[Federal Register Volume 80, Number 208 (Wednesday, October 28, 2015)]
[Notices]
[Pages 66100-66102]
[FR Doc No: 2015-27356]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-76237; File No. SR-MIAX-2015-60]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; Miami International Securities
Exchange LLC; Notice of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of a
Proposed Rule Change to Extend the Pilot Period Applicable to Rule 521
and Rule 530 Relating To Limit Up/Limit Down

October 22, 2015.
    Pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934
(the ``Act''),\1\ and Rule 19b-4 thereunder,\2\ notice is hereby given
that on October 20, 2015, Miami International Securities Exchange LLC
(``MIAX'' or ``Exchange'') filed with the Securities and Exchange
Commission (``Commission'') the proposed rule change as described in
Items I and II below, which Items have been prepared by the Exchange.
The Commission is publishing this notice to solicit comments on the
proposed rule change from interested persons.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

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

    The Exchange is filing a proposal to amend (i) Exchange Rule 530
(Limit Up-Limit Down) to extend the pilot period for the treatment of
erroneous transactions during a Limit or Straddle State and (ii)
Interpretations and Policies .01 to Rule 521 (Nullification and
Adjustment of Options Transactions Including Obvious Errors) to clarify
that the pilot period during which an execution will not be subject to
review as an Obvious Error or Catastrophic Error will coincide with the
pilot period for the LULD Plan (as defined below).
    The text of the proposed rule change is available on the Exchange's
Web site at http://www.miaxoptions.com/filter/wotitle/rule_filing, at
MIAX's principal office, and at the Commission's Public Reference Room.

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

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

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

1. Purpose
    The Exchange proposes to amend Rule 530 (Limit Up-Limit Down) in
order to extend the pilot period for the treatment of erroneous
transactions that occur in a Limit or Straddle State to coincide with
the proposed extension of the pilot period for the LULD Plan (as
defined below), including any extensions to the pilot period for the
LULD Plan.
    Exchange Rule 530(j) provides for the treatment of erroneous
transactions occurring during Limit and Straddle States. Specifically,
once an NMS Stock has entered a Limit or Straddle State, the Exchange
will nullify a transaction in an option overlying such an NMS Stock as
provided in Rule 530(j). This provision was adopted for a one year
pilot period beginning on the date of the implementation of the Plan to
Address Extraordinary Market Volatility Pursuant to Rule 608 of
Regulation NMS, April 8, 2013 (the ``LULD Plan'').\3\ The Exchange
previously extended the pilot period for Rule 530(j) until October 23,
2015.\4\ The Exchange now proposes to extend the pilot period for Rule
530(j) to coincide with the proposed extension of the pilot period for
the LULD Plan, including any extensions to the pilot

period for the LULD Plan, in order to allow the Exchange and the
Commission additional time to collect and analyze data regarding the
impact of Rule 530(j) on liquidity and market quality in the options
markets.\5\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ See Exchange Rule 503(j). See also Securities Exchange Act
Release Nos. 69210 (March 22, 2013), 78 FR 18637 (March 27, 2013)
(SR-MIAX-2013-12); 69342 (April 8, 2013), 78 FR 22017 (April 12,
2013) (SR-MIAX-2013-12); 69234 (March 25, 2013), 78 FR 19344 (March
29, 2013) (SR-MIAX-2013-15); 69354 (April 9, 2013), 78 FR 22357
(April 15, 2013) (SR-MIAX-2013-15).
    \4\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 74307 (February 19,
2015), 80 FR 10196 (February 25, 2015) (SR-MIAX-2015-11).
    \5\ Currently the pilot period for the LULD Plan is proposed to
be extended until April 22, 2016. See Joint Industry Plan; Notice of
Filing of the Ninth Amendment to the National Market System Plan to
Address Extraordinary Market Volatility by BATS Exchange, Inc., BATS
Y-Exchange, Inc., Chicago Board Options Exchange, Inc., Chicago
Stock Exchange, Inc., EDGA Exchange, Inc., EDGX Exchange, Inc.,
Financial Industry Regulatory Authority, Inc., NASDAQ OMX BX, Inc.,
NASDAQ OMX PHLX LLC, The Nasdaq Stock Market LLC, National Stock
Exchange, Inc., New York Stock Exchange LLC, NYSE MKT LLC, and NYSE
Arca, Inc., Securities Exchange Act Release No. 75917 (September 14,
2015), 80 FR 56515 (September 18, 2015).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    To assist the Commission in its analysis, the Exchange will provide
the Commission and the public with data and analysis during the
duration of the pilot in order to evaluate the impact of Limit and
Straddle States on liquidity and market quality in the options markets.
Specifically, on a date not later than five (5) months prior to the
pilot expiration date, including any extensions of the pilot period,
the Exchange represents that it shall provide the Commission and the
public assessments relating to the impact of the obvious error Rules
during Limit and Straddle States that (i) evaluate the statistical and
economic impact of Limit and Straddle States on liquidity and market
quality in the options markets; and (ii) assess whether the lack of
obvious error rules in effect during the Straddle and Limit States are
problematic. If the LULD Plan extension is approved the next data
assessment will be due no later than December 18, 2015. Additionally,
each month during the pilot period the Exchange shall provide to the
Commission and the public a dataset containing the data for each
Straddle and Limit State in optionable stocks. For each stock that
reaches a Straddle or Limit State, the number of options included in
the dataset can be reduced by selecting options in which at least one
(1) trade occurred on the Exchange during the Straddle or Limit State.
For each of those options affected, each data record should contain the
following information: (i) Stock symbol, option symbol, time at the
start of the straddle or limit state, an indicator for whether it is a
straddle or limit state; and (ii) for activity on the exchange--(A)
executed volume, time-weighted quoted bid-ask spread, time-weighted
average quoted depth at the bid, time-weighted average quoted depth at
the offer, (B) high execution price, low execution price, (C) number of
trades for which a request for review for error was received during
Straddle and Limit States, (D) an indicator variable for whether those
options outlined above have a price change exceeding 30% during the
underlying stock's Limit or Straddle state compared to the last
available option price as reported by OPRA before the start of the
Limit or Straddle state (1 if observe 30% and 0 otherwise) and another
indicator variable for whether the option price within five minutes of
the underlying stock leaving the Limit or Straddle state (or halt if
applicable) is 30% away from the price before the start of the Limit or
Straddle state.
    The Exchange also proposes to amend Interpretations and Policies
.01 to Rule 521 (Nullification and Adjustment of Options Transactions
Including Obvious Errors) to take out the actual end date of the pilot
period during which an execution will not be subject to review as an
Obvious Error or Catastrophic Error pursuant to paragraph (c) or (d) of
Rule 521 if it occurred while the underlying security was in a ``Limit
State'' or ``Straddle State,'' as defined in the LULD Plan, and instead
clarify that the pilot period will coincide with the pilot period for
the LULD Plan, including any extensions to the pilot period for the
LULD Plan.
2. Statutory Basis
    MIAX believes that its proposed rule change is consistent with
Section 6(b) of the Act \6\ in general, and furthers the objectives of
Section 6(b)(5) of the Act \7\ in particular, in that it is designed to
prevent fraudulent and manipulative acts and practices, to promote just
and equitable principles of trade, to foster cooperation and
coordination with persons engaged in facilitating transactions in
securities, to remove impediments to and perfect the mechanisms of a
free and open market and a national market system and, in general, to
protect investors and the public interest. Specifically, the proposal
supports the objectives of perfecting the mechanism of a free and open
market and the national market system because it promotes uniformity
across markets concerning when and how to halt trading in all stock
options as a result of extraordinary market volatility. In addition,
the Exchange believes that the extension of the pilot to coincide with
the pilot period for the LULD Plan will help ensure that market
participants continue to benefit from the protections of the Limit Up-
Limit Down Rules which will protect investors and the public interest
while allowing the Exchange and the Commission additional time to
collect and analyze data regarding the impact of Rules on liquidity and
market quality in the options markets.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b).
    \7\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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 changes are
being made to extend the pilot program that provides for how the
Exchange shall treat orders and quotes in options overlying NMS stocks
when the Limit Up-Limit Down Plan is in effect and will not impose any
burden on competition while providing certainty of treatment and
execution of options orders during periods of extraordinary volatility
in the underlying NMS stock, and facilitating appropriate liquidity
during a Limit State or Straddle State.

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

    Written comments were neither solicited nor received.

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

    Because the 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 if consistent with the protection of investors
and the public interest, the proposed rule change has become effective
pursuant to Section 19(b)(3)(A) of the Act \8\ and Rule 19b-
4(f)(6)(iii) thereunder.\9\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \8\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A).
    \9\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6)(iii). As required under Rule 19b-
4(f)(6)(iii), the Exchange provided the Commission with written
notice of its intent to file the proposed rule change, along with a
brief description and the text of 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 asked the Commission to waive the 30-day operative
delay so that the proposal may become operative immediately upon
filing. The Commission believes that waiving the 30-day operative delay
is consistent with the protection of investors and the public interest,
as it will allow the obvious error pilot

program to continue uninterrupted while the industry gains further
experience operating under the LULD Plan, and avoid any investor
confusion that could result from a temporary interruption in the pilot
program. For this reason, the Commission designates the proposed rule
change to be operative upon filing.\10\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \10\ For purposes only of waiving the 30-day operative delay,
the Commission has also considered the proposed rule's impact on
efficiency, competition, and capital formation. See 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 shall institute proceedings to
determine whether the proposed rule should be approved or disapproved.

IV. Solicitation of Comments

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

Electronic Comments

     Use the Commission's Internet comment form (http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml); or
     Send an email to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Please include
File Number SR-MIAX-2015-60 on the subject line.

Paper Comments

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

All submissions should refer to File Number SR-MIAX-2015-60. This file
number should be included on the subject line if email is used. To help
the Commission process and review your comments more efficiently,
please use only one method. The Commission will post all comments on
the Commission's Internet Web site (http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml). Copies of the submission, all subsequent amendments, all
written statements with respect to the proposed rule change that are
filed with the Commission, and all written communications relating to
the proposed rule change between the Commission and any person, other
than those that may be withheld from the public in accordance with the
provisions of 5 U.S.C. 552, will be available for Web site viewing and
printing in the Commission's Public Reference Room, 100 F Street NE.,
Washington, DC 20549 on official business days between the hours of
10:00 a.m. and 3:00 p.m. Copies of such filing also will be available
for inspection and copying at the principal office of the Exchange. All
comments received will be posted without change; the Commission does
not edit personal identifying information from submissions. You should
submit only information that you wish to make available publicly. All
submissions should refer to File Number SR-MIAX-2015-60, and should be
submitted on or before November 18, 2015.
    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets,
pursuant to delegated authority.\11\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \11\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12).

Brent J. Fields,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2015-27356 Filed 10-27-15; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 81, Number 151 (Friday, August 5, 2016)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 51815-51818]
[FR Doc No: 2016-18500]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. FAA-2015-3143; Directorate Identifier 2015-NM-047-AD]
RIN 2120-AA64

Airworthiness Directives; Empresa Brasileira de Aeronautica S.A.
(Embraer) Airplanes

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Supplemental notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM); reopening of
comment period.

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

SUMMARY: We are revising an earlier proposed airworthiness directive
(AD) for certain Empresa Brasileira de Aeronautica S.A. (Embraer) Model
EMB-135 airplanes and Model EMB-145, -145ER, -145MR, -145LR, -145MP,
and -145EP airplanes. The NPRM proposed to require a detailed
inspection for chafing on the electrical harness of each electrical
fuel pump in the fuel tanks, replacement of the affected electrical
fuel pump with a new or serviceable pump if necessary, and installation
of clamps on the fuel pump electrical harnesses. The NPRM was prompted
by a report of chafing found between the fuel pump electrical harness
and the fuel pump tubing during scheduled maintenance. This action
revises the NPRM by expanding the proposed applicability and revising
the compliance time for the detailed inspection. We are proposing this
supplemental NPRM (SNPRM) to detect and correct chafing of the fuel
pump harnesses with other parts inside the fuel tank, which could
present a potential ignition source that could result in a fire or fuel
tank explosion. Since certain actions impose an additional burden over
those proposed in the NPRM, we are reopening the comment period to
allow the public the chance to comment on these proposed changes.

DATES: We must receive comments on this SNPRM by September 19, 2016.

ADDRESSES: You may send comments, using the procedures found in 14 CFR
11.43 and 11.45, by any of the following methods:
     Federal eRulemaking Portal: Go to http://www.regulations.gov. Follow the instructions for submitting comments.
     Fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>.
     Mail: U.S. Department of Transportation, Docket
Operations, M-30, West Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140, 1200 New
Jersey Avenue SE., Washington, DC 20590.
     Hand Delivery: U.S. Department of Transportation, Docket
Operations, M-30, West Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140, 1200 New
Jersey Avenue SE., Washington, DC, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday
through Friday, except Federal holidays.
    For service information identified in this SNPRM, contact Empresa
Brasileira de Aeronautica S.A. (Embraer), Technical Publications
Section (PC 060), Av. Brigadeiro Faria Lima, 2170--Putim--12227-901
S[atilde]o Jose dos Campos--SP--Brasil; telephone +55 12 3927-5852 or
+55 12 3309-0732; fax +55 12 3927-7546; email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
Internet http://www.flyembraer.com. You may view this referenced
service information at the FAA, Transport Airplane Directorate, 1601
Lind Avenue SW., Renton, WA. For information on the availability of
this material at the FAA, call<PHONE_NUMBER>.

Examining the AD Docket

    You may examine the AD docket on the Internet at http://www.regulations.gov by searching for and locating Docket No. FAA-2015-
3143; or in person at the Docket Management Facility between 9 a.m. and
5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays. The AD docket
contains this proposed AD, the regulatory evaluation, any comments
received, and other information. The street address for the Docket
Office (telephone:<PHONE_NUMBER>) is in the ADDRESSES section. Comments
will be available in the AD docket shortly after receipt.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Todd Thompson, Aerospace Engineer,
International Branch, ANM-116, Transport Airplane Directorate, FAA,
1601 Lind Avenue SW., Renton, WA 98057-3356; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>;
fax<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Comments Invited

    We invite you to send any written relevant data, views, or
arguments about this proposed AD. Send your comments to an address
listed under the ADDRESSES section. Include ``Docket No. FAA-2015-3143;
Directorate Identifier 2015-NM-047-AD'' at the beginning of your
comments. We specifically invite comments on the overall regulatory,
economic, environmental, and energy aspects of this proposed AD. We
will consider all comments received by the closing date and may amend
this proposed AD based on those comments.
    We will post all comments we receive, without change, to http://www.regulations.gov, including any personal information you provide. We
will also post a report summarizing each substantive verbal contact we
receive about this proposed AD.

Discussion

    We issued a notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) to amend 14 CFR
part 39 by adding an AD that would apply to certain Empresa Brasileira
de Aeronautica S.A. (Embraer) Model EMB-135 airplanes and Model EMB-
145, -145ER, -145MR, -145LR, -145MP, and -145EP airplanes. The NPRM
published in the Federal Register on August 21, 2015 (80 FR 50812)
(``the NPRM'').

Actions Since Previous NPRM was Issued

    Since we issued the NPRM, we have determined that certain airplanes
were inadvertently omitted from the applicability, and the compliance
time for the detailed inspection required by paragraph (h)(1) of this
AD must be revised to ``within 5,000 flight hours or 24 months after
the effective date of this AD, whichever occurs first.''
    The Ag[ecirc]ncia Nacional de Avia[ccedil][atilde]o Civil (ANAC),
which is the aviation authority for Brazil, has issued Brazilian
Airworthiness Directive 2015-03-01, effective March 23, 2015 (referred
to after this as the Mandatory Continuing Airworthiness Information, or
``the MCAI''), to correct an unsafe condition on certain Empresa
Brasileira de Aeronautica S.A. (Embraer) Model EMB-135 airplanes and
Model EMB-145, -145ER, -145MR, -145LR, -145MP, and -145EP airplanes.
The MCAI states:

    Chafing between the fuel pump electrical harness and fuel pump
tubing was detected during scheduled maintenance. We are issuing
this [Brazilian] AD to protect the fuel pump harnesses against
chafing with other parts inside the fuel tank, which could present a
potential ignition source that could result in a fire or fuel tank
explosion.

    The required actions include a detailed inspection for chafing on
the electrical harness of each electrical fuel pump in the fuel tanks,
replacement of the affected electrical fuel pump with a new or
serviceable pump if necessary, and installation of clamps on the fuel
pump electrical harnesses. You may examine the MCAI in the AD docket on
the Internet at http://www.regulations.gov by searching for and
locating Docket No. FAA-2015-3143.

Related Service Information Under 1 CFR Part 51

    Embraer has issued Service Bulletin 145-28-0030, Revision 01, dated
October 22, 2010; and Service Bulletin 145LEG-28-0032, Revision 01,
dated November 20, 2012. The service information describes procedures
for a detailed inspection for chafing on the electrical harness of each
electrical fuel pump in the fuel tanks, replacement of the affected
electrical fuel pump with a new or serviceable pump if necessary, and
installation of clamps on the fuel pump electrical harnesses. This
service information is reasonably available because the interested
parties have access to it through their normal course of business or by
the means identified in the ADDRESSES section.

Comments

    We gave the public the opportunity to participate in developing
this proposed AD. We considered the comments received.

Request To Clarify Airplane Applicability

    ExpressJet Airlines stated that the airplane effectivity in Embraer
Service Bulletin 145-28-0030, Revision 01, dated October 22, 2010,
included Model EMB-145XR airplanes. ExpressJet Airlines stated that
Model EMB-145XR airplanes are not included in paragraph (c),
``Applicability,'' of the proposed AD (in the NPRM) and asked if this
is the intent of the NPRM or if the Model EMB-145XR airplanes should be
included.
    We agree with the commenter to clarify the applicability of this
SNPRM. Although ANAC unintentionally omitted Model EMB-145XR airplanes
from the applicability of its AD, the serial numbers corresponding to
Model EMB-145XR airplanes are identified in the Embraer Service
Bulletin 145-28-0030, Revision 01, dated October 22, 2010. We have
added Model EMB-145XR airplanes to the applicability of this SNPRM. We
have coordinated this issue with ANAC.

Request To Extend the Compliance Time

    ExpressJet requested that we revise the compliance time for the
detailed inspection in the proposed AD (in the NPRM) to ``within 5,000
flight hours or 24 months after the effective date of this AD,
whichever occurs first,'' instead of ``within 2,500 flight hours or 24
months after the effective date of this AD, whichever occurs first.''
ExpressJet stated that this would allow the majority of the airplanes
to be inspected during a C-check interval, which would be the most
effective time to accomplish the task as the fuel tanks have to be
drained and vented for the inspection to be performed. ExpressJet
commented that these limits also line up with the current
recommendations in the service information.
    We agree with the commenter for the reasons stated previously. Data
from Embraer confirms that increasing the flight hours another 2,500
flight hours is acceptable. We have changed this SNPRM accordingly.

FAA's Determination and Requirements of This SNPRM

    This product has been approved by the aviation authority of another
country, and is approved for operation in the United States. Pursuant
to our bilateral agreement with the State of Design Authority, we have
been notified of the unsafe condition described in the MCAI and service
information referenced above. We are proposing this AD because we
evaluated all pertinent information and determined an unsafe condition
exists and is likely to exist or develop on other products of these
same type designs.
    Certain changes described above expand the scope of the NPRM. As a
result, we have determined that it is necessary to reopen the comment
period to provide additional opportunity for the public to comment on
this SNPRM.

Costs of Compliance

    We estimate that this SNPRM affects 731 airplanes of U.S. registry.
    We estimate that it would take about 11 work-hours per product to
comply with the new basic requirements of this SNPRM. The average labor
rate is $85 per work-hour. Required parts would cost about $0 per
product. Based on these figures, we estimate the cost of this SNPRM on
U.S. operators to be $683,485, or $935 per product.
    In addition, we estimate that any necessary follow-on actions would
take about 6 work-hours and would require parts costing $11,242, for a
cost of $11,752 per product. We have no way of determining the number
of aircraft that might need this action.
    According to the manufacturer, some of the costs of this SNPRM may
be covered under warranty, thereby reducing the cost impact on affected
individuals. We do not control warranty coverage for affected
individuals. As a result, we have included all costs in our cost
estimate.

Authority for This Rulemaking

    Title 49 of the United States Code specifies the FAA's authority to
issue rules on aviation safety. Subtitle I, section 106, describes the
authority of the FAA Administrator. ``Subtitle VII: Aviation
Programs,'' describes in more detail the scope of the Agency's
authority.
    We are issuing this rulemaking under the authority described in
``Subtitle VII, Part A, Subpart III, Section 44701: General
requirements.'' Under that section, Congress charges the FAA with
promoting safe flight of civil aircraft in air commerce by prescribing
regulations for practices, methods, and procedures the Administrator
finds necessary for safety in air commerce. This regulation is within
the scope of that authority because it addresses an unsafe condition
that is likely to exist or develop on products identified in this
rulemaking action.

Regulatory Findings

    We determined that this proposed AD would not have federalism
implications under Executive Order 13132. This proposed AD would not
have 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.
    For the reasons discussed above, I certify this proposed
regulation:
    1. Is not a ``significant regulatory action'' under Executive Order
12866;
    2. Is not a ``significant rule'' under the DOT Regulatory Policies
and Procedures (44 FR 11034, February 26, 1979);
    3. Will not affect intrastate aviation in Alaska; and
    4. Will not have a significant economic impact, positive or
negative, on a substantial number of small entities under the criteria
of the Regulatory Flexibility Act.

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39

    Air transportation, Aircraft, Aviation safety, Incorporation by
reference, Safety.

The Proposed Amendment

    Accordingly, under the authority delegated to me by the
Administrator, the FAA proposes to amend 14 CFR part 39 as follows:

PART 39--AIRWORTHINESS DIRECTIVES

0
1. The authority citation for part 39 continues to read as follows:

    Authority:  49 U.S.C. 106(g), 40113, 44701.

Sec.  39.13  [Amended]

0
2. The FAA amends Sec.  39.13 by adding the following new airworthiness
directive (AD):

Empresa Brasileira de Aeronautica S.A. (Embraer): Docket No. FAA-
2015-3143; Directorate Identifier 2015-NM-047-AD.

(a) Comments Due Date

    We must receive comments by September 19, 2016.

(b) Affected ADs

    None.

(c) Applicability

    This AD applies to the airplanes specified in paragraphs (c)(1)
and (c)(2) of this AD.
    (1) Empresa Brasileira de Aeronautica S.A. (Embraer) Model EMB-
135ER, -135KE, -135KL, and -135LR airplanes; and Model EMB-145, -
145ER, -145MR, -145LR, -145MP, -145EP, and -145XR airplanes,
certificated in any category, as identified in Embraer Service
Bulletin 145-28-0030, Revision 01, dated October 22, 2010.
    (2) Empresa Brasileira de Aeronautica S.A. (Embraer) Model EMB-
135BJ airplanes,

certificated in any category, as identified in Embraer Service
Bulletin 145LEG-28-0032, Revision 01, dated November 20, 2012.

(d) Subject

    Air Transport Association (ATA) of America Code 28, Fuel.

(e) Reason

    This AD was prompted by a report of chafing found between the
fuel pump electrical harness and the fuel pump tubing during
scheduled maintenance. We are issuing this AD to detect and correct
chafing of the fuel pump harnesses with other parts inside the fuel
tank, which could present a potential ignition source that could
result in a fire or fuel tank explosion.

(f) Compliance

    Comply with this AD within the compliance times specified,
unless already done.

(g) Detailed Inspection and Corrective Action

    Do the actions specified in paragraphs (g)(1) and (g)(2) of this
AD at the applicable times specified in paragraph (h)(1) or (h)(2)
of this AD.
    (1) Do a detailed inspection for chafing on the electrical
harness of each electrical fuel pump in the fuel tanks, in
accordance with the Accomplishment Instructions of Embraer Service
Bulletin 145-28-0030, Revision 01, dated October 22, 2010 (for Model
EMB-135ER, -135KE, -135KL, and -135LR airplanes; and Model EMB-145,
-145ER, -145MR, -145LR, -145MP, -145EP, and -145XR airplanes); or
Embraer Service Bulletin 145LEG-28-0032, Revision 01, dated November
20, 2012 (for Model EMB-135BJ airplanes). If any chafing is found,
before further flight, replace the affected electrical fuel pump
with a new or serviceable pump having the same part number, in
accordance with the Accomplishment Instructions of Embraer Service
Bulletin 145-28-0030, Revision 01, dated October 22, 2010; or
Embraer Service Bulletin 145LEG-28-0032, Revision 01, dated November
20, 2012; as applicable.
    (2) Install clamps on the fuel pump electrical harnesses, in
accordance with the Accomplishment Instructions of Embraer Service
Bulletin 145-28-0030, Revision 01, dated October 22, 2010 (for Model
EMB-135ER, -135KE, -135KL, and -135LR airplanes; and Model EMB-145,
-145ER, -145MR, -145LR, -145MP, -145EP, and -145XR airplanes); or
Embraer Service Bulletin 145LEG-28-0032, Revision 01, dated November
20, 2012 (for Model EMB-135BJ airplanes).

(h) Compliance Times

    (1) For Model EMB-135ER, -135KE, -135KL, and -135LR airplanes;
and Model EMB-145, -145ER, -145MR, -145LR, -145MP, -145EP, and -
145XR airplanes: Do the actions specified in paragraph (g) of this
AD within 5,000 flight hours or 24 months after the effective date
of this AD, whichever occurs first.
    (2) For Model EMB-135BJ airplanes: Do the actions specified in
paragraph (g) of this AD within 4,800 flight hours or 48 months
after the effective date of this AD, whichever occurs first.

(i) Credit for Previous Actions

    This paragraph provides credit for actions required by paragraph
(g) of this AD, if those actions were performed before the effective
date of this AD using Embraer Service Bulletin 145-28-0030, dated
September 1, 2010 (for Model EMB-135ER, -135KE, -135KL, and -135LR
airplanes; and Model EMB-145, -145ER, -145MR, -145LR, -145MP, -
145EP, and -145XR airplanes); or Embraer Service Bulletin 145LEG-28-
0032, dated September 15, 2011 (for Model EMB-135BJ airplanes), as
applicable. This service information is not incorporated by
reference in this AD.

(j) Other FAA AD Provisions

    The following provisions also apply to this AD:
    (1) Alternative Methods of Compliance (AMOCs): The Manager,
International Branch, ANM-116, Transport Airplane Directorate, FAA,
has the authority to approve AMOCs for this AD, if requested using
the procedures found in 14 CFR 39.19. In accordance with 14 CFR
39.19, send your request to your principal inspector or local Flight
Standards District Office, as appropriate. If sending information
directly to the International Branch, send it to ATTN: Todd
Thompson, Aerospace Engineer, International Branch, ANM-116,
Transport Airplane Directorate, FAA, 1601 Lind Avenue SW., Renton,
WA 98057-3356; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax<PHONE_NUMBER>. Information
may be emailed to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Before using any
approved AMOC, notify your appropriate principal inspector, or
lacking a principal inspector, the manager of the local flight
standards district office/certificate holding district office. The
AMOC approval letter must specifically reference this AD.
    (2) Contacting the Manufacturer: For any requirement in this AD
to obtain corrective actions from a manufacturer, the action must be
accomplished using a method approved by the Manager, International
Branch, ANM-116, Transport Airplane Directorate, FAA; or the
Ag[ecirc]ncia Nacional de Avia[ccedil][atilde]o Civil (ANAC); or
ANAC's authorized Designee. If approved by the ANAC Designee, the
approval must include the Designee's authorized signature.

(k) Related Information

    (1) Refer to Mandatory Continuing Airworthiness Information
(MCAI) Brazilian Airworthiness Directive 2015-03-01, effective March
23, 2015, for related information. This MCAI may be found in the AD
docket on the Internet by searching for and locating Docket No. FAA-
2015-3143.
    (2) For service information identified in this AD, contact
Empresa Brasileira de Aeronautica S.A. (Embraer), Technical
Publications Section (PC 060), Av. Brigadeiro Faria Lima, 2170--
Putim--12227-901 S[atilde]o Jose dos Campos--SP--Brasil; telephone
+55 12 3927-5852 or +55 12 3309-0732; fax +55 12 3927-7546; email
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Internet http://www.flyembraer.com. You may
view this service information at the FAA, Transport Airplane
Directorate, 1601 Lind Avenue SW., Renton, WA. For information on
the availability of this material at the FAA, call<PHONE_NUMBER>.

    Issued in Renton, Washington, on July 25, 2016.
Victor Wicklund,
Acting Manager, Transport Airplane Directorate, Aircraft Certification
Service.
[FR Doc. 2016-18500 Filed 8-4-16; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


[Federal Register Volume 81, Number 154 (Wednesday, August 10, 2016)]
[Notices]
[Pages 52922-52925]
[FR Doc No: 2016-18909]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-78478; File No. SR-C2-2016-014]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; C2 Options Exchange, Incorporated;
Notice of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of a Proposed Rule Change
Relating to AIM Retained Orders

August 4, 2016.
    Pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934
(the ``Act''),\1\ and Rule 19b-4 thereunder,\2\ notice is hereby given
that on July 27, 2016, C2 Options Exchange, Incorporated (the
``Exchange'' or ``C2'') filed with the Securities and Exchange
Commission (the ``Commission'') the proposed rule change as described
in Items I, II, and III below, which Items have been prepared by the
Exchange. The Exchange filed the proposal as a ``non-controversial''
proposed rule change pursuant to Section 19(b)(3)(A)(iii) of the Act
\3\ and Rule 19b-4(f)(6) thereunder.\4\ The Commission is publishing
this notice to solicit comments on the proposed rule change from
interested persons.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1).
    \2\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4.
    \3\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A)(iii).
    \4\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

    The text of the proposed rule change is available on the Exchange's
Web site (http://www.c2exchange.com/Legal/), at the Exchange's Office
of the Secretary, and at the Commission's Public Reference Room.

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

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

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

1. Purpose
    The Exchange proposes to amend Rule 6.51 (Automated Improvement
Mechanism (``AIM'')) to: (1) Clarify how orders submitted for
electronic crossing into the AIM auction are treated if an auction
cannot occur; (2) adopt Interpretation and Policy .10 to Rule 6.51 (AIM
Retained Order Functionality) to describe the Exchange's AIM Retained
Order (``A:AIR'') functionality in the Rules; and (3) make minor edits
to Interpretation and Policy .04 to Rule 6.13 (Price Check Parameters)
relating to the treatment of complex AIM orders marked A:AIR and
correct certain typographical errors. The Exchange notes that this
filing is based upon and, in all material respects, substantially
similar to a recent filing of Chicago Board Options Exchange,
Incorporated (``CBOE'') regarding A:AIR functionality.\5\ Both AIM and
A:AIR functionality are active on CBOE.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 77848 (May 17,
2016), 81 FR 31978 (May 20, 2016) (SR-CBOE-2016-024) (Order
Approving Proposed Rule Change, as Modified by Amendment No. 2
Thereto, Relating to AIM Retained Orders). See also Interpretation
and Policy .09 to CBOE Rule 6.74A (AIM Retained Order
Functionality).

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

    Under Rule 6.51 (Automated Improvement Mechanism (``AIM'')), a
Permit Holder (``Participant'') that represents agency orders may
electronically execute an order it represents as agent (``Agency
Order'') against principal interest or against a solicited order
provided it submits the Agency Order for electronic execution into the
AIM auction (``Auction'') for processing. Matched Agency Orders may be
processed via AIM subject to certain eligibility requirements contained
in Rule 6.51(a). Specifically, to be eligible for processing via AIM,
the Agency Order must be: (1) In a class designated as eligible for AIM
Auctions as determined by the Exchange and within the designated
Auction order eligibility size parameters as such size parameters are
determined by the Exchange; and (2) stopped as principal or with a
solicited order at the better of the national best bid or offer
(``NBBO'') or the Agency Order's limit price (if the order is a limit
order).\6\ Orders submitted for crossing into AIM, which are ineligible
for Auction processing will result in both the Agency Order and the
matching contra order(s) being cancelled.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ See Rule 6.51(a).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Under Rule 6.51(a)(1), an Auction may be conducted in a class
designated as eligible for Auctions as determined by the Exchange. Any
determinations made by the Exchange, such as eligible classes, will be
communicated in a Regulatory Circular pursuant to Interpretation and
Policy .05 to Rule 6.51. Notably, AIM functionality is currently not
activated in any class on the Exchange.
    A:AIR functionality is an enhancement to AIM, which if activated,
would allow Participants the flexibility to choose, on an order-by-
order basis, whether an Agency Order should continue into the System
\7\ for processing rather than cancel in the event that an Auction
cannot occur.\8\ A:AIR functionality essentially allows for the entry
of Agency Orders into AIM with contingency processing instructions for
handling in the event that the order cannot be processed via Auction.
For example, using A:AIR functionality, a Permit Holder enters an
Agency Order to buy 10 standard contracts at the market along with a
matched solicited contra order to sell 10 standard contracts at $1.21.
At the time the A:AIR order is entered, the NBBO is $1.00 to $1.20,
with a Customer order to sell 30 contracts at $1.20 resting at the top
of the book alone. Here, the order would not be eligible for submission
into AIM because the Agency Order was not stopped with a solicited
order priced better than the NBBO.\9\ As a result, pursuant to Rule
6.51(a)(2), the Auction would not begin. Whereas both the Agency Order
and solicited order would have cancelled if the order were not marked
A:AIR, in this case, because the order was marked A:AIR, the Agency
Order would route to the automated trading system for processing and
trade against the resting Customer--the solicited order would still be
cancelled. Again, however, had the Permit Holder not marked this order
A:AIR, both the Agency Order and solicited order would cancel.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ The System refers to the Exchange's automated trading system
as defined in Rule 1.1 (Definitions).
    \8\ There are a variety of circumstances in which an AIM order
may be submitted to the Exchange for processing, but an auction may
not occur. For example, a Participant may submit an order for AIM
processing, which is not AIM eligible because one or more of the
conditions required for an AIM auction to occur pursuant to Rule
6.51(a) is not present. In addition, an order that is otherwise AIM
eligible may not be able to process for a variety of reasons,
including, but not limited to circumstances in which AIM
functionality is suspended. In either of such cases, A:AIR
functionality may allow the Agency Order to process despite the
overall order not being AIM eligible.
    \9\ See Rule 6.51(a)(2).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Currently, A:AIR functionality is not explicitly defined in the
Exchange's AIM rules.\10\ Accordingly, this filing is intended to
further codify, clarify, and describe A:AIR functionality in the Rules.
Specifically, the Exchange proposes to adopt Interpretation and Policy
.10 to Rule 6.51 (AIM Retained Order Functionality), under which the
Exchange would define an A:AIR order as the transmission of two or more
orders for crossing pursuant to Rule 6.51, with the Agency Order priced
at the market or a limit price in the standard increment for the option
series and marked with a contingency instruction to route the Agency
Order for processing and cancel any contra orders if an Auction cannot
occur (including if the conditions described in Rule 6.51(a) are not
met).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \10\ A:AIR functionality is generally referred to in the Rules,
although not using that term. See Interpretation and Policy .04 to
Rule 6.13 (Price Check Parameters) at paragraphs (c)(5), (d),
(f)(3), and (h)(4) referring to orders that instruct the System to
process the Agency Order as an unpaired order if an AIM Auction
cannot be initiated.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Furthermore, to ensure that A:AIR orders are properly priced to
allow the Exchange to book the Agency Order in the event an Auction
cannot occur, proposed Interpretation and Policy .10 to Rule 6.51 would
provide that orders marked ``A:AIR'' with Agency Orders that are not
priced at the market or that are priced with a limit price not in the
standard increment for the option series in which they are entered
would be rejected. For example, if a Participant were to submit a
matched Agency Order into AIM for processing in a class with a minimum
increment of a nickel, which was stopped with a contra order at $0.07,
both the Agency Order and the contra order would be rejected because
the order, which is not priced in the minimum increment for the class,
would not eligible for AIM processing and because the System would not
be able to book an order at $0.07 in a class with a minimum increment
of a nickel. Notably, this provision of proposed Interpretation and
Policy .10 to Rule 6.51 is consistent with Exchange rules that only
permit orders at the standard increment to enter the book.\11\ Finally,
proposed Interpretation and Policy .10 to Rule 6.51 would provide that
A:AIR order functionality could be made available on those order
management platforms as determined by the Exchange and announced via
Regulatory Circular. This provision is intended to make clear that
A:AIR functionality may not be available on all trading platforms in
use on the Exchange.\12\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \11\ See Rule 6.4.
    \12\ A:AIR functionality is not currently supported on the PULSe
trader workstation. PULSe is an order handling tool used for the
manual handling of orders. Thus, when ineligible AIM orders would be
rejected back to PULSe users, a person is present to decide how best
to handle such orders. PULSe users can either re-route such orders
to be booked or for alternative electronic processing on the
Exchange.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange also notes that although orders submitted into AIM,
which are not marked A:AIR and are ineligible for Auction processing
will result in both the Agency Order and the matching contra order(s)
being cancelled, the Rules do not explicitly provide as much.
Accordingly, the Exchange proposes to add language to Rule 6.51(a) to
provide that in the event that a Participant submits a matched Agency
Order for electronic execution into the Auction that is ineligible for
processing because it does not meet the conditions described in
paragraph (a), both the Agency Order and any solicited contra orders
will be cancelled unless marked as an AIM Retained order pursuant to
proposed Interpretation and Policy .10 to Rule 6.51.\13\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \13\ Notably, the A:AIR functionality may be primarily used by
smart router technology to ensure that ineligible AIM orders are
submitted into the System for processing and not cancelled. Whereas
traditional brokers and dealers are equipped to manually handle
cancelled orders that are returned to them and may revise the
cancelled orders' terms or contact their customers for further
instructions, smart routers are generally all electronic algorithmic
systems that may not allow for manual handling of cancelled orders.

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

    The Exchange also proposes to make minor changes to Interpretation
and Policy .04 to Rule 6.13 regarding price reasonability checks on
complex orders to harmonize references to A:AIR functionality in Rule
6.13 with the language in proposed Interpretation and Policy .10 to
Rule 6.51. Specifically, the Exchange proposes to modify Interpretation
and Policy .04(c)(5), (d), (f)(3), and (h)(4) to Rule 6.13 (Price Check
Parameters) to change references to AIM orders that instruct the System
to process the Agency Order as an unpaired order if an AIM auction
cannot be initiated, to instead refer to A:AIR orders as defined in
proposed Interpretation and Policy .10 to Rule 6.51. These changes are
non-substantive and intended only to harmonize existing references to
A:AIR functionality currently in the Rules with the definition of A:AIR
orders set forth in proposed Interpretation and Policy .10 to Rule
6.51. The proposed rule change also makes non-substantive changes in
these paragraphs to capitalize the defined term Agency Order,
consistent with Rule 6.51.
2. Statutory Basis
    The Exchange believes the proposed rule change is consistent with
the Act and the rules and regulations thereunder applicable to the
Exchange and, in particular, the requirements of Section 6(b) of the
Act.\14\ Specifically, the Exchange believes the proposed rule change
is consistent with the Section 6(b)(5) \15\ requirements that the rules
of an exchange be 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 regulating,
clearing, settling, processing information with respect to, and
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.
Additionally, the Exchange believes the proposed rule change is
consistent with the Section 6(b)(5) \16\ requirement that the rules of
an exchange not be designed to permit unfair discrimination between
customers, issuers, brokers, or dealers.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \14\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b).
    \15\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5).
    \16\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In particular, the Exchange believes that A:AIR functionality makes
the Exchange's price improvement mechanisms [sic] easier to use and
minimizes the risk of orders being mishandled on the Exchange. The
A:AIR functionality provides opportunities for execution of Customer
orders that a Participant submits for crossing via AIM that cannot be
auctioned. The Exchange believes that this functionality mitigates the
risk that inadvertent mishandling of Agency Orders (i.e. Customer
orders) will cause marketable Customer orders to go unfilled. The
Exchange believes that such outcomes serve to protect investors'
interests by helping to ensure that ineligible AIM Agency Orders are
processed in accordance with customer instructions rather than
cancelled. Accordingly, the Exchange believes that the proposed rule
change is consistent with the purposes of the Act.
    In addition, the Exchange believes that A:AIR functionality
promotes competition amongst market participants by allowing more
orders to be processed. Finally, the proposed rule change seeks to
provide additional clarity and completeness in the Rules regarding
functionalities that may be made available on the Exchange. The
Exchange is continuously updating the Rules to provide additional
detail, clarity, and transparency regarding its operations and trading
systems. The Exchange believes that the adoption of detailed, clear,
and transparent rules reduces burdens on competition and promotes just
and equitable principles of trade.

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 Exchange notes that
price improvement mechanism enhancements such as A:AIR functionality
are widely used across the national options exchanges. The Exchange
believes that offering additional functionalities and enhancements to
its price improvement mechanisms [sic] promotes intermarket
competition. The exchanges have developed these mechanisms in order to
provide market participants diverse opportunities to seek valuable
price improvement and as a means to compete with one another for order
flow. The U.S. options exchanges are continuously making enhancements
and adding functionalities to their price improvement mechanisms in
order to provide more competitive marketplaces for market participants
and better compete with one another. The Exchange believes that
enhancements to such mechanisms promote intermarket competition for
order flow between the exchanges. A:AIR functionality is simply one of
many enhancements that the Exchange has made to AIM for this purpose.

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

    The Exchange neither solicited nor received written comments on 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:
    A. Significantly affect the protection of investors or the public
interest;
    B. impose any significant burden on competition; and
    C. 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 \17\ and
Rule 19b-4(f)(6) \18\ thereunder. 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.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \17\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A).
    \18\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

IV. Solicitation of Comments

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

Electronic Comments

     Use the Commission's Internet comment form (http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml); or
     Send an email to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Please include
File Number SR-C2-2016-014 on the subject line.

Paper Comments

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

All submissions should refer to File Number SR-C2-2016-014. This file
number should be included on the subject line if email is used. To help
the Commission process and review your comments more efficiently,
please use only one method. The Commission will post all comments on
the Commission's Internet Web site (http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml). Copies of the submission, all subsequent amendments, all
written statements with respect to the proposed rule change that are
filed with the Commission, and all written communications relating to
the proposed rule change between the Commission and any person, other
than those that may be withheld from the public in accordance with the
provisions of 5 U.S.C. 552, will be available for Web site viewing and
printing in the Commission's Public Reference Room, 100 F Street NE.,
Washington, DC 20549 on official business days between the hours of
10:00 a.m. and 3:00 p.m. Copies of such filing also will be available
for inspection and copying at the principal office of the Exchange. All
comments received will be posted without change; the Commission does
not edit personal identifying information from submissions. You should
submit only information that you wish to make available publicly. All
submissions should refer to File Number SR-C2-2016-014, and should be
submitted on or before August 31, 2016.

    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets,
pursuant to delegated authority.\19\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \19\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Robert W. Errett,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2016-18909 Filed 8-9-16; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 86, Number 124 (Thursday, July 1, 2021)]
[Notices]
[Page 35113]
[FR Doc No: 2021-14103]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Federal Emergency Management Agency

[Internal Agency Docket No. FEMA-4605-DR; Docket ID FEMA-2021-0001]

West Virginia; Major Disaster and Related Determinations

AGENCY: Federal Emergency Management Agency, DHS.

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: This is a notice of the Presidential declaration of a major
disaster for the State of West Virginia (FEMA-4605-DR), dated May 20,
2021, and related determinations.

DATES: The declaration was issued May 20, 2021.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Dean Webster, Office of Response and
Recovery, Federal Emergency Management Agency, 500 C Street SW,
Washington, DC 20472,<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Notice is hereby given that, in a letter
dated May 20, 2021, the President issued a major disaster declaration
under the authority of the Robert T. Stafford Disaster Relief and
Emergency Assistance Act, 42 U.S.C. 5121 et seq. (the ``Stafford
Act''), as follows:

    I have determined that the damage in certain areas of the State
of West Virginia resulting from severe storms and flooding during
the period of February 27 to March 4, 2021, is of sufficient
severity and magnitude to warrant a major disaster declaration under
the Robert T. Stafford Disaster Relief and Emergency Assistance Act,
42 U.S.C. 5121 et seq. (the ``Stafford Act''). Therefore, I declare
that such a major disaster exists in the State of West Virginia.
    In order to provide Federal assistance, you are hereby
authorized to allocate from funds available for these purposes such
amounts as you find necessary for Federal disaster assistance and
administrative expenses.
    You are authorized to provide Individual Assistance and Public
Assistance in the designated areas and Hazard Mitigation throughout
the state. Consistent with the requirement that Federal assistance
be supplemental, any Federal funds provided under the Stafford Act
for Public Assistance, Hazard Mitigation, and Other Needs Assistance
under section 408 will be limited to 75 percent of the total
eligible costs.
    Further, you are authorized to make changes to this declaration
for the approved assistance to the extent allowable under the
Stafford Act.

    The time period prescribed for the implementation of section
310(a), Priority to Certain Applications for Public Facility and Public
Housing Assistance, 42 U.S.C. 5153, shall be for a period not to exceed
six months after the date of this declaration.
    The Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) hereby gives notice
that pursuant to the authority vested in the Administrator, under
Executive Order 12148, as amended, Jeffrey L. Jones, of FEMA is
appointed to act as the Federal Coordinating Officer for this major
disaster.
    The following areas of the State of West Virginia have been
designated as adversely affected by this major disaster:

    Cabell, Kanawha, Mingo, and Wayne Counties for Individual
Assistance.
    Boone, Kanawha, Lincoln, Logan, Mingo, and Wayne Counties for
Public Assistance.
    All areas within the State of West Virginia are eligible for
assistance under the Hazard Mitigation Grant Program.

    The following Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance Numbers
(CFDA) are to be used for reporting and drawing funds: 97.030,
Community Disaster Loans; 97.031, Cora Brown Fund; 97.032, Crisis
Counseling; 97.033, Disaster Legal Services; 97.034, Disaster
Unemployment Assistance (DUA); 97.046, Fire Management Assistance
Grant; 97.048, Disaster Housing Assistance to Individuals and
Households In Presidentially Declared Disaster Areas; 97.049,
Presidentially Declared Disaster Assistance--Disaster Housing
Operations for Individuals and Households; 97.050, Presidentially
Declared Disaster Assistance to Individuals and Households--Other
Needs; 97.036, Disaster Grants--Public Assistance (Presidentially
Declared Disasters); 97.039, Hazard Mitigation Grant.

Deanne Criswell,
Administrator, Federal Emergency Management Agency.
[FR Doc. 2021-14103 Filed 6-30-21; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 9111-23-P


[Federal Register: January 7, 2009 (Volume 74, Number 4)]
[Notices]
[Page 729-730]
[DOCID:fr07ja09-59]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-59187; File No. 4-533]

Joint Industry Plan; Notice of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness
of Amendment to the National Market System Plan for the Selection and
Reservation of Securities Symbols To Add NASDAQ OMX BX, Inc., as a
Party Thereto

December 30, 2008.
    Pursuant to Section 11A(a)(3) of the Securities Exchange Act of
1934 (``Act'')\1\ and Rule 608 thereunder,\2\ notice is hereby given
that on December 24, 2008, NASDAQ OMX BX, Inc., (``BSE'') filed with
the Securities and Exchange Commission (``Commission'') an amendment to
the National Market System Plan for the Selection and Reservation of
Securities Symbols (``Symbology Plan'' or ``Plan'').\3\ The amendment
proposes to add BSE as a party to the Symbology Plan. The Commission is
publishing this notice to solicit comments on the proposed amendment
from interested persons.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ 15 U.S.C. 78k-1(a)(3).
    \2\ 17 CFR 242.608.
    \3\ On November 6, 2008, the Commission approved the Symbology
Plan that was originally proposed by the Chicago Stock Exchange,
Inc. (``CHX''), The Nasdaq Stock Market, Inc. (``Nasdaq''), National
Association of Securities Dealers, Inc. (``NASD'') (n/k/a Financial
Industry Regulatory Authority, Inc. (``FINRA'')), National Stock
Exchange, Inc. (``NSX''), and Philadelphia Stock Exchange, Inc.
(``Phlx''), subject to certain changes. See Securities Exchange Act
Release No. 58904, 73 FR 67218 (November 13, 2008) (File No. 4-533).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

I. Description and Purpose of the Amendment

    The current parties to the Symbology Plan are Chicago Board Options
Exchange, Incorporated (``CBOE''), CHX, FINRA, the International
Securities Exchange, LLC (``ISE''), Nasdaq, New York Stock Exchange LLC
(``NYSE''), NYSE Arca, Inc. (``NYSE Arca''), NYSE Alternext U.S. LLC
(``NYSE Alternext''), NSX and Phlx.\4\ The proposed amendment to the
Symbology Plan would add BSE as a party to the Symbology Plan. A self-
regulatory organization (``SRO'') may become a party to the Symbology
Plan if it satisfies the requirements of Section I(c) of the Plan.
Specifically, an SRO may become a party to the Symbology Plan if: (i)
It maintains a market for the listing or trading of Plan Securities \5\
in accordance with rules approved by the Commission, which securities
are identified by one, two, or three character symbols, on the one
hand, or four or five character symbols, on the other hand, in each
case prior to any suffix or special conditional identifier; (ii) it
signs a current copy of the Plan; and (iii) it pays to the other
parties a proportionate share of the aggregate development costs, based
upon the number of symbols reserved by the new party during the first
twelve (12) months of such party's membership.\6\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ On November 18, 2008, ISE filed with the Commission an
amendment to the Plan to add ISE as a member to the Plan. See
Securities and Exchange Act Release No. 59024 (November 26, 2008) 73
FR 74538 (December 8, 2008) (File No. 4-533).
    On December 22, 2008, NYSE, NYSE Arca, and NYSE Alternext
(``NYSE Group Exchanges'') and CBOE filed with the Commission
amendments to the Plan to add the NYSE Group Exchanges and CBOE as
members to the Plan. See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 59162
(December 24, 2008) (File No. 4-533).
    \5\ ``Plan Securities'' are defined in the Symbology Plan as
securities that: (i) Are NMS securities as currently defined in Rule
600(a)(46) under the Act; and (ii) any other equity securities
quoted, traded and/or trade reported through an SRO facility.
    \6\ Sections I(c) and IV(a) of the Plan.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    BSE has submitted a signed copy of the Symbology Plan to the
Commission in accordance with the requirement set forth in the
Symbology Plan regarding new parties to the plan.

II. Effectiveness of the Proposed Symbology Plan Amendment

    The foregoing proposed Symbology Plan amendment has become
effective pursuant to Rule 608(b)(3)(iii) \7\ because it involves
solely technical or ministerial matters. At any time within 60 days of
the filing of the amendment, the Commission may summarily abrogate the
amendment and require that it be refiled pursuant to paragraph (b)(1)
of Rule 608,\8\ if it appears to the Commission that such action is
necessary or appropriate in the public interest, for the protection of
investors or the maintenance of fair and orderly markets, to remove
impediments to, and perfect the mechanisms of, a national market system
or otherwise in furtherance of the purposes of the Act.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ 17 CFR 242.608(b)(3)(iii).
    \8\ 17 CFR 242.608(b)(1).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

III. Solicitation of Comments

    Interested persons are invited to submit written data, views and
arguments concerning the foregoing, including whether the amendment 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 e-mail to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Please include
File Number 4-533 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 4-533. This file number
should be included on the subject line if e-mail is used. To help the
Commission process and review your comments more efficiently, please
use only one method. The Commission will post all comments on the
Commission's Internet Web site (http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml).
Copies of the submission, all subsequent amendments, all written
statements with respect to the proposed rule change that are filed with
the Commission, and all written communications relating to the proposed
rule change between the Commission and any person, other than those
that may be withheld from the public in accordance with the provisions
of 5 U.S.C. 552, will be available for inspection and copying in the
Commission's Public Reference Room, on official business days between
the hours of 10 a.m. and 3 p.m. Copies of the filing also will be
available for inspection and copying at the principal office of the
Exchange. All comments received will be posted without change; the
Commission does not edit personal identifying information from
submissions. You should submit only information that you wish to make
available publicly. All submissions should refer to File Number 4-533
and should be submitted on or before January 28, 2009.

    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets,
pursuant to delegated authority.\9\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \9\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Florence E. Harmon,
Acting Secretary.
 [FR Doc. E9-11 Filed 1-6-09; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 74, Number 115 (Wednesday, June 17, 2009)]
[Notices]
[Pages 28693-28695]
[FR Doc No: E9-14242]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

[EPA-HQ-SFUND-2004-0008; FRL-8919-5]

Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposed Collection;
Comment Request; Cooperative Agreements and Superfund State Contracts
for Superfund Response Actions; EPA ICR No. 1487.08, OMB Control No.
2050-0179

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: In compliance with the Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA) (44
U.S.C. 3501 et seq.), this document announces that EPA is planning to
submit a request to renew an existing approved Information Collection
Request (ICR) to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB). This ICR is
scheduled to expire on December 31, 2009. Before submitting the ICR to
OMB for review and approval, EPA is soliciting comments on specific
aspects of the proposed information collection as described below.

DATES: Comments must be submitted on or before August 30, 2009.

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-
SFUND-2004-0008, by one of the following methods:
     www.regulations.gov: Follow the online instructions for
submitting comments.
     E-mail<EMAIL_ADDRESS>     Fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>.
     Mail: Superfund Docket, Environmental Protection Agency,
Mailcode: 28221 T, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave., NW., Washington, DC 20460.
     Hand Delivery: Docket Coordinator, Headquarters; U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency; CERCLA Docket Office; 1301
Constitution Avenue; EPA West, Room 3334, Washington, DC 20004. Such
deliveries are only accepted during the Docket's normal hours of
operation, and special arrangements should be made for deliveries of
boxed information.
    Instructions: Direct your comments to Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-SFUND-
2004-0008. EPA's policy is that all comments received will be included
in the public docket without change and may be made available online at
www.regulations.gov, including any personal information provided,
unless the comment includes information claimed to be Confidential
Business Information (CBI) or other information whose disclosure is
restricted by statute. Do not submit information that you consider to
be CBI or otherwise protected through www.regulations.gov or e-mail.
The www.regulations.gov Web site is an ``anonymous access'' system,
which means EPA will not know your identity or contact information
unless you provide it in the body of your comment. If you send an e-
mail comment directly to EPA without going through www.regulations.gov
your e-mail address will be automatically captured and included as part
of the comment that is placed in the public docket and made available
on the Internet. If you submit an electronic comment, EPA recommends
that you include your name and other contact information in the body of
your comment and with any disk or CD-ROM you submit. If EPA cannot read
your comment due to technical difficulties and cannot contact you for
clarification, EPA may not be able to consider your comment. Electronic
files should avoid the use of special characters, any form of
encryption, and be free of any defects or viruses. For additional
information about EPA's public docket visit the EPA Docket Center
homepage at http://www.epa.gov/epahome/dockets.htm.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: David Yogi, Office of Solid Waste and
Emergency Response, Assessment and Remediation Division, (5204 P),
Environmental Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave., NW.,
Washington, DC 20460; telephone number:<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax number: 703-
603-9112; e-mail address<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

How Can I Access the Docket and/or Submit Comments?

    EPA has established a public docket for this ICR under Docket ID
No. EPA-HQ-SFUND-2004-0008, which is available for online viewing at

www.regulations.gov, or in person viewing at the Superfund Docket in
the EPA Docket Center (EPA/DC), EPA West, Room 3334, 1301 Constitution
Ave., NW., Washington, DC 20004. The EPA/DC Public Reading Room is open
from 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., Monday through Friday, excluding legal
holidays. The telephone number for the Reading Room is<PHONE_NUMBER>,
and the telephone number for the Superfund Docket is<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    Use www.regulations.gov to obtain a copy of the draft collection of
information, submit or view public comments, access the index listing
of the contents of the docket, and to access those documents in the
public docket that are available electronically. Once in the system,
select ``search'', then key in the docket ID number identified in this
document.

What Information Is EPA Particularly Interested in?

    Pursuant to section 3506(c)(2)(A) of the PRA, EPA specifically
solicits comments and information to enable it to:
    (i) Evaluate whether the proposed collection of information is
necessary for the proper performance of the functions of the Agency,
including whether the information will have practical utility;
    (ii) Evaluate the accuracy of the Agency's estimate of the burden
of the proposed collection of information, including the validity of
the methodology and assumptions used;
    (iii) Enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information
to be collected; and
    (iv) Minimize the burden of the collection of information on those
who are to respond, including through the use of appropriate automated
electronic, mechanical, or other technological collection techniques or
other forms of information technology, e.g., permitting electronic
submission of responses. In particular, EPA is requesting comments from
very small businesses (those that employ less than 25) on examples of
specific additional efforts that EPA could make to reduce the paperwork
burden for very small businesses affected by this collection.

What Should I Consider When I Prepare My Comments for EPA?

    You may find the following suggestions helpful for preparing your
comments:
    1. Explain your views as clearly as possible and provide specific
examples.
    2. Describe any assumptions that you used.
    3. Provide copies of any technical information and/or data you used
that support your views.
    4. If you estimate potential burden or costs, explain how you
arrived at the estimate that you provide.
    5. Offer alternative ways to improve the collection activity.
    6. Make sure to submit your comments by the deadline identified
under DATES.
    7. To ensure proper receipt by EPA, be sure to identify the docket
ID number assigned to this action in the subject line on the first page
of your response. You may also provide the name, date, and Federal
Register citation.

What Information Collection Activity or ICR Does This Apply to?

    Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-SFUND-2004-0008.
    Affected entities: Entities potentially affected by this action are
States, federally-recognized Indian tribes and Tribal Consortia, and
political subdivisions which apply to EPA for financial assistance
under a Superfund cooperative agreement or a Superfund State Contract.
    Title: Cooperative Agreements and Superfund State Contracts for
Superfund Response Actions
    ICR numbers: EPA ICR No. 1487.09, OMB Control No. 2050-0179.
    ICR status: This ICR is currently scheduled to expire on December
31, 2009. An Agency may not conduct or sponsor, and a person is not
required to respond to, a collection of information, unless it displays
a currently valid OMB control number. The OMB control numbers for EPA's
regulations in title 40 of the CFR, after appearing in the Federal
Register when approved, are listed in 40 CFR part 9, are displayed
either by publication in the Federal Register or by other appropriate
means, such as on the related collection instrument or form, if
applicable. The display of OMB control numbers in certain EPA
regulations is consolidated in 40 CFR part 9.
    Abstract: This ICR authorizes the collection of information under
40 CFR part 35, subpart O, which establishes the administrative
requirements for cooperative agreements funded under the Comprehensive
Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA) for
State, federally-recognized Indian tribal governments, and political
subdivision response actions. This regulation also codifies the
administrative requirements for Superfund State Contracts for non-State
lead remedial responses. This regulation includes only those provisions
mandated by CERCLA, required by OMB Circulars, or added by EPA to
ensure sound and effective financial assistance management under this
regulation. The information is collected from applicants and/or
recipients of EPA assistance and is used to make awards, pay
recipients, and collect information on how federal funds are being
utilized. EPA requires this information to meet its federal stewardship
responsibilities. Recipient responses are required to obtain a benefit
(federal funds) under 40 CFR part 31, ``Uniform Administrative
Requirements for Grants and Cooperative Agreements to State and Local
Governments'' and under 40 CFR part 35, ``State and Local Assistance.''
An agency may not conduct or sponsor, and a person is not required to
respond to, a collection of information unless it displays a currently
valid OMB control number. The OMB control numbers for EPA's regulations
in 40 CFR are listed in 40 CFR part 9.
    The EPA would like to solicit comments to:
    (i) Evaluate whether the proposed collection of information is
necessary for the proper performance of the functions of the Agency,
including whether the information will have practical utility;
    (ii) Evaluate the accuracy of the Agency's estimate of the burden
of the proposed collection of information, including the validity of
the methodology and assumptions used;
    (iii) Enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information
to be collected; and
    (iv) Minimize the burden of the collection of information on those
who are to respond, including through the use of appropriate automated
electronic, mechanical, or other technological collection techniques or
other forms of information technology, e.g., permitting electronic
submission of responses.
    Burden Statement: The annual public reporting and recordkeeping
burden for this collection of information is estimated to average 7.38
hours per response. Burden means the total time, effort, or financial
resources expended by persons to generate, maintain, retain, or
disclose or provide information to or for a federal agency. This
includes the time needed to review instructions; develop, acquire,
install, and utilize technology and systems for the purposes of
collecting, validating, and verifying information, processing and
maintaining information, and disclosing and providing information;
adjust the existing ways to comply with any previously applicable
instructions and requirements which have subsequently changed; train
personnel to be able to

respond to a collection of information; search data sources; complete
and review the collection of information; and transmit or otherwise
disclose the information.
    The ICR provides a detailed explanation of the Agency's estimate,
which is only briefly summarized here:
    Estimated total number of potential respondents: 568.
    Frequency of response: On occasion.
    Estimated total average number of responses for each respondent:
1.7.
    Estimated total annual burden hours: 4,952.64.
    Estimated total annual costs: $128,466.67 (This includes only the
estimated burden cost of $128,466.67 and no costs for capital
investment or maintenance and operational costs.)

Are There Changes in the Estimates From the Last Approval?

    There is a decrease of 883 hours in the total estimated respondent
burden compared with that identified in the ICR currently approved by
OMB. This decrease reflects a decrease in the estimated number of
respondents from the previous ICR.

What Is the Next Step in the Process for This ICR?

    EPA will consider the comments received and amend the ICR as
appropriate. The final ICR package will then be submitted to OMB for
review and approval pursuant to 5 CFR 1320.12. At that time, EPA will
issue another Federal Register notice pursuant to 5 CFR
1320.5(a)(1)(iv) to announce the submission of the ICR to OMB and the
opportunity to submit additional comments to OMB. If you have any
questions about this ICR or the approval process, please contact the
technical person listed under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT.

    Dated: June 8, 2009.
Phyllis Anderson,
Acting Director, Assessment and Remediation Division, Office of
Superfund Remediation and Technology Innovation.
[FR Doc. E9-14242 Filed 6-16-09; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


[Federal Register Volume 86, Number 63 (Monday, April 5, 2021)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 17565-17567]
[FR Doc No: 2021-06637]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Coast Guard

33 CFR Part 165

[Docket Number USCG-2021-0131]
RIN 1625-AA87

Security Zone; Christina River, Newport, DE

AGENCY: Coast Guard, Department of Homeland Security (DHS).

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking.

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

SUMMARY: The Coast Guard is proposing to establish a security zone for
the protection of Very Important Persons (VIPs) as they transit by
vehicle on the route 141 bridge over the Christina River near Newport,
Delaware. The security zone will be enforced intermittently and only
during times of a protected VIP transit over the bridge and will
restrict vessel traffic while the zone is being enforced. This proposed
rulemaking would prohibit persons and vessels from entering or
remaining within the security zone unless authorized by the Captain of
the Port Delaware Bay or a designated representative. We invite your
comments on this proposed rulemaking.

DATES: Comments and related material must be received by the Coast
Guard on or before May 5, 2021.

ADDRESSES: You may submit comments identified by docket number USCG-
2021-0131 using the Federal eRulemaking Portal at https://www.regulations.gov. See the ``Public Participation and Request for
Comments'' portion of the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section for further
instructions on submitting comments.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: If you have questions about this
proposed rulemaking, call or email Petty Officer Jennifer Padilla,
Sector Delaware Bay, Waterways Management Division, U.S. Coast Guard;
telephone<PHONE_NUMBER><EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Table of Abbreviations

CFR Code of Federal Regulations
DHS Department of Homeland Security
FR Federal Register
NPRM Notice of proposed rulemaking
Sec.  Section
U.S.C. United States Code
VIPs Very Important Persons

II. Background, Purpose, and Legal Basis

    These VIP visits require the implementation of heightened security
measures for protection of VIPs who may travel on the route 141 bridge
over the Christina River in Newport, Delaware. Due to the roadway
passing over the Christina River, this security zone is necessary to
protect VIPs, the public, and the surrounding waterway. To date in the
year 2021 there have been 4 requests for security zones at this
location. As a result, the Coast Guard had to issue numerous temporary
security zones. Continued requests for this security zone are expected
through 2024.
    The purpose of this proposed rulemaking is to protect the VIPs and
the public from destruction, loss, or injury from sabotage, subversive
acts, or other malicious or potential terrorist acts. The Coast Guard
is proposing this rulemaking under authority in 46 U.S.C. 70034
(previously 33 U.S.C. 1231).

III. Discussion of Proposed Rule

    The Captain of the Port Delaware Bay (COTP) is proposing to
establish a security zone for the protection of Very Important Persons
(VIPs) as they transit by vehicle on the route 141 bridge over the
Christina River near Newport, Delaware. This rule is necessary to
expedite the establishment and enforcement of this security zone when
short notice is provided to the COTP for VIPs traveling over the route
141 bridge. The security zone is bounded on the east by a line drawn
from 39[deg]42.55' North Latitude (N), 075[deg]35.88' West Longitude
(W), thence southerly to 39[deg]42.50' N, 075[deg]35.87' W proceeding
from shoreline to shoreline on the Christina River in a westerly
direction where it is bounded by the South James Street Bridge at
39[deg]42.63' N, 075[deg]36.53 W. No vessel or person would be
permitted to enter the security zone without obtaining permission from
the COTP or a designated representative. The regulatory text we are
proposing appears at the end of this document.

IV. Regulatory Analyses

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

A. Regulatory Planning and Review

    Executive Orders 12866 and 13563 direct agencies to assess the
costs and benefits of available regulatory alternatives and, if
regulation is necessary, to select regulatory approaches that maximize
net benefits. This NPRM has not been designated a ``significant
regulatory action,'' under

Executive Order 12866. Accordingly, the NPRM has not been reviewed by
the Office of Management and Budget (OMB).
    This regulatory action determination is based on the duration of
the security zone would not significantly impact vessel traffic due to
the limited amount of time it takes for the VIPs to transit over the
route 141 bridge. Vessel traffic on this portion of the Christina River
is typically limited to recreational traffic. When the security zone is
enforced, the COTP will issue a broadcast via VHF-FM channel 16
allowing vessel traffic time to transit outside of enforcement times.

B. Impact on Small Entities

    The Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980, 5 U.S.C. 601-612, as
amended, requires Federal agencies to consider the potential impact of
regulations on small entities during rulemaking. The term ``small
entities'' comprises small businesses, not-for-profit organizations
that are independently owned and operated and are not dominant in their
fields, and governmental jurisdictions with populations of less than
50,000. The Coast Guard certifies under 5 U.S.C. 605(b) that this
proposed rule would not have a significant economic impact on a
substantial number of small entities.
    While some owners or operators of vessels intending to transit the
security zone may be small entities, for the reasons stated in section
IV.A above, this proposed rule would not have a significant economic
impact on any vessel owner or operator.
    If you think that your business, organization, or governmental
jurisdiction qualifies as a small entity and that this rule would have
a significant economic impact on it, please submit a comment (see
ADDRESSES) explaining why you think it qualifies and how and to what
degree this rule would economically affect it.
    Under section 213(a) of the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement
Fairness Act of 1996 (Pub. L. 104-121), we want to assist small
entities in understanding this proposed rule. If the rule would affect
your small business, organization, or governmental jurisdiction and you
have questions concerning its provisions or options for compliance,
please call or email the person listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION
CONTACT section. The Coast Guard will not retaliate against small
entities that question or complain about this proposed rule or any
policy or action of the Coast Guard.

C. Collection of Information

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

D. Federalism and Indian Tribal Governments

    A rule has implications for federalism under Executive 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 proposed rule under that order and
have determined that it is consistent with the fundamental federalism
principles and preemption requirements described in Executive Order
13132.
    Also, this proposed rule does not have tribal implications under
Executive Order 13175 (Consultation and Coordination with Indian Tribal
Governments) because it would not have a substantial direct effect on
one or more Indian tribes, on the relationship between the Federal
Government and Indian tribes, or on the distribution of power and
responsibilities between the Federal Government and Indian tribes. If
you believe this proposed rule has implications for federalism or
Indian tribes, please call or email the person listed in the FOR
FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section.

E. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act

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

F. Environment

    We have analyzed this proposed rule under Department of Homeland
Security Directive 023-01, Rev. 1, associated implementing
instructions, and Environmental Planning COMDTINST 5090.1 (series),
which guide the Coast Guard in complying with the National
Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (42 U.S.C. 4321-4370f), and have made
a preliminary determination 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 proposed rule involves a security
zone for the protection of Very Important Persons (VIPs) as they
transit by vehicle on the route 141 bridge over the Christina River
near Newport, Delaware. Normally such actions are categorically
excluded from further review under paragraph L[60a] of Appendix A,
Table 1 of DHS Instruction Manual 023-01-001-01, Rev. 1. A preliminary
Record of Environmental Consideration supporting this determination is
available in the docket. For instructions on locating the docket, see
the ADDRESSES section of this preamble. We seek any comments or
information that may lead to the discovery of a significant
environmental impact from this proposed rule.

G. Protest Activities

    The Coast Guard respects the First Amendment rights of protesters.
Protesters are asked to call or email 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.

V. Public Participation and Request for Comments

    We view public participation as essential to effective rulemaking,
and will consider all comments and material received during the comment
period. Your comment can help shape the outcome of this rulemaking. If
you submit a comment, please include the docket number for this
rulemaking, indicate the specific section of this document to which
each comment applies, and provide a reason for each suggestion or
recommendation.
    We encourage you to submit comments through the Federal eRulemaking
Portal at https://www.regulations.gov. If your material cannot be
submitted using https://www.regulations.gov, call or email the person
in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section of this document for
alternate instructions.
    We accept anonymous comments. Comments we post to https://www.regulations.gov will include any personal information you have
provided. For more about privacy and submissions in response to this
document, see DHS's eRulemaking System of Records notice (85 FR 14226,
March 11, 2020).
    Documents mentioned in this NPRM as being available in the docket,
and public comments, will be in our online docket at https://www.regulations.gov and can be viewed by following that

website's instructions. We review all comments received, but we will
only post comments that address the topic of the proposed rule. We may
choose not to post off-topic, inappropriate, or duplicate comments that
we receive. If you go to the online docket and sign up for email
alerts, you will be notified when comments are posted or a final rule
is published.

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 is
proposing to amend 33 CFR part 165 as follows:

PART 165--REGULATED NAVIGATION AREAS AND LIMITED ACCESS AREAS

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

    Authority: 46 U.S.C. 70034, 70051; 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.  165.560 to read as follows:

Sec.  165.560  Security Zone; Christina River, Newport, DE.

    (a) Location. The following area is a security zone: All waters of
the Christina River, from shoreline to shoreline bounded on the east by
a line drawn from 39[deg]42.55' North Latitude (N), 075[deg]35.88' West
Longitude (W), thence southerly to 39[deg]42.50' N, 075[deg]35.87' W
thence along the Christina River in a westerly direction and bounded by
the South James Street Bridge at 39[deg]42.63' N, 075[deg]36.53 W.
These coordinates are based on North American Datum 83 (NAD83).
    (b) Definitions. As used in this section--
    Designated representative means a Coast Guard Patrol Commander,
including a Coast Guard coxswain, petty officer, or other officer
operating a Coast Guard vessel and a Federal, State, and local officer
designated by or assisting the Captain of the Port Delaware Bay (COTP)
in the enforcement of the security zone.
    Official Patrol Vessel means any Coast Guard, Coast Guard
Auxiliary, State, or local law enforcement vessel assigned or approved
by the COTP.
    Very Important Person (VIP) means any person for whom the United
States Secret Service requests implementation of a security zone in
order to supplement protection of said person(s).
    (c) Regulations. (1) In accordance with the general regulations
contained in Sec.  165.33, entry into or movement within this zone is
prohibited unless authorized by the COTP, Sector Delaware Bay or
designated representative.
    (2) Only vessels or people specifically authorized by the Captain
of the Port, Delaware Bay, or designated representative, may enter or
remain in the regulated area. To seek permission to enter, contact the
COTP or the COTP's representative on VHF-FM channel 13 or 16. Those in
the security zone must comply with all lawful orders or directions
given to them by the COTP or the COTP's designated representative. No
person may swim upon or below the surface of the water of this security
zone unless authorized by the COTP or his designated representative.
    (3) Upon being hailed by an official patrol vessel or the
designated representative, by siren, radio, flashing light or other
means, the operator of the vessel shall proceed as directed. Failure to
comply with lawful direction may result in expulsion from the regulated
area, citation for failure to comply, or both.
    (d) Enforcement. This security zone will be enforced with actual
notice by the U.S. Coast Guard representatives on scene, as well as
other methods listed in Sec.  165.7. The Coast Guard will enforce the
security zone created by this section only when it is necessary for the
protection of VIPs traveling across the route 141 bridge in Newport,
Delaware. The U.S. Coast Guard may be additionally assisted in the
patrol and enforcement of the zone by Federal, State, and local
agencies.

    Dated: March 24, 2021.
Jonathan D. Theel,
Captain, U.S. Coast Guard, Captain of the Port, Delaware Bay.
[FR Doc. 2021-06637 Filed 4-2-21; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 9110-04-P