The Coast Guard is required to review and adjust pilotage rates on
the Great Lakes annually. See Parts III and IV of this preamble for
detailed discussions of the Coast Guard's legal basis and purpose for
this rulemaking and for background information on Great Lakes pilotage
ratemaking. Based on our annual review for this rulemaking, we are
adjusting the pilotage rates for the 2015 shipping season to generate
sufficient revenue to cover allowable expenses, and to target pilot
compensation and returns on pilot associations' investments. The rate
adjustments in this rule will, if codified, lead to an increase in the
cost per unit

of service to shippers in all three districts, and result in an
estimated annual cost increase to shippers of approximately $1,276,980
across all three districts over 2014 rates--an increase of 10 percent.
    In addition to the increase in payments that will be incurred by
shippers in all three districts from the previous year as a result of
the discretionary rate adjustments, we are authorizing temporary,
supplemental surcharges to traffic across all three districts in order
for the pilotage associations to recover training expenses and
technology improvements that were incurred throughout the 2013 and 2014
shipping seasons. These temporary surcharges will be authorized for the
duration of the 2015 shipping season, which begins in March. The
additional revenue due to the temporary surcharges was calculated by
multiplying the surcharge percentage by the projected revenue needed in
2015 for each district (Table 37). We estimate that these temporary
surcharges will generate a combined $1,404,678 in revenue for the
pilotage associations across all three districts. In District One, the
10 percent surcharge is expected to generate an additional $440,255 in
revenue. In District Two, the 10 percent surcharge is expected to
generate $424,443 in additional revenue. In District Three, the 10
percent surcharge is expected to generate an additional $539,979 in
revenue. At the end of the 2015 shipping season, we will account for
the monies the surcharges generate and make adjustments (debits/
credits) to the operating expenses for the following year.
    Therefore, after accounting for the implementation of the temporary
surcharges on traffic across all three districts, the payments made by
shippers during the 2015 shipping season are estimated to be
approximately $2,681,657 more than the payments that were made in
2014.\4\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ Total payments across all three districts are equal to the
increase in payments incurred by shippers as a result of the rate
changes plus the temporary surcharges applied to traffic in
Districts One, Two, and Three.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    A regulatory assessment follows.
    The final rule applies the 46 CFR part 404, Appendix A, full
ratemaking methodology, including the exercise of our discretion to
increase Great Lakes pilotage rates, on average, approximately 10
percent overall from the current rates set in the 2014 final rule. The
Appendix A methodology is discussed and applied in detail in Part VI of
this preamble. Among other factors described in Part VI, it reflects
audited 2012 financial data from the pilotage associations (the most
recent year available for auditing), projected association expenses,
and regional inflation or deflation. The last full Appendix A
ratemaking was concluded in 2014 and used financial data from the 2011
base accounting year. The last annual rate review, conducted under 46
CFR part 404, Appendix C, was completed early in 2011.
    The shippers affected by these rate adjustments are those owners
and operators of domestic vessels operating on register (employed in
foreign trade) and owners and operators of foreign vessels on a route
within the Great Lakes system. These owners and operators must have
pilots or pilotage service as required by 46 U.S. C. 9302. There is no
minimum tonnage limit or exemption for these vessels. The statute
applies only to commercial vessels and not to recreational vessels.
    Owners and operators of other vessels that are not affected by this
final rule, such as recreational boats and vessels operating only
within the Great Lakes system, may elect to purchase pilotage services.
However, this election is voluntary and does not affect our calculation
of the rate and is not a part of our estimated national cost to
shippers.
    We used 2011-2013 vessel arrival data from the Coast Guard's Marine
Information for Safety and Law Enforcement (MISLE) system to estimate
the average annual number of vessels affected by the rate adjustment.
Using that period, we found that approximately 114 different vessels
journeyed into the Great Lakes system annually. These vessels entered
the Great Lakes by transiting at least one of the three pilotage
districts before leaving the Great Lakes system. These vessels often
made more than one distinct stop, docking, loading, and unloading at
facilities in Great Lakes ports. Of the total trips for the 114
vessels, there were approximately 353 annual U.S. port arrivals before
the vessels left the Great Lakes system, based on 2011-2013 vessel data
from MISLE.
    The impact of the rate adjustment to shippers is estimated from the
District pilotage revenues. These revenues represent the costs that
shippers must pay for pilotage services. The Coast Guard sets rates so
that revenues equal the estimated cost of pilotage for these services.
    We estimate the additional impact (cost increases or cost
decreases) of the rate adjustment in this rule to be the difference
between the total projected revenue needed to cover costs in 2014,
based on the 2014 rate adjustment, and the total projected revenue
needed to cover costs in 2015, as set forth in this rule, plus any
temporary surcharges authorized by the Coast Guard. Table 36 details
projected revenue needed to cover costs in 2015 after making the
discretionary adjustment to pilotage rates as discussed in Step 7 of
Part V of this preamble. Table 37 summarizes the derivation for
calculating the revenue expected to be generated as a result of the
temporary surcharges applied to traffic in all three districts as
discussed in Step 7 of Part V of this preamble. Table 38 details the
additional cost increases to shippers by area and district as a result
of the rate adjustments and temporary surcharges on traffic in
Districts One, Two, and Three.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ 2014 Pilotage Rates are described in Table 16 of this rule.
    \6\ The estimated rate changes are described in Table 32 of this
rule.
    \7\ 2015 Pilotage Rates--2014 Pilotage Rates x Rate Change.
    \8\ Projected 2015 Bridge Hours are described in Table 14 of
this rule.
    \9\ Projected Revenue Needed in 2015--2015 Pilotage Rates x
Projected 2015 Bridge Hours.

                                 Table 36--Rate Adjustment by Area and District
                                             [$U.S.; Non-discounted]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                Projected
                                   2014 Pilotage    Rate change    2015 Pilotage  Projected 2015      revenue
                                     rates \5\          \6\          rates \7\     bridge hours   needed in 2015
                                                                                \8\             \9\
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Area 1..........................         $472.50            1.10         $519.74           5,116      $2,659,014
Area 2..........................          291.96            1.10          321.15           5,429       1,743,536
                                 -------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Total, District One.........  ..............  ..............  ..............  ..............       4,402,549
Area 4..........................          210.40            1.10          231.44           5,814       1,345,588
Area 5..........................          521.64            1.10          573.80           5,052       2,898,845
                                 -------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Total, District Two.........  ..............  ..............  ..............  ..............       4,244,433
Area 6..........................          204.95            1.10          225.45           9,611       2,166,780
Area 7..........................          495.01            1.10          544.52           3,023       1,646,070
Area 8..........................          191.34            1.10          210.47           7,540       1,586,945
                                 -------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Total, District Three.......  ..............  ..............  ..............  ..............       5,399,795
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* Some values may not total due to rounding.

                                                       Table 37--Derivation of Temporary Surcharge
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                              Area 1          Area 2          Area 4          Area 5          Area 6          Area 7          Area 8
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Projected Revenue Needed in 2015........      $2,659,014      $1,743,536      $1,345,588      $2,898,845      $2,166,780      $1,646,070      $1,586,945
Surcharge Rate..........................             10%             10%             10%             10%             10%             10%             10%
Surcharge Raised........................        $265,901        $174,354        $134,559        $289,885        $216,678        $167,607        $158,694
                                         ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Total Surcharge.....................             $440,255
                                                     $424,443
                                                             $539,979
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

                                Table 38--Impact of the Rule by Area and District
                                             [$U.S.; Non-discounted]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                Total costs or
                                                                                savings of
                                                                                this final
                                     Projected       Projected                      Additional         rule
                                      revenue         revenue        Temporary      revenue or      (additional
                                    needed  in      needed  in       surcharge      costs 2015      revenue  or
                                     2014 \10\       2015 \11\                      (2015-2014)        costs
                                                                                2015+temporary
                                                                                surcharge)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Area 1..........................      $2,417,285      $2,659,014        $265,901        $241,729        $507,630
Area 2..........................       1,585,032       1,743,536         174,354         158,503         332,857
                                 -------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Total, District One.........       4,002,318       4,402,549         440,255         400,232         840,487
Area 4..........................       1,223,262       1,345,588         134,559         122,326         256,885
Area 5..........................       2,635,314       2,898,845         289,885         263,531         553,416
                                 -------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Total, District Two.........       3,858,576       4,244,433         424,443         385,858         810,301
Area 6..........................       1,969,800       2,166,780         216,678         196,980         413,658
Area 7..........................       1,496,427       1,646,070         164,607         149,643         314,250
Area 8..........................       1,442,677       1,586,945         158,694         144,268         302,962
                                 -------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Total, District Three.......       4,908,904       5,399,795         539,979         490,890       1,030,870
    System Total................      12,769,797      14,046,777       1,404,678       1,276,980       2,681,657
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* Some values may not total due to rounding.

    After applying the discretionary rate change in this rule, the
resulting difference between the projected revenue in 2014 and the
projected revenue in 2015 is the annual change in payments from
shippers to pilots after accounting for market conditions (i.e., a
decrease in demand for pilotage services) and the change to pilotage
rates as a result of this final rule. This figure is equivalent to the
total additional payments or reduction in payments from the previous
year that shippers will incur for pilotage services from this rule.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \10\ Projected revenue needed in 2014 is described in Table 16
of this rule.
    \11\ Projected revenue needed in 2015 is described in Table 36
of this rule.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The impact of the discretionary rate adjustment on shippers varies
by area and district in this final rule. The discretionary rate
adjustments will lead to affected shippers operating in District One,
District Two, and District Three experiencing an increase in payments
of $400,232, $385,858, and $490,890, respectively, from the previous
year.
    In addition to the rate adjustments, temporary surcharges on
traffic in District One, District Two, and District Three will be
applied for the duration of the 2015 season in order for the pilotage
associations to recover training expenses and technology investments
incurred during the 2013 and 2014

shipping seasons. We estimate that these surcharges will generate an
additional $440,255, $424,443, and $539,979 in revenue for the pilotage
associations in District One, District Two, and District Three,
respectively. At the end of the 2015 shipping season, we will account
for the monies the surcharges generate and make adjustments (debits/
credits) to the operating expenses for the following year.\12\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \12\ Our projections indicate in the 2016 rulemaking we will
apply a surcharge of $112,226 for District One shippers at the end
of the 2015 season in order to account for the difference between
the total surcharges collected ($440,255) and the actual expenses
incurred by the District One pilot association ($328,029 for
training expenses), District Two shippers $98,614 (calculation:
$424,443 (total surcharges collected) minus $300,000 to train two
applicant pilots and ($25,829.80 for technology improvements)), and
District Three shippers $213,029 (calculation: $539,979 (total
surcharges collected) minus $326,950 (actual training expenses
incurred)).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    To calculate an exact cost or savings per vessel is difficult
because of the variation in vessel types, routes, port arrivals,
commodity carriage, time of season, conditions during navigation, and
preferences for the extent of pilotage services on designated and
undesignated portions of the Great Lakes system. Some owners and
operators will pay more and some would pay less, depending on the
distance travelled and the number of port arrivals by their vessels.
However, the increase in costs reported earlier in this rule does
capture the adjustment in payments that shippers will experience from
the previous year. The overall adjustment in payments, after taking
into account the increase in pilotage rates and the addition of
temporary surcharges will be an increase in payments by shippers of
approximately $2,681,657 across all three districts.
    This rule will allow the Coast Guard to meet the requirements in 46
U.S. C. 9303 to review the rates for pilotage services on the Great
Lakes, thus ensuring proper pilot compensation.
    Alternatively, if we imposed the new rates based on the new
contract data from AMOU, instead of using the discretionary rate
adjustment described in Step 7, there would be an approximately 12
percent decrease in rates across the system. Instead of shippers
experiencing an increase in payments of approximately $1,276,980 \13\
from the previous year, as a result of the rate adjustments, shippers
would instead experience a reduction in payments of approximately
$1,475,412.\14\ Table 39 details projected revenue needed to cover
costs in 2015 if the discretionary adjustment to pilotage rates as
discussed in Step 7 of Part V of this preamble is not made. Table 40
details the additional costs or savings by area and district as a
result of this alternative proposal.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \13\ This figure is the total costs or savings of the final rule
minus the surcharges.
    \14\ This figure does not include the additional payments
incurred by shippers as a result of the temporary surcharges applied
to traffic in all three districts. The figure is equal to the total
additional costs or savings of this final rule minus the temporary
surcharges (see Table 40).
    \15\ The estimated rate changes are described in Table 32 of
this final rule.

                           Table 39--Alternative Rate Adjustment by Area and District
                                             [$U.S.; Non-discounted]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                2014 Pilotage    Rate change    2015 Pilotage  Projected 2015  Projected revenue
                                    rates           \15\            rates       bridge hours     needed in 2015
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Area 1.......................         $472.50          0.8423         $398.00           5,116         $2,036,149
Area 2.......................          291.96          0.8443          246.51           5,429          1,338,302
                              ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Total, District One......  ..............  ..............  ..............  ..............          3,374,451
Area 4.......................          210.40          0.9946          209.27           5,814          1,216,674
Area 5.......................          521.64          0.8363          436.22           5,052          2,203,805
                              ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Total, District Two......  ..............  ..............  ..............  ..............          3,420,480
Area 6.......................          204.95          0.9405          192.76           9,611          1,852,580
Area 7.......................          495.01          0.8608          426.13           3,023          1,288,197
Area 8.......................          191.34          0.9418          180.20           7,540          1,358,677
                              ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Total, District Three....  ..............  ..............  ..............  ..............          4,499,454
    System Total.............  ..............  ..............  ..............  ..............         11,294,385
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\*\ Some values may not total due to rounding.

                          Table 40--Alternative Impact of the Rule by Area and District
                                             [$U.S.; Non-discounted]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                             Projected         Projected                        Additional costs
                                          revenue needed    revenue needed       Temporary       or savings of
                                              in 2014           in 2015          surcharge         this rule
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Area 1.................................        $2,417,285        $2,036,149          $203,615         ($177,521)
Area 2.................................         1,585,032         1,338,302           133,830          (112,900)
                                        ------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Total, District One................         4,002,318         3,374,451           337,445          (290,421)
Area 4.................................         1,223,262         1,216,674           121,667           115,080
Area 5.................................         2,635,314         2,203,805           220,381          (211,128)
                                        ------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Total, District Two................         3,858,576         3,420,480           342,048           (96,048)
Area 6.................................         1,969,800         1,852,580           185,258            68,038
Area 7.................................         1,496,427         1,288,197           128,820           (79,411)
Area 8.................................         1,442,677         1,358,677           135,868            51,868
                                        ------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Total, District Three..............         4,908,904         4,499,454           449,945            40,495
                                        ------------------------------------------------------------------------
    System Total.......................        12,769,797        11,294,385         1,129,439          (345,974)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\*\ Some values may not total due to rounding.

    We reject this alternative, however, because independent audits of
pilot association revenues details a nearly $2 million gap between
Coast Guard revenue projections and the amount of revenues actually
collected. A rate decrease would only further widen this disparity, and
would also jeopardize the ability of pilotage associations to provide
safe, efficient, and reliable pilotage service. A rate increase of 10
percent in all areas will lessen the gap between revenues projected by
the Coast Guard and those collected by pilot associations, and the gap
between the actual salaries of U.S. Registered Pilots and Canadian
Registered Pilots of the GLPA. See our discussion of Step 7 in Part VI
of this preamble for further explanation.

B. 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
people.
    We expect that entities affected by the final rule will be
classified under the North American Industry Classification System
(NAICS) code subsector 483-Water Transportation, which includes the
following 6-digit NAICS codes for freight transportation: 483111--Deep
Sea Freight Transportation, 483113--Coastal and Great Lakes Freight
Transportation, and 483211--Inland Water Freight Transportation.
According to the Small Business Administration's definition, a U.S.
company with these NAICS codes and employing less than 500 employees is
considered a small entity.
    For the final rule, we reviewed recent company size and ownership
data for the period 2011 through 2013 in the Coast Guard's MISLE
database, and we reviewed business revenue and size data provided by
publicly available sources such as MANTA and Reference USA. We found
that large, foreign-owned shipping conglomerates or their subsidiaries
owned or operated all vessels engaged in foreign trade on the Great
Lakes. We assume that new industry entrants would be comparable in
ownership and size to these shippers.
    There are three U.S. entities affected by this rule that receive
revenue from pilotage services. These are the three pilot associations
that provide and manage pilotage services within the Great Lakes
districts. Two of the associations operate as partnerships and one
operates as a corporation. These associations are designated with the
same NAICS industry classification and small-entity size standards
described above, but they have fewer than 500 employees; combined, they
have approximately 65 total employees. We expect no adverse impact to
these entities from this rule because through this rulemaking, all the
pilot associations are provided with additional revenue to offset some
of the projected expenses associated with the projected number of
bridge hours and pilots, and to keep them on par with their Canadian
counterparts.
    Therefore, the Coast Guard certifies under 5 U.S.C. 605(b) that
this rule would not have a significant economic impact on a substantial
number of small entities.

C. Assistance for Small Entities

    Under section 213(a) of the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement
Fairness Act of 1996 (Pub. L. 104-121), we offered to assist small
entities in understanding this rule so that they can better evaluate
its effects on them and participate in the rulemaking. 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.
    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).

D. 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). This rule does
not change the burden in the collection currently approved by the OMB
under OMB Control Number 1625-0086, Great Lakes Pilotage Methodology.

E. Federalism

    A rule has implications for federalism under E.O. 13132,
Federalism, if it has a substantial direct effect on the States, on the
relationship between the national government and the States, or on the
distribution of power and responsibilities among the various levels of
government. We have analyzed this rule under that order and have
determined that it is consistent with the fundamental federalism
principles and preemption requirements described in E.O. 13132. Our
analysis is explained below.
    Congress directed the Coast Guard to establish ``rates and charges
for pilotage services.'' 46 U.S.C. 9303(f). This regulation is issued
pursuant to that statute and is preemptive of state law as specified in
46 U.S.C. 9306. Under 46 U.S.C. 9306, a ``State or political
subdivision of a State may not regulate or impose any requirement on
pilotage on the Great Lakes.'' As a result, States or local governments
are expressly prohibited from regulating within this category.
Therefore, this rule is consistent with the principles of federalism
and preemption requirements in E.O. 13132.

F. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act

    The Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (2 U.S.C. 1531-1538)
requires Federal agencies to assess the effects of their discretionary
regulatory actions. In particular, the Act addresses actions

that may result in the expenditure by a State, local, or tribal
government, in the aggregate, or by the private sector of $100,000,000
(adjusted for inflation) or more in any one year. Though this rule
would not result in such expenditure, we discuss the effects of this
rule elsewhere in this preamble.

G. Taking of Private Property

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

H. Civil Justice Reform

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

I. Protection of Children

    We have analyzed this rule under E.O. 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.

J. Indian Tribal Governments

    This rule does not have tribal implications under E.O. 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.

K. Energy Effects

    We have analyzed this rule under E.O. 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 E.O. 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 E.O. 13211.

L. Technical Standards

    The National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act (15 U.S.C.
272, note) directs agencies to use voluntary consensus standards in
their regulatory activities unless the agency provides Congress,
through the OMB, 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.

M. Environment

    We have analyzed this rule under Department of Homeland Security
Management Directive 023-01 and Commandant Instruction M16475.lD, which
guide the Coast Guard in complying with the National Environmental
Policy Act of 1969 (42 U.S.C. 4321-4370f), and have concluded that this
action is one of a category of actions that do not individually or
cumulatively have a significant effect on the human environment. A
final environmental analysis checklist supporting this determination is
available in the docket where indicated under the ADDRESSES section of
this preamble. This final rule involves regulations that are editorial
or procedural and fall under section 2.B.2, figure 2-1, paragraph
(34)(a) of the Instruction.

List of Subjects in 46 CFR Part 401

    Administrative practice and procedure, Great Lakes, Navigation
(water), Penalties, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Seamen.

    For the reasons discussed in the preamble, the Coast Guard amends
46 CFR part 401 as follows:

Title 46--Shipping

PART 401--GREAT LAKES PILOTAGE REGULATIONS

0
1. The authority citation for part 401 continues to read as follows:

    Authority:  46 U.S.C. 2104(a), 6101, 7701, 8105, 9303, 9304;
Department of Homeland Security Delegation No. 0170.1; 46 CFR
401.105 also issued under the authority of 44 U.S.C. 3507.

0
2. In Sec.  401.405, revise paragraphs (a) and (b), including the
footnote to Table (a), to read as follows:

Sec.  401.405  Basic rates and charges on the St. Lawrence River and
Lake Ontario.

* * * * *
    (a) Area 1 (Designated Waters):

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                  Service                        St. Lawrence River
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Basic Pilotage............................  $21.13 per kilometer or
                                             $37.42 per mile.\1\
Each Lock Transited.......................  $469.\1\
Harbor Movage.............................  $1,535.\1\
------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ The minimum basic rate for assignment of a pilot in the St. Lawrence
  River is $1,024, and the maximum basic rate for a through trip is
  $4,492.

    (b) Area 2 (Undesignated Waters):

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                        Service                           Lake Ontario
------------------------------------------------------------------------
6-hour Period.........................................              $959
Docking or Undocking..................................               915
------------------------------------------------------------------------

0
3. In Sec.  401.407, revise paragraphs (a) and (b), including the
footnote to Table (b), to read as follows:

Sec.  401.407  Basic rates and charges on Lake Erie and the navigable
waters from Southeast Shoal to Port Huron, MI.

* * * * *
    (a) Area 4 (Undesignated Waters):

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                       Lake Erie (East
               Service                  of  Southeast        Buffalo
                                           Shoal)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
6-hour Period.......................              $934              $934
Docking or Undocking................               718               718
Any point on the Niagara River below               N/A             1,834
 the Black Rock Lock................
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    (b) Area 5 (Designated Waters):

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                   Toledo or any
                                                   point on Lake
       Any point on or in            Southeast     Erie west of    Detroit River   Detroit Pilot     St. Clair
                                       Shoal         Southeast                         Boat            River
                                                       Shoal
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Toledo or any port on Lake Erie           $2,637          $1,559          $3,424          $2,637             N/A
 west of Southeast Shoal........
Port Huron Change Point.........       \1\ 4,594       \1\ 5,321           3,451           2,685           1,909
St. Clair River.................       \1\ 4,594             N/A           3,451           3,451           1,559
Detroit or Windsor or the                  2,637           3,424           1,559             N/A           3,451
 Detroit River..................
Detroit Pilot Boat..............           1,909           2,637             N/A             N/A           3,451
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ When pilots are not changed at the Detroit Pilot Boat.

0
4. In Sec.  401.410, revise paragraphs (a), (b), and (c) to read as
follows:

Sec.  401.410  Basic rates and charges on Lakes Huron, Michigan, and
Superior; and the St. Mary's River.

* * * * *
    (a) Area 6 (Undesignated Waters):

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                         Lakes Huron and
                        Service                             Michigan
------------------------------------------------------------------------
6-hour Period.........................................              $779
Docking or Undocking..................................               739
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    (b) Area 7 (Designated Waters):

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                              Area                                    De tour        Gros cap       Any harbor
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Gros Cap........................................................          $2,913             N/A             N/A
Algoma Steel Corporation Wharf at Sault Ste. Marie, Ontario.....           2,913          $1,097             N/A
Any point in Sault Ste. Marie, Ontario, except the Algoma Steel            2,441           1,097             N/A
 Corporation Wharf..............................................
Sault Ste. Marie, MI............................................           2,441           1,097             N/A
Harbor Movage...................................................             N/A             N/A          $1,097
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    (c) Area 8 (Undesignated Waters):

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                        Service                           Lake Superior
------------------------------------------------------------------------
6-hour Period.........................................              $661
Docking or Undocking..................................               628
------------------------------------------------------------------------

Sec.  401.420  [Amended]

0
5. Amend Sec.  401.420 as follows:
0
a. In paragraph (a), remove the text ``$129'' and add, in its place,
the text ``$142''; and remove the text ``$2,021'' and add, in its
place, the text ``$2,223'';
0
b. In paragraph (b), remove the text ``$129'' and add, in its place,
the text ``$142''; and remove the text ``$2,021'' and add, in its
place, the text ``$2,223''; and
0
c. In paragraph (c)(1), remove the text ``$763'' and add, in its place,
the text ``$839''; in paragraph (c)(3), remove the text ``$129'' and
add, in its place, the text ``$142''; and remove the text ``$2,021''
and add, in its place, the text ``$2,223''.

Sec.  401.428  [Amended]

0
6. In Sec.  401.428, remove the text ``$763'' and add, in its place,
the text ``$839''.

    Dated: February 23, 2015.
Gary C. Rasicot,
Director, Marine Transportation Systems, U.S. Coast Guard.
[FR Doc. 2015-04036 Filed 2-25-15; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 9110-04-P


[Federal Register Volume 88, Number 177 (Thursday, September 14, 2023)]
[Notices]
[Pages 63102-63103]
[FR Doc No: 2023-19880]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

Combined Notice of Filings #1

    Take notice that the Commission received the following exempt
wholesale generator filings:

    Docket Numbers: EG23-277-000.
    Applicants: River Ferry Solar I LLC.
    Description: River Ferry Solar I LLC submits Notice of Self-
Certification of Exempt Wholesale Generator Status.
    Filed Date: 9/6/23.
    Accession Number: 20230906-5171.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. ET 9/27/23.

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

    Docket Numbers: ER23-1407-002.
    Applicants: Transource Pennsylvania, LLC.
    Description: Compliance filing: American Electric Power Service
Corporation submits tariff filing per 35: Transource Compliance Filing
regarding Transmission Rates in ER23-1407 to be effective 8/12/2023.
    Filed Date: 9/8/23.
    Accession Number: 20230908-5061.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. ET 9/29/23.

    Docket Numbers: ER23-2779-000.
    Applicants: PJM Interconnection, L.L.C.
    Description: Tariff Amendment: Notice of Cancellation of ISA, SA
No. 5990; Queue No. AF2-265 Re: Breach to be effective 11/6/2023.
    Filed Date: 9/7/23.
    Accession Number: 20230907-5119.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. ET 9/28/23.

    Docket Numbers: ER23-2780-000.
    Applicants: Public Service Company of Colorado.
    Description: Tariff Amendment: 2023-09-07--GI-2016-15 E&P-Agrmt--
556--NOC to be effective 11/6/2023.
    Filed Date: 9/7/23.
    Accession Number: 20230907-5130.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. ET 9/28/23.

    Docket Numbers: ER23-2781-000.
    Applicants: Southwest Power Pool, Inc.
    Description: Sec.  205(d) Rate Filing: Attachment AA to Add the
Winter Season Resource Adequacy Requirement to be effective 12/1/2023.
    Filed Date: 9/8/23.
    Accession Number: 20230908-5016.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. ET 9/29/23.

    Docket Numbers: ER23-2782-000.
    Applicants: Algodon Solar Energy LLC.
    Description: Sec.  205(d) Rate Filing: Revised Market-Based Rate
Tariff Filing to be effective 11/8/2023.
    Filed Date: 9/8/23.
    Accession Number: 20230908-5026.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. ET 9/29/23.

    Docket Numbers: ER23-2783-000.
    Applicants: Algodon Solar Energy Holdings LLC.
    Description: Sec.  205(d) Rate Filing: Revised Market-Based Rate
Tariff Filing to be effective 11/8/2023.
    Filed Date: 9/8/23.
    Accession Number: 20230908-5027.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. ET 9/29/23.

    Docket Numbers: ER23-2784-000.
    Applicants: Chisholm Trail Solar Energy LLC.
    Description: Sec.  205(d) Rate Filing: Revised Market-Based Rate
Tariff Filing to be effective 11/8/2023.
    Filed Date: 9/8/23.
    Accession Number: 20230908-5036.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. ET 9/29/23.

    Docket Numbers: ER23-2785-000.
    Applicants: Chisholm Trail Solar Energy Holdings LLC.
    Description: Sec.  205(d) Rate Filing: Revised Market-Based Rate
Tariff Filing to be effective 11/8/2023.
    Filed Date: 9/8/23.
    Accession Number: 20230908-5038.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. ET 9/29/23.

    Docket Numbers: ER23-2786-000.
    Applicants: Flat Ridge 4 Wind, LLC.
    Description: Sec.  205(d) Rate Filing: Revised Market-Based Rate
Tariff Filing to be effective 11/8/2023.
    Filed Date: 9/8/23.
    Accession Number: 20230908-5046.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. ET 9/29/23.

    Docket Numbers: ER23-2787-000.
    Applicants: Flat Ridge 4 Wind Holdings LLC.
    Description: Sec.  205(d) Rate Filing: Revised Market-Based Rate
Tariff Filing to be effective 11/8/2023.
    Filed Date: 9/8/23.
    Accession Number: 20230908-5050.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. ET 9/29/23.

    Docket Numbers: ER23-2788-000.

    Applicants: PJM Interconnection, L.L.C.
    Description: Sec.  205(d) Rate Filing: Original ISA, Service
Agreement No. 7069; Queue No. AF1-064 to be effective 8/7/2023.
    Filed Date: 9/8/23.
    Accession Number: 20230908-5054.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. ET 9/29/23.

    Docket Numbers: ER23-2789-000.
    Applicants: Flat Ridge 5 Wind Energy LLC.
    Description: Sec.  205(d) Rate Filing: Revised Market-Based Rate
Tariff Filing to be effective 11/8/2023.
    Filed Date: 9/8/23.
    Accession Number: 20230908-5063.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. ET 9/29/23.

    Docket Numbers: ER23-2790-000.
    Applicants: Flat Ridge 5 Wind Energy Holdings LLC.
    Description: Sec.  205(d) Rate Filing: Revised Market-Based Rate
Tariff Filing to be effective 11/8/2023.
    Filed Date: 9/8/23.
    Accession Number: 20230908-5064.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. ET 9/29/23.

    Docket Numbers: ER23-2791-000.
    Applicants: Midcontinent Independent System Operator, Inc.,
Michigan Electric Transmission Company, LLC.
    Description: Sec.  205(d) Rate Filing: Midcontinent Independent
System Operator, Inc. submits tariff filing per 35.13(a)(2)(iii: 2023-
09-08_METC Abandonment Incentive Application-Hiple/Helix to be
effective 11/8/2023.
    Filed Date: 9/8/23.
    Accession Number: 20230908-5075.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. ET 9/29/23.

    Docket Numbers: ER23-2792-000.
    Applicants: Lazbuddie Wind Energy LLC.
    Description: Sec.  205(d) Rate Filing: Revised Market-Based Rate
Tariff Filing to be effective 11/8/2023.
    Filed Date: 9/8/23.
    Accession Number: 20230908-5099.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. ET 9/29/23.

    Docket Numbers: ER23-2793-000.
    Applicants: Lazbuddie Wind Energy Holdings LLC.
    Description: Sec.  205(d) Rate Filing: Revised Market-Based Rate
Tariff Filing to be effective 11/8/2023.
    Filed Date: 9/8/23.
    Accession Number: 20230908-5100.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. ET 9/29/23.

    Docket Numbers: ER23-2794-000.
    Applicants: Pixley Solar Energy LLC.
    Description: Sec.  205(d) Rate Filing: Revised Market-Based Rate
Tariff Filing to be effective 11/8/2023.
    Filed Date: 9/8/23.
    Accession Number: 20230908-5103.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. ET 9/29/23.

    Docket Numbers: ER23-2795-000.
    Applicants: Pixley Solar Energy Holdings LLC.
    Description: Sec.  205(d) Rate Filing: Revised Market-Based Rate
Tariff Filing to be effective 11/8/2023.
    Filed Date: 9/8/23.
    Accession Number: 20230908-5105.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. ET 9/29/23.

    Docket Numbers: ER23-2796-000.
    Applicants: AEP Texas Inc.
    Description: Sec.  205(d) Rate Filing: AEPTX-LCRA TSC (B&B Gravel)
Facilities Development Agreement to be effective 8/23/2023.
    Filed Date: 9/8/23.
    Accession Number: 20230908-5122.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. ET 9/29/23.

    The filings are accessible in the Commission's eLibrary system
(https://elibrary.ferc.gov/idmws/search/fercgensearch.asp) by querying
the docket number.
    Any person desiring to intervene, to protest, or to answer a
complaint in any of the above proceedings must file in accordance with
Rules 211, 214, or 206 of the Commission's Regulations (18 CFR 385.211,
385.214, or 385.206) on or before 5:00 p.m. Eastern time on the
specified comment date. Protests may be considered, but intervention is
necessary to become a party to the proceeding.
    eFiling is encouraged. More detailed information relating to filing
requirements, interventions, protests, service, and qualifying
facilities filings can be found at: http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/efiling/filing-req.pdf. For other information, call<PHONE_NUMBER>
(toll free). For TTY, call<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    The Commission's Office of Public Participation (OPP) supports
meaningful public engagement and participation in Commission
proceedings. OPP can help members of the public, including landowners,
environmental justice communities, Tribal members and others, access
publicly available information and navigate Commission processes. For
public inquiries and assistance with making filings such as
interventions, comments, or requests for rehearing, the public is
encouraged to contact OPP at<PHONE_NUMBER> or [email protected].

    Dated: September 8, 2023.
Kimberly D. Bose,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2023-19880 Filed 9-13-23; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register: February 19, 2009 (Volume 74, Number 32)]
[Notices]
[Page 7715-7716]
[DOCID:fr19fe09-84]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-59386; File No. SR-DTC-2008-06]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; The Depository Trust Company;
Order Approving Proposed Rule Change, As Amended, To Modify End of Day
Settlement Procedures Relating to Settlement Acknowledgement Cut-Off
Time Frames for Settling Banks

February 11, 2009.

I. Introduction

    On June 19, 2008, The Depository Trust Company (``DTC'') filed with
the Securities and Exchange Commission (``Commission'') and on August
7, 2008, amended proposed rule change SR-

DTC-2008-06 pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the Securities Exchange Act
of 1934 (``Act'').\1\ Notice of the proposal was published in the
Federal Register on August 18, 2008.\2\ The Commission received no
comment letters. For the reasons discussed below, the Commission is
approving the proposed rule change as amended.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1).
    \2\ Securities Exchange Act Release No. 58343 (August 12, 2008),
73 FR 48259.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

II. Description

    DTC is modifying its end of day settlement procedures relating to
settlement acknowledgement cut-off time frames for Settling Banks.\3\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ The term ``Settling Bank'' means a Participant which is a
bank or trust company, subject to supervision or regulation pursuant
to Federal or State banking laws, which is a party to an effective
Settling Bank Agreement.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    DTC's End-of-Day Settlement Processing controls and coordinates the
settling of Participant accounts and Settling Bank accounts on DTC's
systems. Settlement occurs through the Fedwire system and is initiated
when DTC posts final figures for Participants and Settling Banks.
Although the actual settlement process begins with the posting of the
final settlement figures at approximately 3:45 p.m. each day,\4\ DTC's
settlement system provides Participants and Settling Banks with online
reports throughout the processing day. These reports reflect gross
debits, gross credits, and the net debit or credit for each Participant
and a net-net figure for each Settling Bank.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ All times are Eastern Standard Time.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Settling Banks, which settle for themselves, may also settle for
other Participants. Currently, the cut-off time for Settling Banks to
acknowledge their net-net settlement balance or to refuse to settle for
a specific Participant is the later of 4:30 p.m. or 30 minutes after
final net-net settlement balances are first made available by DTC.\5\
Any Participant for which a Settling Bank has refused to settle must
make arrangements for payment of any amount due DTC.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ The end-of-day net-net figure is the net of all
participants' net balances after cross endorsement with the National
Securities Clearing Corporation for which a Settling Bank settles,
including its own accounts.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Once the Settling Bank acknowledgement process has been completed,
DTC utilizes the Federal Reserve Bank of New York's National Settlement
Service (``NSS'') to effect end-of-day cash settlement.
    DTC is proposing that the cut-off time for Settling Banks to
acknowledge their settlement balance or refusal to settle for a
Participant be the later of 4:15 p.m. or 30 minutes after DTC has
posted final net-net settlement balances. DTC is proposing this change
to enable DTC to be in a position to release the credit amount due
Participants at an earlier time. Since DTC provides each Settling Bank
with online reports throughout the processing day which reflect gross
debits, gross credits, and the net debit or credit for each Participant
and a net-net figure for the Settling Bank, DTC believes that this
earlier cut-off time should not cause any undo burden. In the event
that a Settling Bank is experiencing difficulty in identifying customer
cash flows or has another extenuating circumstance and as a result
needs more time to acknowledge settlement or refuses to settle, that
Settling Bank would have to notify the Settlement department of its
request for additional time prior to 4:15 p.m.

III. Discussion

    Section 19(b) of the Act directs the Commission to approve a
proposed rule change of a self-regulatory organization if it finds that
such proposed rule change is consistent with the requirements of the
Act and the rules and regulations thereunder applicable to such
organization. Section 17A(b)(3)(F) of the Act requires that the rules
of a clearing agency be designed to promote the prompt and accurate
clearance and settlement of securities transactions.\6\ The Commission
believes that DTC's rule change is consistent with this Section because
the rule change should facilitate the prompt and accurate clearance and
settlement of securities by enabling DTC to send the NSS file to the
Federal Reserve Bank of New York earlier in the day and thus complete
settlement earlier.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ 15 U.S.C. 78q-1(b)(3)(F).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

IV. Conclusion

    On the basis of the foregoing, the Commission finds that the
proposed rule change, as amended, is consistent with the requirements
of the Act and in particular Section 17A of the Act and the rules and
regulations thereunder.\7\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ In approving the proposed rule change, as amended, the
Commission considered the proposal's impact on efficiency,
competition, and capital formation.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    It is therefore ordered, pursuant to Section 19(b)(2) of the Act,
that the proposed rule change (File No. SR-DTC-2008-06) as amended be
and hereby is approved.

    For the Commission by the Division of Trading and Markets,
pursuant to delegated authority.\8\
Florence E. Harmon,
Deputy Secretary.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \8\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

[FR Doc. E9-3428 Filed 2-18-09; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 80, Number 131 (Thursday, July 9, 2015)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 39386-39388]
[FR Doc No: 2015-16805]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Coast Guard

33 CFR Part 165

[Docket Number USCG-2015-0613]
RIN 1625-AA00

Safety Zone; The Cleveland Yachting Club Annual Regatta Fireworks
Display; Lake Erie, Rocky River, OH

AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS.

ACTION: Temporary final rule.

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

SUMMARY: The Coast Guard is establishing a temporary safety zone on
Lake Erie, Rocky River, OH. This safety zone is intended to restrict
vessels from a portion of Lake Erie during the Cleveland Yachting Club
Annual Regatta fireworks display. This temporary safety zone is
necessary to protect mariners and vessels from the navigational hazards
associated with a fireworks display.

DATES: This rule will be enforced from 9:30 p.m. until 10:15 p.m. on
July 12, 2015.

ADDRESSES: Documents mentioned in this preamble are part of docket
[USCG-2015-0613]. To view documents mentioned in this preamble as being
available in the docket, go to http://www.regulations.gov, type the
docket number in the ``SEARCH'' box and click ``SEARCH.'' Click on Open
Docket Folder on the line associated with this rulemaking. You may also
visit the Docket Management Facility in Room W12-140 on the ground
floor of the Department of Transportation West Building, 1200 New
Jersey Avenue SE., Washington, DC 20590, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m.,
Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: If you have questions on this rule,
call or email LT Stephanie Pitts, Chief of Waterways Management, U.S.
Coast Guard Marine Safety Unit Cleveland; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>43,
email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>If you have questions on viewing the
docket, call Ms. Cheryl Collins, Program Manager, Docket Operations,
telephone<PHONE_NUMBER> or 1-800-647-5527.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Table of Acronyms

DHS Department of Homeland Security
FR Federal Register
NPRM Notice of Proposed Rulemaking
TFR Temporary Final Rule

A. Regulatory History and 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 doing so would be impracticable and
contrary to the public interest. The final details for this event were
not known to the Coast Guard until there was insufficient time
remaining before the event to publish an NPRM. Thus, delaying the
effective date of this rule to wait for a comment period to run would
be impracticable and contrary to the public interest because it would
inhibit the Coast Guard's ability to protect spectators and vessels
from the hazards associated with a maritime fireworks display.
    Under 5 U.S.C. 553(d)(3), the Coast Guard finds that good cause
exists for making this temporary rule effective less than 30 days after
publication in the Federal Register. For the same reasons

discussed in the preceding paragraph, waiting for a 30 day notice
period to run would be impracticable and contrary to the public
interest.

B. Basis and Purpose

    The legal basis and authorities for this rule are found in 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, and 160.5; Pub. L. 107-295, 116 Stat. 2064;
and Department of Homeland Security Delegation No. 0170.1, which
collectively authorize the Coast Guard to establish and define
regulatory safety zones.
    Between 9:30 p.m. and 10:15 p.m. on July 12, 2015, a fireworks
display will be held on the shoreline of Lake Erie, in Rocky River, OH,
in vicinity of the western point of the entrance to the Rocky River. It
is anticipated that numerous vessels will be in the immediate vicinity
of the launch point. The Captain of the Port Buffalo has determined
that such a launch proximate to a gathering of watercraft pose a
significant risk to public safety and property. Such hazards include
premature and accidental detonations, dangerous projectiles, and
falling or burning debris.

C. Discussion of the Final Rule

    With the aforementioned hazards in mind, the Captain of the Port
Buffalo has determined that this temporary safety zone is necessary to
ensure the safety of spectators and vessels during the Cleveland
Yachting Club Annual Regatta fireworks display. This zone will be
effective and enforced from 9:30 p.m. until 10:15 p.m. on July 12,
2015. This zone will encompass all waters of Lake Erie; Rocky River, OH
within a 280-foot radius of position 41[deg] 29' 25.7'' N. and 081[deg]
50' 18.5'' W. (NAD 83).
    Entry into, transiting, or anchoring within the safety zone is
prohibited unless authorized by the Captain of the Port Buffalo or his
designated on-scene representative. The Captain of the Port or his
designated on-scene representative may be contacted via VHF Channel 16.

D. Regulatory Analyses

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

1. Regulatory Planning and Review

    This rule is not a significant regulatory action under section 3(f)
of Executive Order 12866, Regulatory Planning and Review, as
supplemented by Executive Order 13563, Improving Regulation and
Regulatory Review, and does not require an assessment of potential
costs and benefits under section 6(a)(3) of Executive Order 12866 or
under section 1 of Executive Order 13563. The Office of Management and
Budget has not reviewed it under those Orders.
    We conclude that this rule is not a significant regulatory action
because we anticipate that it will have minimal impact on the economy,
will not interfere with other agencies, will not adversely alter the
budget of any grant or loan recipients, and will not raise any novel
legal or policy issues. The safety zone created by this rule will be
relatively small and enforced for a relatively short time. Also, the
safety zone is designed to minimize its impact on navigable waters.
Furthermore, the safety zone has been designed to allow vessels to
transit around it. Thus, restrictions on vessel movement within that
particular area are expected to be minimal. Under certain conditions,
moreover, vessels may still transit through the safety zone when
permitted by the Captain of the Port.

2. Impact on Small Entities

    Under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601-612), we have
considered the impact of this rule on small entities. 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.
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 will affect the following entities, some of which
might be small entities: the owners or operators of vessels intending
to transit or anchor in a portion of Lake Erie on the evening of July
12, 2015.
    This safety zone will not have a significant economic impact on a
substantial number of small entities for the following reasons: this
safety zone would be effective, and thus subject to enforcement, for
only 45 minutes late in the day. Traffic may be allowed to pass through
the zone with the permission of the Captain of the Port. The Captain of
the Port can be reached via VHF channel 16. Before the enforcement of
the zone, we would issue local Broadcast Notice to Mariners.

3. Assistance for Small Entities

    Under section 213(a) of the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement
Fairness Act of 1996 (Public Law 104-121), we want to assist small
entities in understanding this rule. If the rule would affect your
small business, organization, or governmental jurisdiction and you have
questions concerning its provisions or options for compliance, please
contact the person listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT
section above.
    Small businesses may send comments on the actions of Federal
employees who enforce, or otherwise determine compliance with, Federal
regulations to the Small Business and Agriculture Regulatory
Enforcement Ombudsman and the Regional Small Business Regulatory
Fairness Boards. The Ombudsman evaluates these actions annually and
rates each agency's responsiveness to small business. If you wish to
comment on actions by employees of the Coast Guard, call 1-888-REG-FAIR
(1-888-734-3247). The Coast Guard will not retaliate against small
entities that question or complain about this rule or any policy or
action of the Coast Guard.

4. Collection of Information

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

5. Federalism

    A rule has implications for federalism under Executive Order 13132,
Federalism, if it has a substantial direct effect on the States, on the
relationship between the national government and the States, or on the
distribution of power and responsibilities among the various levels of
government. We have analyzed this rule under that Order and determined
that this rule does not have implications for federalism.

6. Protest Activities

    The Coast Guard respects the First Amendment rights of protesters.
Protesters are asked to contact the person listed in the ``For Further
Information Contact'' section to coordinate protest activities so that
your message can be received without jeopardizing the safety or
security of people, places, or vessels.

7. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act

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

we do discuss the effects of this rule elsewhere in this preamble.

8. Taking of Private Property

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

9. Civil Justice Reform

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

10. Protection of Children

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

11. Indian Tribal Governments

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

12. Energy Effects

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

13. Technical Standards

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

14. Environment

    We have analyzed this rule under Department of Homeland Security
Management Directive 023-01 and Commandant Instruction M16475.lD, which
guide the Coast Guard in complying with the National Environmental
Policy Act of 1969 (NEPA)(42 U.S.C. 4321-4370f), and have determined
that this action is one of a category of actions that do not
individually or cumulatively have a significant effect on the human
environment. This rule involves the establishment of a safety zone and,
therefore it is categorically excluded from further review under
paragraph 34(g) of Figure 2-1 of the Commandant Instruction. An
environmental analysis checklist supporting this determination and a
Categorical Exclusion Determination are available in the docket where
indicated under ADDRESSES. We seek any comments or information that may
lead to the discovery of a significant environmental impact from this
rule.

List of Subjects in 33 CFR Part 165

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

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

PART 165--REGULATED NAVIGATION AREAS AND LIMITED ACCESS AREAS

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

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

0
2. Add Sec.  165.T09-0613 to read as follows:

Sec.  165.T09-0613  Safety Zone; Cleveland Yachting Club Regatta
Fireworks Display; Lake Erie, Rocky River, OH.

    (a) Location. This zone will encompass all waters of Lake Erie,
Rocky River, OH within a 280-foot radius of position 41[deg] 29' 15.7''
N. and 081[deg] 50' 18.5'' W. (NAD 83).
    (b) Enforcement period. This regulation will be enforced on July
12, 2015 from 9:30 p.m. until 10:15 p.m.
    (c) Regulations. (1) In accordance with the general regulations in
Sec.  165.23, entry into, transiting, or anchoring within this safety
zone is prohibited unless authorized by the Captain of the Port Buffalo
or his designated on-scene representative.
    (2) This safety zone is closed to all vessel traffic, except as may
be permitted by the Captain of the Port Buffalo or his designated on-
scene representative.
    (3) The ``on-scene representative'' of the Captain of the Port
Buffalo is any Coast Guard commissioned, warrant or petty officer who
has been designated by the Captain of the Port Buffalo to act on his
behalf.
    (4) Vessel operators desiring to enter or operate within the safety
zone must contact the Captain of the Port Buffalo or his on-scene
representative to obtain permission to do so. The Captain of the Port
Buffalo or his on-scene representative may be contacted via VHF Channel
16. Vessel operators given permission to enter or operate in the safety
zone must comply with all directions given to them by the Captain of
the Port Buffalo, or his on-scene representative.

    Dated: June 25, 2015.
B.W. Roche,
Captain, U.S. Coast Guard, Captain of the Port Buffalo.
[FR Doc. 2015-16805 Filed 7-8-15; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 9110-04-P


[Federal Register: August 25, 2008 (Volume 73, Number 165)]
[Notices]
[Page 50067-50068]
[DOCID:fr25au08-94]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Railroad Administration

Petition for Waiver of Compliance

    In accordance with Part 211 of Title 49 Code of Federal Regulations
(CFR), notice is hereby given that the Federal Railroad Administration
(FRA) has received a request for a waiver of compliance from certain
requirements of its safety standards. The individual petition is
described below, including the party seeking relief, the regulatory
provisions involved, the nature of the relief being requested, and the
petitioner's arguments in favor of relief.

Harsco Track Technologies (Waiver Petition Docket Number FRA-2008-0070)

    Harsco Track Technologies (HTT) is seeking a waiver of compliance
from 49 CFR Part Sec.  214.505(a), pertaining to enclosed cabs on on-
track roadway maintenance machines (RMM). Specifically, HTT would like
relief from the requirement of an enclosed cab, operable heating and
air conditioning system, and positive pressurized ventilation system on
a remotely controlled RMM.
    Interested parties are invited to participate in these proceedings
by submitting written views, data, or comments. FRA does not anticipate
scheduling a public hearing in connection with these proceedings since
the facts do not appear to warrant a hearing. If any interested party
desires an opportunity for oral comment, they should notify FRA, in
writing, before the end of the comment period and specify the basis for
their request.
    All communications concerning these proceedings should identify the
appropriate docket number (e.g. , Waiver Petition Docket Number FRA-
2008-0070) and may be submitted by any of the following methods:
     Web site: http://www.regulations.gov. Follow the online
instructions for submitting comments.
     Fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>.
     Mail: Docket Operations Facility, U.S. Department of
Transportation, 1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE., W12-140, Washington, DC
20590.
     Hand Delivery: 1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE., Room W12-140,
Washington, DC 20590, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday,
except Federal holidays.
    Communications received within 45 days of the date of this notice
will be considered by FRA before final action is taken. Comments
received after that date will be considered as far as practicable. All
written communications concerning these proceedings are available for
examination during regular business hours (9 a.m.-5 p.m.) at the above
facility. All documents in the public docket are also available for
inspection and copying on the Internet at the docket facility's Web
site at http://www.regulations.gov.
    Anyone is able to search the electronic form of any written

communications and 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 DOT's complete Privacy Act Statement in the Federal
Register published on April 11, 2000 (Volume 65, Number 70; Pages
19477-78).

    Issued in Washington, DC on August 20, 2008.
Grady C. Cothen, Jr.,
Deputy Associate Administrator for Safety Standards and Program
Development.
[FR Doc. E8-19637 Filed 8-22-08; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4910-06-P


[Federal Register Volume 87, Number 157 (Tuesday, August 16, 2022)]
[Notices]
[Pages 50366-50368]
[FR Doc No: 2022-17533]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-95466; File No. SR-NYSE-2022-34]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; New York Stock Exchange LLC;
Notice of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of Proposed Rule Change To
Amend and Update Rule 35

August 10, 2022.
    Pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) \1\ of the Securities Exchange Act of
1934 (``Act'') \2\ and Rule 19b-4 thereunder,\3\ notice is hereby given
that on July 28, 2022, New York Stock Exchange LLC (``NYSE'' or the
``Exchange'') filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the
``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\ 15 U.S.C. 78a.
    \3\ 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 and update Rule 35 (Floor Employees
To Be Registered) to remove certain provisions that are obsolete and no
longer necessary. The proposed rule change is available on the
Exchange's website at www.nyse.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 those 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 parts of such statements.

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

1. Purpose
    The purpose of this filing is to amend and update Rule 35, which
governs the requirements for admittance to the Floor of the Exchange,
to remove certain provisions that are obsolete and no longer
necessary.\4\ In addition, the Exchange proposes to re-number the
remaining paragraphs of Rule 35 to conform with the proposed deletions,
which are described below.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ Rule 35 provides, in relevant part that ``[n]o employee of a
member or member organization shall be admitted to the Floor unless
he is registered with, qualified by and approved by the Exchange,
and upon compliance of both the employer and employee with such
requirements as the Exchange may determine.''
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Rule 35.10 and 35.30 govern the issuance of ``Floor tickets'' and
``Employee Floor Tickets''--each of which may be ``Regular'' or
``Special''--to Floor employees as a prerequisite to enter the trading
Floor. A Regular ticket would ``admit holders to the telephone booths
around the perimeter of the stock trading Floor, and the area behind
the stock trading posts'' and ``are issued only to employees of members
or member organizations that are assigned telephone or post spaces.''
\5\ Special tickets are issued ``only for the purpose of assisting or
relieving a Floor employee of the same member or member organization.''
\6\ The Exchange no longer issues Floor tickets but instead requires
Trading Floor Badges for admittance to the Floor, which requirement was
codified in Exchange rules earlier this year. Specifically, paragraph
(d) to Rule 37 (Admission and Conduct on the Trading Floor), provides
that:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ See Rule 37(d). See also Securities Exchange Act Release No.
94217 (February 10, 2022), 87 FR 8901 (February 10, 2022) (SR-NYSE-
2021-73) (``Rule 37 Approval Order''). The Exchange notes that Rule
37 is administered by the Exchange's regulatory staff.
    \6\ See Rule 35.10.

    Admission to the Floor will be by Exchange-issued badge only.
Exchange-issued badges must be appropriately displayed, with the
photo visible, at all times while on the Floor. Use of an Exchange-
issued badge belonging to another member or Floor employee to enter
or exit the Floor is prohibited. Authorized persons seeking
admission to the Floor without a badge must show proper
identification and obtain a temporary badge from the Security
Office. Visitor's badges are not acceptable identification cards for
Floor employees.\7\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ See Rule 35.30.

    Further, Rule 303(a) provides that members who execute orders on
the Floor must be provided with an identification badge and must wear
the same while on the Floor, and that every member's badge must contain
his or her name and a number and the name of his or her member
organization.\8\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \8\ See Rule 303(a).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Rule 35.10 and 35.30
    In light of the Trading Floor badge requirements set forth in Rule
37(d) and Rule 303(a), and the fact that the Exchange no longer issues
nor relies upon Floor tickets for admission to the Floor, the Exchange
proposes to delete Rule 35.10 and 35.30 as obsolete.
    Rule 35.20 sets forth ``Regulations pertaining to Floor
employees.'' The regulations set forth include requirements that:
     all Floor employees be at their booths or posts on the
Floor one-half hour prior to the opening of business or such earlier
time as directed by the Exchange;
     all members or member organizations with a telephone space
on the Floor, have at least one Floor employee at such space for
fifteen minutes (or as determined by the Exchange) following the later
of the close of the market each day or until all reports due said
member or member organization have been received;

     Floor employees may not be upon or to cross the trading
area of the Floor ten minutes preceding the market opening and five
minutes following the market, other than as specified in the Exchange's
Floor Conduct and Safety Guidelines'';
     Floor employees who, because of illness or injury, are
relieved from duty by the medical clinic located in the Exchange
building, must report to that clinic before returning to duty and that
any such Floor employees that is absent for more than two days, without
having previously reported to the Exchange's medical clinic, must
likewise report to that clinic before returning to duty;
     Floor employees are to be instructed that they must keep a
day's supply of stationery on hand, and that arrangements should be
made for this stationery to be delivered to the Exchange either after
the close by the employer's messengers or one-half hour prior to the
opening of business by the Floor employees; and
     Floor employees may not make bids or offers nor may any
employee interfere with any order during its transmission.\9\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \9\ See Rule 35.20.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Of the foregoing requirements, the Exchange proposes to delete as
obsolete all but the last requirement (i.e., that Floor employees not
make bids or offers nor interfere with order transmission), which it
proposes to re-number at Rule 35.10.\10\ During continuous trading,
Floor Brokers must verbally announce crossing transactions at the point
of sale prior to such transactions printing to the tape. To avoid
interference with the announcement and consummation of such interest,
the Exchange believes it is appropriate to retain the prohibition
against Floor employees making bids/offers or otherwise interfering
with order transmission.\11\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \10\ See proposed Rule 35.10.
    \11\ See proposed Rule 35.10.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    As set forth below, advancements in technology related to trading
on the Exchange and electronic communications have rendered nearly all
of the remaining Rule 35.20 requirements as obsolete and no longer
necessary.
    First, because of technical enhancements that allow the Exchange to
process, disseminate, and publish trading information in ``real-time'',
the requirements that Floor employees (including those with telephones
on the Floor) report to and remain at their booths/posts at specified
times before the open and after the close of trading are no longer
necessary.\12\ These technical advancements have alleviated the need
for the physical presence of Floor employees by the times specified in
the current provisions. As such, the Exchange proposes to delete such
provisions.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \12\ See, e.g., Rule 7.35A (DMM-Facilitated Core Open and
Trading Halt Auctions) and Rule 7.35B (DMM-Facilitated Closing
Auctions) and Rule 7.35C (Exchange-Facilitated Auctions) (providing,
in relevant part, that certain Auction Imbalance Information would
be disseminated and published by the Exchange).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange likewise proposes to delete the prohibition against
Floor employees being in (upon) or crossing through the trading area of
the Floor for specified times before and after the close of trading.
The purpose of this prohibition was to restrict movement on the trading
Floor at the opening or closing of trading to prevent anyone from
blocking access to point of sale or interfering order executions.
Because of advancements in technology that allow for fewer Floor
personnel to be physically on the Floor during the open and close of
trading, the Exchange proposes to delete this provision as no longer
necessary. With respect to reference to the Floor Conduct and Safety
Guidelines (``Guidelines''), which historically regulated the behavior
and conduct of members and was administered by Floor Officials, the
NYSE eliminated the role and function of Floor Officials and recently
adopted a new Rule 37, setting forth standards of dress and conduct for
the Floor. For the foregoing reason, the Exchange proposes to delete
this provision as obsolete and no longer necessary.
    In addition, due to communication enhancements, the Exchange
proposes to delete as obsolete the requirement that Floor employees
keep a certain amount of stationary on hand. Communication is no longer
limited to written correspondence on physical stationary and Floor
employees have the ability to communicate through others means (such as
the cell phone, email and internet) at any time. Thus, the Exchange
proposes to delete this provision as obsolete and no longer necessary.
    Finally, the Exchange no longer operates an on-site medical clinic
and therefore the requirement that Floor employees be cleared by the
Exchange clinic before returning to the Floor after an illness-related
absence is obsolete and no longer necessary.
    Consistent with the foregoing, the Exchange proposes to re-number
the balance of Rule 35 as Rule 35.20-Rule 35.60.\13\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \13\ See proposed Rule 35.20-Rule 35.60.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

2. Statutory Basis
    The proposed rule change is consistent with Section 6(b) of the
Act,\14\ in general, and furthers the objectives of Section
6(b)(5),\15\ in particular, because it is designed to prevent
fraudulent and manipulative acts and practices, to promote just and
equitable principles of trade, to foster cooperation and coordination
with persons engaged in facilitating transactions in securities, to
remove impediments to, and perfect the mechanism of, a free and open
market and a national market system and, in general, to protect
investors and the public interest.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \14\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b).
    \15\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange believes that the proposal to delete certain
provisions of Rule 35, which have been determined to be obsolete and
unnecessary, would add clarity, transparency and internal consistency
to Exchange rules making them easier to navigate and comprehend.
Further, the Exchange believes that the proposed revisions are
consistent with the Act as no regulatory purposes are currently served
by the aforementioned obsolete (and in some cases anachronistic)
requirements. The Exchange believes that market participants would
benefit from the increased clarity, thereby reducing potential
confusion and ensuring that persons subject to the Exchange's
jurisdiction, regulators, and the investing public can more easily
navigate and understand the Exchange's rules.
    Finally, the proposed non-substantive conforming changes (to
renumber the remaining provisions of Rule 35) would remove impediments
to and perfect the mechanism of a free and open market and a national
market system and, in general, protect investors and the public
interest because the proposed non-substantive changes would add
clarity, transparency and consistency to the Exchange's rules.

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

    The Exchange does not believe that the proposed rule change will
impose any burden on competition that is not necessary or appropriate
in furtherance of the purposes of the Act. The proposed rule change is
not intended to address competitive issues but is rather concerned with
deleting obsolete references that and making non-substantive conforming
changes to the Exchange rules. Since the proposal does not
substantively modify system functionality or processes on the

Exchange, the proposed changes will not impose any burden on
competition.

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

    No written comments were solicited or received with respect to the
proposed rule change.

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

    Because the foregoing proposed rule change does not (i)
significantly affect the protection of investors or the public
interest; (ii) impose any significant burden on competition; and; (iii)
become operative for 30 days from the date on which it was filed, or
such shorter time as the Commission may designate, it has become
effective pursuant to Section 19(b)(3)(A) of the Act \16\ and Rule 19b-
4(f)(6) \17\ thereunder.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \16\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A).
    \17\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6). In addition, Rule 19b-4(f)(6)
requires a self-regulatory organization to give the Commission
written notice of its intent to file the proposed rule change at
least five business days prior to the date of filing of the proposed
rule change, or such shorter time as designated by the Commission.
The Exchange has satisfied this requirement.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange has asked the Commission to waive the 30-day operative
delay.\18\ The Commission finds that waiving the 30-day operative delay
is consistent with the protection of investors and the public interest
because waiver of the operative delay will reduce the potential for
confusion related to how to comply with aspects of Rule 35 rules that
are now obsolete or impracticable. The Exchange requested the operative
delay in order to update the text of Rule 35 to be consistent with
current requirements by removing provisions that, because of technical
enhancements to trading and improvements to electronic communications,
are obsolete and no longer necessary without delay. Accordingly, the
Commission hereby waives the 30-day operative delay and designates the
proposal operative upon filing.\19\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \18\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6)(iii).
    \19\ For purposes only of waiving the 30-day operative delay,
the Commission has considered the proposed rule change's impact on
efficiency, competition, and capital formation. 15 U.S.C. 78c(f).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    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 will institute proceedings to
determine whether the proposed rule change should be approved or
disapproved.

IV. Solicitation of Comments

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

Electronic Comments

     Use the Commission's internet comment form (http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml); or
     Send an email to [email protected]. Please include
File Number SR-NYSE-2022-34 on the subject line.

Paper Comments

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

All submissions should refer to File Number SR-NYSE-2022-34. 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 website (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 website 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. Persons submitting comments are
cautioned that we do not redact or edit personal identifying
information from comment submissions. You should submit only
information that you wish to make available publicly. All submissions
should refer to File Number SR-NYSE-2022-34 and should be submitted on
or before September 6, 2022.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \20\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12).

    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets,
pursuant to delegated authority.\20\
J. Matthew DeLesDernier,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2022-17533 Filed 8-15-22; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011-01-P