, of the most
significant aspects of such statements.

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

1. Purpose
    The purpose of the proposed rule change is to amend the time period
allowed for member submission of responses in the Block Order
Mechanism, Facilitation Mechanism, Solicited Order Mechanism, and Price
Improvement Mechanism (``PIM'') from 500 milliseconds (\1/2\ of one
second) to a time period designated by the Exchange of no less than 100
milliseconds (1/10 of one second) and no more than 1 second.\3\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ While the Exchange intends to decrease the time period
allowed for responses, the proposed rule would also allow the
Exchange to increase this time period up to 1 second, which is the
time period previously allowed for the submission of responses. See
Securities Exchange Act Release No. 58224 (July 25, 2008), 73 FR
44303 (July 30, 2008) (SR-ISE-2007-94).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Rule 716 contains the requirements applicable to the execution of
orders using the Block Order Mechanism, Facilitation Mechanism, and
Solicited Order Mechanism. The Block Order Mechanism allows members to
obtain liquidity for the execution of a block-size order,\4\ and the
Facilitation and Solicited Order Mechanisms allow members to enter
cross transactions seeking price improvement.\5\ Rule 723 contains the
requirements applicable to the execution of orders using the PIM. The
PIM allows members to enter cross transactions of any size. The
Facilitation, Solicited Order Mechanisms and PIM allow for members to
designate certain customer orders for price improvement and submit such
orders into one of the mechanisms with a matching contra order. Once
the order is submitted, the Exchange commences an auction by
broadcasting a message to all members that includes the series, price,
size and side of the market.\6\ Further, responses within the PIM
(i.e., Improvement Orders), are also broadcast to market participants
during the auction. Orders entered into any of these mechanisms
currently are exposed to all market participants for 500 milliseconds,
giving them an opportunity to enter additional trading interest before
the orders are automatically executed. Under the proposal, the Exchange
would determine an appropriate exposure period for each of the four
auction mechanisms that is no less than 100 milliseconds and no more
than 1 second, consistent with exposure periods permitted on other
exchanges such as NASDAQ BX (``BX'') and NASDAQ PHLX (``Phlx'').\7\
When approving the previous change to exposure periods in these
mechanisms the Securities and Exchange Commission concluded that
reducing these time periods was consistent with the Securities Exchange
Act of 1934 (the ``Act'').\8\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ Block-size orders are orders for 50 contracts or more. See
Rule 716(a).
    \5\ Only block-size orders can be entered into the Facilitation
Mechanism, whereas only orders for 500 contracts or more can be
entered into the Solicited Order Mechanism. See Rule 716(d) and (e).
    \6\ Members may choose to hide the size, side, and price when
entering orders into the Block Order Mechanism.
    \7\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 76301 (October 29,
2015), 80 FR 68347 (November 4, 2015) (SR-BX-2015-032) and
Securities Exchange Act Release No. 77557 (April 7, 2016), 81 FR
21935 (April 13, 2016) (SR-PHLX-2016-40).
    \8\ See Exchange Act Release No. 68849 (February 6, 2013), 78 FR
9973 (February 12, 2013) (SR-ISE-2012-100).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange is not proposing any change to the requirement in Rule
717(d) and (e) that requires an Electronic Access Member (``EAM'') to
expose its customer's order on the book for at least one second before
either executing such agency order as principal or against orders
solicited from members and non-members, unless the EAM submits the
agency order to the Facilitation Mechanism, Solicited Order Mechanism,
or PIM.\9\ The Exchange believes this exception for the Facilitation
Mechanism, Solicited Order Mechanism and PIM is appropriate because the
customer order is guaranteed an execution at the National Best Bid/
Offer (``NBBO'') or a better price through the Facilitation Mechanism,
Solicited Order Mechanism and PIM. Additionally, members are informed
about the agency order starting the auction through receipt of the
broadcast. Members have the opportunity to compete for participation in
the execution of the customer order by responding to the broadcast with
their best priced responses.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \9\ Since EAMs submitting orders into the Block Mechanism do not
have the contra order, Rule 717(d) and (e) does not apply.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    With respect to the Facilitation Mechanism, Solicited Order
Mechanism, and PIM, the Exchange believes the proposed rule change
could provide more customer orders an opportunity for price improvement
because it will reduce the market risk for all members executing trades
in these mechanisms. Members that submit orders into such mechanisms to
initiate an auction (``Initiating Members'') are required to guarantee
an execution at the NBBO or a better price, and are subject to market
risk while the order is exposed in one of the mechanisms to other
members. While other members are also subject to market risk, the
Initiating Member is most exposed because the market can move against
them during the auction period and they have guaranteed the customer an
execution at the NBBO or better based on the market prices prior to the
commencement of the auction. In today's fast-paced markets, big price
changes can occur in 100 milliseconds or less, leaving the Initiating
Members vulnerable to trading losses due to their choice to seek price
improvement for their customer. The Initiating Member acts in a
critical role in the price improvement process and their willingness to
guarantee the customer an execution at the NBBO or a better price is
keystone to the customer order gaining the opportunity for price
improvement. Therefore, limiting Initiating Members' market risk by
reducing the exposure time in the mechanisms should increase the
likelihood that an Initiating Member would seek price improvement for
its customer by entering such orders into one of the mechanisms.
    Additionally, the Exchange does not believe that requiring the
auction to run for 500 milliseconds is necessary in today's market
where, generally, members' systems have the capability to respond
within 100 milliseconds or faster. As such, reducing the response time
in the Block Order Mechanism is appropriate as members no longer need
500 milliseconds to respond to the auction. Reducing the auction time
for the Block Order Mechanism from 500 milliseconds to as low as 100
milliseconds will allow members the opportunity to seek out liquidity
in an expedient manner that is consistent with system capabilities.
    Furthermore, although the Exchange currently plans to reduce the
time period allowed for the submission of auction responses to 100
milliseconds, the Exchange believes that it is appropriate to provide
the flexibility to choose a response period of up to 1 second as this
is consistent with the rules of other options markets.\10\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \10\ See note 7 supra.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange's members operate electronic systems that enable them
to react and respond to orders in a meaningful way in fractions of a
second. The Exchange anticipates that its members will continue to
compete within the proposed auction duration designated by the
Exchange. In particular, the Exchange believes that the proposed
auction response times--which will be no less than 100 milliseconds and
no more than 1

second--will continue to provide members with sufficient time to
respond to, compete for, and provide price improvement for orders, and
will provide investors and other market participants with more timely
executions, and reduce their market risk.
    Reducing the duration of the auctions from 500 milliseconds to as
low as 100 milliseconds will benefit members trading in the mechanisms.
It is in these members' best interest to minimize the auction time
while continuing to allow members adequate time to electronically
respond. Both the order being exposed and the members' responses are
subject to market risk during the auction. While a limited number of
members wait to respond until later in the auction, presumably to
minimize their market risk, in more than 94% of executions occurring in
the mechanisms members respond within the first 100 milliseconds. The
Exchange believes that an auction time as low as 100 milliseconds will
continue to provide market participants with sufficient time to
respond, compete, and provide price improvement for orders and will
provide investors and other market participants with more timely
executions, thereby reducing their market risk.\11\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \11\ With Block Orders, the member enters one side of the order
in an effort to find contra-side liquidity. While this order is
exposed, the member is exposed to market risk. Therefore, reducing
the exposure time will reduce the market risk for Block Orders just
as it will reduce the market risk with respect to orders entered
into the Facilitation Mechanism, Solicited Order Mechanism, and PIM.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    To substantiate that members can receive, process, and communicate
a response to an auction broadcast within 100 milliseconds, the
Exchange surveyed all members that responded to an auction in the
period beginning July 1, 2015 and ending January 15, 2016. The Exchange
received responses from all of the 21 members surveyed, and each member
confirmed that they can receive, process, and communicate a response
back to the Exchange within 100 milliseconds.
    Also in consideration of this proposed rule change, the Exchange
reviewed all executions occurring in the mechanisms by its Members from
March 28, 2016--April 25, 2016. This review of executions in the
mechanisms indicates that approximately 98% of responses that resulted
in price improving executions at the conclusion of an auction were
submitted within 500 milliseconds. Approximately 94% of responses that
resulted in price improving executions at the conclusion of an auction
were submitted within 100 milliseconds of the initial order, and 83%
were submitted within 50 milliseconds of the initial order.
    Accordingly, the Exchange believes that an auction time as low as
100 milliseconds will continue to provide members with sufficient time
to respond to, compete for, and provide price improvement for orders,
and will provide investors and other market participants with more
timely executions, and reduce their market risk. Moreover,
Supplementary Material .04 to Rule 723 provides that the PIM will not
run simultaneously with or overlap another PIM in the same series. As a
result, members may be unable to initiate PIMs on behalf of their
customers. Reducing the auction time to as low as 100 milliseconds will
decrease the likelihood that an auction is underway when a customer
order is received. Accordingly, the Exchange believes it is likely that
the number of PIM transactions will increase, thereby providing
customers a greater opportunity to benefit from price improvement.
    The Exchange believes that the information outlined above regarding
price improving transactions in the mechanisms and the feedback
provided by members provides substantial support for its assertion that
reducing the auction from 500 milliseconds to as low as 100
milliseconds will continue to provide members with sufficient time to
ensure competition for orders entered into the mechanisms, and could
provide customer orders with additional opportunities for price
improvement.
    With regard to the impact of this proposal on system capacity, the
Exchange has analyzed its capacity and represents that it has the
necessary systems capacity to handle the potential additional traffic
associated with the additional transactions that may occur with the
implementation of the proposed reduction in the auction duration to no
less than 100 milliseconds. Additionally, the Exchange represents that
its systems will be able to sufficiently maintain an audit trail for
order and trade information with the reduction in the auction duration.
Further, although the Exchange and its members are fully capable of
handling a response time of 100 milliseconds, the Exchange proposes to
reduce the auction time over a period of weeks ending at 100
milliseconds. This will ensure a smooth implementation of the faster
timers and that the Exchange's and its members' systems are working
properly given the faster response times.
    Upon effectiveness of the proposal, and at least six weeks prior to
implementation of the proposed rule change, the Exchange will issue a
circular to members, informing them of the implementation date of the
reduction of the auction from 500 milliseconds to the auction time
designated by the Exchange to allow members the opportunity to perform
systems changes. This will give members an opportunity to make any
necessary modifications to coincide with the implementation date. The
Exchange also represents that it will issue a circular at least four
weeks prior to any future changes, as permitted by its rules, to the
auction time.
2. Statutory Basis
    The Exchange believes that the proposed rule change is consistent
with the requirements of the Act, and the rules and regulations
thereunder that are applicable to a national securities exchange, and,
in particular, with the requirements of Section 6(b) of the Act.\12\ In
particular, the proposal is consistent with Section 6(b)(5) of the
Act,\13\ because it is designed to promote just and equitable
principles of trade, remove impediments to and perfect the mechanisms
of a free and open market and a national market system and, in general,
to protect investors and the public interest.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \12\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b).
    \13\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In particular, the proposed rule change will provide investors with
more timely execution of their options orders, while ensuring that
there is an adequate exposure of orders in the mechanisms.
Additionally, the proposed change will allow more investors the
opportunity to receive price improvement through the mechanisms, and
will reduce market risk for members using the mechanisms. Finally, as
mentioned above, other exchanges such as BX and Phlx, have already
amended their rules to permit response times consistent with those
proposed here--i.e., no less than 100 milliseconds and no more than 1
second.\14\ As such, the Exchange believes the proposed rule change
would help perfect the mechanism for a free and open national market
system, and generally help protect investors' and the public's
interest.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \14\ See note 7 supra.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange believes the proposed rule change is not unfairly
discriminatory because the auction duration would be the same for all
members. All members in the mechanisms have today, and will continue to
have, an equal opportunity to receive the broadcast and respond with
their best prices during the

auction. Additionally, the Exchange believes the reduction in the
auction duration reduces the market risk for all members. The reduction
in time period reduces the market risk for the Initiating Member as
well as any members providing orders in response to a broadcast.
Moreover, based on the feedback the Exchange received from its members,
the Exchange believes that a reduction in the auction period to a low
of 100 milliseconds would not impair members' ability to compete in the
mechanisms. The Exchange believes these results support the assertion
that a reduction in the auction duration would not be unfairly
discriminatory and would benefit investors.

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

    The Exchange believes the proposal is consistent with Section
6(b)(8) of the Act \15\ in that it does not impose any burden on
competition that is not necessary or appropriate in furtherance of the
purposes of the Act. The proposed rule change is not designed to
address any aspect of competition, but instead would continue to
provide market participants with sufficient time to respond, compete,
and provide price improvement for orders in the Exchange's auction
mechanisms. The proposed rule also provides investors and other market
participants with more timely executions, thereby reducing their market
risk. As proposed, the rule does not impose an undue burden on members
because they are all currently capable of responding to these
mechanisms in under 100 milliseconds. Finally, the proposed rule change
offers the same exposure period to all members and would not impose a
competitive burden on any particular participant.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

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

    The Exchange has not solicited, and does not intend to solicit,
comments on this proposed rule change. The Exchange has not received
any unsolicited written comments from members or other interested
parties.

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

    Within 45 days of the publication date of this notice in the
Federal Register or within such longer period up to 90 days (i) as the
Commission may designate if it finds such longer period to be
appropriate and publishes its reasons for so finding or (ii) as to
which the self-regulatory organization consents, the Commission will:
    (A) By order approve or disapprove such proposed rule change, or
    (B) institute proceedings to determine whether the proposed rule
change should be disapproved.

IV. Solicitation of Comments

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

Electronic Comments

     Use the Commission's Internet comment form (http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml); or
     Send an email to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Please
include File Number SR-ISE-2016-26 on the subject line.

Paper Comments

     Send paper comments in triplicate to Brent J. Fields,
Secretary, Securities and Exchange Commission, 100 F Street NE.,
Washington, DC 20549-1090.

All submissions should refer to File Number SR-ISE-2016-26. 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-ISE-2016-26 and should be
submitted on or before December 16, 2016.

    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets,
pursuant to delegated authority.\16\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

Brent J. Fields,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2016-28308 Filed 11-23-16; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


From:	Kevin Culligan/DC/USEPA/US

To:	"Frey Nathan J."<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
Cc:	"Mancini Dominic J."<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Peter
Tsirigotis/RTP/USEPA/US@EPA, Joseph Goffman/DC/USEPA/US@EPA, RobertJ
Wayland/RTP/USEPA/US@EPA

Date:	03/25/2012 11:11 PM

Subject:	Updated preamble

Nathan,

After further discussions this afternoon, Gina instructed us to provide
you a copy of the preamble in which we addressed your comments
consistent with the discussion that she had with Cass yesterday.


[Federal Register Volume 78, Number 143 (Thursday, July 25, 2013)]
[Notices]
[Pages 44955-44956]
[FR Doc No: 2013-17835]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES

Food and Drug Administration

[Docket No. FDA-2012-N-0977]

Agency Information Collection Activities; Announcement of Office
of Management and Budget Approval; Regulations Restricting the Sale and
Distribution of Cigarettes and Smokeless Tobacco To Protect Children
and Adolescents

AGENCY: Food and Drug Administration, HHS.

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) is announcing that a
collection of information entitled ``Regulations Restricting the Sale
and Distribution of Cigarettes and Smokeless Tobacco to Protect
Children and Adolescents'' has been approved by the Office of
Management and Budget (OMB) under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Daniel Gittleson, Office of
Information Management, Food and Drug Administration, 1350 Piccard Dr.,
PI50-400B, Rockville, MD 20850,<PHONE_NUMBER>,
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: On April 10, 2013, the Agency submitted a
proposed collection of information entitled ``Regulations Restricting
the Sale and Distribution of Cigarettes and Smokeless Tobacco to
Protect Children and Adolescents'' to OMB for review and clearance
under 44 U.S.C. 3507. An Agency may not conduct or sponsor, and a
person is not required to respond to, a collection of information
unless it displays a currently valid OMB control number. OMB has now
approved the information collection and has assigned OMB control number
0910-0312. The approval expires on July 31, 2016. A copy of the
supporting statement for this information collection is available on
the Internet at http://www.reginfo.gov/public/do/PRAMain.

    Dated: July 19, 2013.
Leslie Kux,
Assistant Commissioner for Policy.
[FR Doc. 2013-17835 Filed 7-24-13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4160-01-P


UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

OFFICE OF THE SECRETARY

WASHINGTON, D.C.

Issued by the Department of Transportation on December 6, 2005

NOTICE OF ACTION TAKEN -- DOCKET OST-2005-22903

________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________

This serves as notice to the public of the action described below, taken
by the Department official indicated (no additional confirming order
will be issued in this matter).

Applicant:  AEROVIAS de MEXICO, S.A. de C.V. (Aeromexico)
            Date Filed:  November 3, 2005

Relief requested:  Exemption from 49 USC § 41301 to permit the
applicant to conduct scheduled foreign air transportation of persons,
property, and mail between: 1) Mexico City, Mexico, and Stockton,
California; 2) Morelia, Mexico, and Oakland, California; and 3) the four
Mexican coterminal points Guadajalara/Morelia/Leon-El Bajio/Mexico City,
and Bakersfield, California.

If renewal, date and citation of last action:  New authority.

Applicant representative:  William C. Evans,<PHONE_NUMBER>           DOT
analyst:  Robert J. Finamore,<PHONE_NUMBER>

Responsive pleadings:  None.

	DISPOSITION

Action:  Approved in part (Morelia – Oakland), remainder ( Mexico City
– Stockton and Guadalajara/Morelia/Leon-El Bajio/Mexico City –
Bakersfield) deferred.  (See remarks)

Action date:  December 6, 2005

Effective dates of authority granted:  December 6, 2005, through
December 6, 2006.

Basis for approval (bilateral agreement/reciprocity):  United
States-Mexico Air Transport Services Agreement.

Except to the extent exempted/waived, this authority is subject to the
terms, conditions, and limitations of our standard exemption conditions
(attached), and to the otherwise-applicable terms, conditions, and
limitations of Aeromexico’s foreign air carrier permit (Order
91-5-25).

Special conditions/Remarks:  Federal Inspection services for entry of
international traffic are not currently available at Stockton and
Bakersfield.  For this reason, we shall defer action on the Mexico City
- Stockton and Guadalajara/Morelia/Leon-El Bajio/Mexico City -
Bakersfield portions of this application until such time as these
services are available.

Action taken by:   Paul L. Gretch, Director, Office of International
Aviation

________________________________________________________________________
_______________________________________________________

Under authority assigned by the Department in its regulations, 14 CFR
Part 385, we found that (1) our action was consistent with Department
policy; (2) the applicant was qualified to perform its proposed
operations; (3) grant of the authority was consistent with the public
interest; and (4) grant of the authority would not constitute a major
regulatory action under the Energy Policy and Conservation Act of 1975.
To the extent not granted/deferred/dismissed, we denied all requests in
the referenced Docket.  We may amend, modify, or revoke the authority
granted in this Notice at any time without hearing at our discretion.

Persons entitled to petition the Department for review of the action set
forth in this Notice under the Department’s regulations, 14 CFR
§385.30, may file their petitions within seven (7) days after the date
of issuance of this Notice.  This action was effective when taken, and
the filing of a petition for review will not alter such effectiveness.

An electronic version of this document is available on the World Wide
Web at:

  HYPERLINK "http://dms.dot.gov//reports/reports_aviation.asp"
http://dms.dot.gov//reports/reports_aviation.asp

FOREIGN CARRIER EXEMPTION CONDITIONS
                              ATTACHMENT

In the conduct of the operations authorized, the foreign carrier
applicant(s) shall:

1) Not conduct any operations unless it holds a currently effective
authorization from its homeland for such operations, and it has filed a
copy of such authorization with the Department;

2) Comply with all applicable requirements of the Federal Aviation
Administration, including, but not limited to, 14 CFR Parts 129, 91, and
36, and with all applicable U.S. Government requirements concerning
security, including, but not limited to, 49 CFR Part 1546 or 1550, as
applicable.  To assure compliance with all applicable U.S. Government
requirements concerning security, the holder shall, before commencing
any new service (including charter flights) from a foreign airport that
would be the holder’s last point of departure for the United States,
contact its International Principal Security Inspector (IPSI) to advise
the IPSI of its plans and to find out whether the Transportation
Security Administration has determined that security is adequate to
allow such airport(s) to be served;

3) Comply with the requirements for minimum insurance coverage contained
in 14 CFR Part 205, and, prior to the commencement of any operations
under this authority, file evidence of such coverage, in the form of a
completed OST Form 6411, with the Federal Aviation Administration’s
Program Management Branch (AFS-260), Flight Standards Service (any
changes to, or termination of, insurance also shall be filed with that
office);

4) Not operate aircraft under this authority unless it complies with
operational safety requirements at least equivalent to Annex 6 of the
Chicago Convention;

5) Conform to the airworthiness and airman competency requirements of
its Government for international air services;

6) Except as specifically exempted or otherwise provided for in a
Department Order, comply with the requirements of 14 CFR Part 203,
concerning waiver of Warsaw Convention liability limits and defenses;

7) Agree that operations under this authority constitute a waiver of
sovereign immunity, for the purposes of 28 U.S.C. 1605(a), but only with
respect to those actions or proceedings instituted against it in any
court or other tribunal in the United States that are: a) based on its
operations in international air transportation that, according to the
contract of carriage, include a point in the United States as a point of
origin, point of destination, or agreed stopping place, or for which the
contract of carriage was purchased in the United States; or b) based on
a claim under any international agreement or treaty cognizable in any
court or other tribunal of the United States.  In this condition, the
term “international air transportation” means “international
transportation” as defined by the Warsaw Convention, except that all
States shall be considered to be High Contracting Parties for the
purpose of this definition;

8) Except as specifically authorized by the Department, originate or
terminate all flights to/from the United States in its homeland;

9) Comply with the requirements of 14 CFR Part 217, concerning the
reporting of scheduled, nonscheduled, and charter data;

10) If charter operations are authorized, except as otherwise provided
in the applicable aviation agreement, comply with the Department’s
rules governing charters (including 14 CFR Parts 212 and 380); and

11) Comply with such other reasonable terms, conditions, and limitations
required by the public interest as may be prescribed by the Department,
with all applicable orders or regulations of other U.S. agencies and
courts, and with all applicable laws of the United States.

This authority shall not be effective during any period when the holder
is not in compliance with the conditions imposed above.  Moreover, this
authority cannot be sold or otherwise transferred without explicit
Department approval under Title 49 of the U.S. Code.

05/2004


[Federal Register: August 7, 2009 (Volume 74, Number 151)]
[Notices]
[Page 39718]
[DOCID:fr07au09-105]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

Proposed Collection; Comment Request

Upon Written Request; Copies Available From: Securities and Exchange
Commission, Office of Investor Education and Advocacy, Washington, DC
20549-0213.

Extension:
    Form T-2, OMB Control No. 3235-0111, SEC File No. 270-122.

    Notice is hereby given that, pursuant to the Paperwork Reduction
Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.), the Securities and Exchange
Commission (``Commission'') is soliciting comments on the collection of
information summarized below. The Commission plans to submit this
existing collection of information to the Office of Management and
Budget for approval.
    Form T-2 (17 CFR 269.2) is a statement of eligibility of an
individual trustee to serve under an indenture relating to debt
securities offered publicly. The information is used to determine
whether the trustee is qualified to serve under the indenture. Form T-2
takes approximately 9 hours per response to prepare and is filed by 36
respondents. We estimate that 25% of the 9 burden hours (2 hours per
responses) is prepared by the filer for a total reporting burden of 72
hours (2 hours per response x 36 responses).
    Written comments are invited on: (a) Whether this proposed
collection of information is necessary for the performance of the
functions of the agency, including whether the information will have
practical utility; (b) the accuracy of the agency's estimate of the
burden imposed by the collection of information; (c) ways to enhance
the quality, utility, and clarity of the information collected; and (d)
ways to minimize the burden of the collection of information on
respondents, including through the use of automated collection
techniques or other forms of information technology. Consideration will
be given to comments and suggestions submitted in writing within 60
days of this publication.
    Please direct your written comments to Charles Boucher, Director/
CIO, Securities and Exchange Commission, C/O Shirley Martinson, 6432
General Green Way, Alexandria, Virginia 22312; or send an e-mail to:
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
    Dated: August 3, 2009.
Florence E. Harmon,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. E9-18980 Filed 8-6-09; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 8010-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 86, Number 16 (Wednesday, January 27, 2021)]
[Notices]
[Pages 7334-7335]
[FR Doc No: 2021-01781]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration

[Docket No. PHMSA-2019-0144]

Pipeline Safety: Request for Special Permit; Natural Gas Pipeline
Company of America, LLC

AGENCY: Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration (PHMSA);
DOT.

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: PHMSA is publishing this notice to solicit public comments on
a request for special permit received from the Natural Gas Pipeline
Company of America, LLC (NGPL). The special permit request is seeking
relief from compliance with certain requirements in the Federal
pipeline safety regulations. At the conclusion of the 30-day comment
period, PHMSA will review the comments received from this notice as
part of its evaluation to grant or deny the special permit request.

DATES: Submit any comments regarding this special permit request by
February 26, 2021.

ADDRESSES: Comments should reference the docket number for this special
permit request and may be submitted in the following ways:
     E-Gov Website: http://www.Regulations.gov. This site
allows the public to enter comments on any Federal Register notice
issued by any agency.
     Fax: 1-202-493-2251.
     Mail: Docket Management System: U.S. Department of
Transportation, Docket Operations, M-30, West Building Ground Floor,
Room W12-140, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE, Washington, DC 20590.
     Hand Delivery: Docket Management System: U.S. Department
of Transportation, Docket Operations, M-30, West Building Ground Floor,
Room W12-140, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE, Washington, DC 20590, between
9:00 a.m. and 5:00 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal
holidays.
    Instructions: You should identify the docket number for the special
permit request you are commenting on at the beginning of your comments.
If you submit your comments by mail, please submit two (2) copies. To
receive confirmation that PHMSA has received your comments, please
include a self-addressed stamped postcard. Internet users may submit
comments at http://www.Regulations.gov.
    Note: There is a privacy statement published on http://www.Regulations.gov. Comments, including any personal information
provided, are posted without changes or edits to http://www.Regulations.gov.
    Confidential Business Information: Confidential Business
Information (CBI) is commercial or financial information that is both
customarily and actually treated as private by its owner. Under the
Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) (5 U.S.C. 552), CBI is exempt from
public disclosure. If your comments responsive to this notice contain
commercial or financial information that is customarily treated as
private, that you actually treat as private, and that is relevant or
responsive to this notice, it is important that you clearly designate
the submitted comments as CBI. Pursuant to 49 Code of Federal
Regulations (CFR) 190.343, you may ask PHMSA to give confidential
treatment to information you give to the agency by taking the following
steps: (1) Mark each page of the original document submission
containing CBI as ``Confidential''; (2) send PHMSA, along with the
original document, a second copy of the original document with the CBI
deleted; and (3) explain why the information you are submitting is CBI.
Unless you are notified otherwise, PHMSA will treat such marked
submissions as confidential under the FOIA, and they will not be placed
in the public docket of this notice. Submissions containing CBI should
be sent to Kay McIver, DOT, PHMSA-PHP-80, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE,

Washington, DC 20590-0001. Any commentary PHMSA receives that is not
specifically designated as CBI will be placed in the public docket for
this matter.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
    General: Ms. Kay McIver by telephone at<PHONE_NUMBER>, or by email
at<EMAIL_ADDRESS>    Technical: Mr. Steve Nanney by telephone at<PHONE_NUMBER>, or by
email at<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: PHMSA received a special permit request from
NGPL, a subsidiary of Kinder Morgan, Inc., seeking a waiver from the
requirements of 49 CFR 192.611(a) and (d): Change in class location:
Confirmation or revision of maximum allowable operating pressure, and
49 CFR 192.619(a): Maximum allowable operating pressure: Steel or
plastic pipelines. This special permit is being requested in lieu of
pipe replacement or pressure reduction for one (1) pipeline segment
totaling 616 feet (approximately 0.12 miles) of 36-inch diameter pipe
on the Gulf Coast Line #3 Pipeline located in White County, Arkansas.
The proposed special permit will allow operation of the original Class
1 pipe in the Class 3 location.
    The proposed special permit segment on the NGPL Gulf Coast Line #3
Pipeline has a maximum allowable operating pressure of 858 pounds per
square inch gauge and was constructed in 1966.
    The special permit request, proposed special permit with
conditions, and Draft Environmental Assessment (DEA) for the NGPL Gulf
Coast Line #3 Pipeline are available for review and public comments in
Docket No. PHMSA-2019-0144. We invite interested persons to review and
submit comments on the special permit request and DEA in the docket.
Please include any comments on potential safety and environmental
impacts that may result if the special permit is granted. Comments may
include relevant data.
    Before issuing a decision on the special permit request, PHMSA will
evaluate all comments received on or before the comments closing date.
Comments received after the closing date will be evaluated, if it is
possible to do so without incurring additional expense or delay. PHMSA
will consider each relevant comment it receives in making its decision
to grant or deny this special permit request.

    Issued in Washington, DC, under authority delegated in 49 CFR
1.97.
Alan K. Mayberry,
Associate Administrator for Pipeline Safety.
[FR Doc. 2021-01781 Filed 1-26-21; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-60-P