Annualized..........................................  ..............  ..............  ..............  ..............          14,368          14,368
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Alternatives Considered
    (1) No Action.
    Keeping current reporting requirements would perpetuate reporting
requirement inconsistencies between foreign and U.S. FOFs, MODUs, and
vessels engaged in an OCS activity. The resulting information asymmetry
prevents the Coast Guard from maintaining domain awareness on the OCS.
Under the status quo, near misses on foreign FOFs, MODUs, and vessels
would continue to not be reported to the Coast Guard, unlike they are
on U.S. FOFs, MODUs, and vessels.
    Although there is no increased reporting cost with this
alternative, it perpetuates information asymmetry in the maritime
domain. Therefore, the Coast Guard did not choose this alternative.
    (2) Lower Reporting Requirements for U.S. FOFs, MODUs, and Vessels
to Harmonize.
    Rather than alter foreign reporting to harmonize with reporting in
46 CFR part 4, the Coast Guard could alter all U.S. reporting in 46 CFR
part 4 to harmonize with 33 CFR part 146. This would reduce the types
of triggers that generate a reportable marine casualty and likely
decrease the number of reports submitted to the Coast Guard. While
reduced reporting could be a cost saving to industry, it could also
reduce the Coast Guard's maritime domain awareness and increase risk to
maritime safety and the marine environment as suggested in the
Deepwater Horizon accident report. For instance, under this alternative
Coast Guard would not receive reports from vessels about casualties
involving allision, collision, grounding, or significant harm to the
environment, etc. These types of casualties are often associated with
injury, fatality, and property damage and losing awareness of these
incidents would likely decrease safety on the outer continental shelf.
This alternative would also undermine the Coast Guard's efforts to keep
up with technology as the energy development industry moved further
offshore. In this environment, floating OCS facilities are typical and,
as explained in section V. of this preamble, the current regulations in
33 CFR part 146 were originally developed and applied to fixed OCS
facilities operating closer to land. Therefore, the Coast Guard did not
choose this alternative.
    (3) Alter Reporting Requirements on Foreign FOFs, MODUs, and
Vessels to Harmonize with Reporting Requirements under 46 CFR part 4
(Proposed).
    The impact of altering the reporting requirements on foreign FOFs,
MODUs, and vessels engaged in an OCS activity to harmonize with 46 CFR
part 4 is demonstrated in the analysis above. The Coast Guard chooses
this alternative over no action or reducing reporting because it
increases domain awareness at relatively little cost to industry while
not losing situational awareness on particular casualty types as with
alternative two.

B. Small Entities

    Under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA), 5 U.S.C. 601-612, we
have considered whether this SNPRM would have a significant economic
impact on a substantial number of small entities. This interim RFA
updates the analysis done in the 2014 NPRM to account for changes in
revenues during the intervening period. The Coast Guard did not receive
comments on the previous small entity analysis. 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.
    Operations on the OCS encompass many different North American
Industry Classification System (NAICS) codes. In a random sample of 80
foreign entities taken from a population of 99 operators for this
regulatory analysis, 15 different NAICS codes applied.\30\ Therefore,
the standard for a small business in this sample has a wide range, with
revenue thresholds ranging from $16.5 million to $1,250 million, and
employee thresholds ranging from 100 to 1,000 employees.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \30\ Not all operators had an available NAICS code; those that
did not were assumed to be small entities.

                                  Table 24--Applicable NAICS Codes of Operators
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                Number of
             NAICS code                             Description                   operators      Size standard
                                                                                classified
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
114111..............................  Finfish Fishing........................               1            * 1,000
212111..............................  Oil & Gas Exploration and Services.....               1            * 1,000
213111..............................  Drilling Oil and Gas Wells.............              11            * 1,000
213112..............................  Support Activities for Oil and Gas                    4        $41,500,000
                                       Operations.
236115..............................  New Single-Family Housing Construction                1        $39,500,000
                                       (Excludes For-Sale Builders).
237110..............................  Water and Sewer Line and Related                      8        $39,500,000
                                       Structures Construction.
238910..............................  Site Preparation Contractors...........               1        $16,500,000
333132..............................  Oil and Gas Field Machinery and                       2     $1,250,000,000
                                       Equipment Manufacturing.
423990..............................  Other Miscellaneous Durable Goods                     1              * 100
                                       Merchant Wholesalers.
424460..............................  Fish & Seafood Merchant Wholesalers....               1              * 100
441222..............................  Boat Dealers...........................               2        $35,000,000
524298..............................  All Other Insurance Related Activities.               4        $16,500,000
541330..............................  Engineering Services...................               2        $16,500,000

999990..............................  Unclassified...........................               1                N/A
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* Employees.

    In this sample of 80 foreign entities, 63 had a known revenue or
employee count. Of these 63 foreign entities, 24 had annual revenues
less than the threshold for a small business of that NAICS code. Five
entities had fewer employees than the threshold for a small business of
that NAICS code. In total, 29 entities of the 80 (36 percent) were
small businesses.
    The primary cost of this rule would be the additional MCR reports
submitted by foreign businesses operating foreign FOFs, MODUs, and
vessels on the OCS. The Coast Guard estimates the total annual cost
would be $13,531 from an increase of 78 reports. While this cost would
be distributed across the entire industry, we do not know the exact
distribution, since the number of MCRs per operator depends on that
operator's specific behavior, which can change over time. In the last
10 years, the average number of reports per owner was 1.03 (compared to
the 5-year average of 1.64 from table 6). Assuming that trend
continues, no single operator would generate more than two additional
reports (rounding up) under the proposed change. For this small entity
analysis, we show the possible impact of two reports per operator at
$346.96. This assumes the total average cost per report is $173.48
($13,531 divided by 78 reports) to account for variance in the
complexity of a report. To have a significant impact on an individual
company under SBA standards, the cost would need to represent more than
1 percent of an individual company's total revenue. In this scenario,
the company's total revenue would have to be $35,500 or less. In the
sample of 62 operators with known revenues, none had a revenue smaller
than $34,696.

  Table 25--Entities Where Cost Represents More Than 1 Percent of Total
                                Revenues
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                          With revenue
                                            less than          Total
                                             $34,696
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Number of Operators...................                 0              80
% of small entities with known revenue                 0              24
% of entities with known revenue......                 0              62
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The primary cost savings of this SNPRM would be the reduced
reporting by U.S. businesses operating fixed OCS facilities, who would
report under the higher damage threshold of 33 CFR part 146. The Coast
Guard estimates the total annual cost savings would be $2,838 in 2019
dollars, discounted at 7 percent for the entire industry. As this is a
cost savings that helps mitigate the impact of the cost of this rule,
we do not consider this SNPRM would have a significant negative impact
on small entities.
    Therefore, the Coast Guard certifies under 5 U.S.C. 605(b) that
this SNPRM, if promulgated, would not have a significant economic
impact on a substantial number of small entities. We are interested in
the potential impacts from this SNPRM on small businesses and request
public comment on these potential impacts. 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 to the docket at the address
listed in the ADDRESSES section of this preamble. In your comment,
explain why you think it qualifies and how and to what degree this
SNPRM would economically affect it.

C. Assistance for Small Entities

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

D. Collection of Information

    The Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, 44 U.S.C. 3501-3520 requires
that the Coast Guard consider the impact of paperwork and other
information collection burdens imposed on the public. An agency may not
collect or sponsor the collection of information, nor may it impose an
information collection requirement unless it displays a currently valid
OMB control number.
    This action contains proposed amendments to the existing
information collection requirements previously approved under OMB
Control Number 1625-0001.\31\ This amendment would increase the number
of affected facilities and the burden for the existing COI number as
described below.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \31\ www.reginfo.gov/public/do/PRAOMBHistory?ombControlNumber=1625-0001.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Title: Report of Marine Casualty Information and Chemical Testing
of Commercial Vessel Personnel.

    OMB Control Number: 1625-0001.
    Summary of the Collection of Information: This collection requires
responses such as the preparation of written notification by completing
a CG-2692 (series) form and the processing of records. We use this
information to identify pertinent safety lessons and to initiate
appropriate steps for reducing the likelihood of similar accidents in
the future. The collection of information will aid the regulated public
in assuring safe practices.
    Need for Information: These reporting requirements permit the Coast
Guard to investigate marine casualties, as required by 46 U.S.C. 6301,
to determine the causes of casualties and whether existing safety
standards are adequate or new laws or regulations need to be developed.
Receipt of a marine casualty report is often the only way in which the
Coast Guard becomes aware of a marine casualty. It is, therefore, a
necessary first step that provides the Coast Guard with the opportunity
to determine the extent to which a casualty will be investigated.
    Proposed Use of Information: In the short term, the information
provided in the report may also trigger corrective safety actions
addressing immediate hazards or defective conditions, further
investigations of mariner conduct or professional competence, or civil
or criminal enforcement actions by the Coast Guard, other Federal
agencies, or State and local authorities. In the long term, the
information contained in the report becomes part of the Coast Guard's
MISLE database. The Coast Guard uses the information in the MISLE
database to identify safety problems and long-term trends, publish
casualty summaries and annual statistics for public use, establish
whether additional safety oversight or regulation is needed, measure
the effectiveness of existing regulatory programs, and better focus the
Coast Guard's limited marine safety resources.
    Description of the Respondents: The respondents are the owners,
agents, masters, operators, or persons in charge that notify the
nearest Sector Office, Marine Inspection Office, or Coast Guard's Group
Office whenever a vessel or facility is involved in a marine casualty.
    Number of Respondents: We estimate an increase of 55 respondents
for a written report of marine casualty. This increases the total
number of respondents for reporting marine casualties from 5,617 to
5,684.
    Frequency of Response: The notification response is required only
if a marine casualty occurs as defined in 46 CFR 4.03-2 and 46 CFR
4.05-1.
    Burden of Response: For each response, we estimate that it takes 1
hour for a vessel crewmember to complete all of the necessary forms
(CG-2692 series). In addition, some marine casualty forms may undergo
additional processing by the respondents. To account for this
additional time, 10 percent of the forms submitted have 10 hours of
additional burden.\32\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \32\ The Coast Guard estimates that it takes up to 1 hour to
complete the necessary CG-2692 (series) form. However, we received
public comments in 2013 on COI number 1625-0001 stating that some
submitters take more time--up to 8 to 12 hours--to complete the
form. See www.regulations.gov/docket?D=USCG-2011-0710. The reason
for this difference is that some entities have the form(s) reviewed
by shore-side personnel, such as an attorney, prior to submission to
the Coast Guard. The practice of having a form reviewed by an
attorney is not required by Coast Guard regulation. While we believe
that this does not typically occur, we have adjusted our burden
estimate to account for the added review.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Estimate of Total Annual Burden: We estimate an increase of 675
respondents for the 1-hour response of a written report of marine
casualty. This increases the total burden hours for reporting marine
casualties from 5,617 to 5,684.
    As required by 44 U.S.C. 3507(d), we will submit a copy of this
SNPRM to OMB for its review of the collection of information.
    We ask for public comment on the proposed collection of information
to help us determine, among other things--
     How useful the information is;
     Whether the information can help us perform our functions
better;
     How we can improve the quality, usefulness, and clarity of
the information;
     Whether the information is readily available elsewhere;
     How accurate our estimate is of the burden of collection;
     How valid our methods are for determining the burden of
collection; and
     How we can minimize the burden of collection.
    If you submit comments on the collection of information, submit
them to both the OMB and to the docket where indicated under ADDRESSES.
    You need not respond to a collection of information unless it
displays a currently valid control number from OMB. Before the Coast
Guard could enforce the collection of information requirements in this
SNPRM, OMB would need to approve the Coast Guard's request to collect
this information.

E. Federalism

    A rule has implications for federalism under Executive Order 13132
(Federalism) if it has a substantial direct effect on the States, on
the relationship between the National Government and the States, or on
the distribution of power and responsibilities among the various levels
of government. We have analyzed this rule under that Executive Order
13132 and have determined that it is consistent with the fundamental
federalism principles and preemption requirements described in
Executive Order 13132. Our analysis follows.
    Congress specifically granted the authority to regulate artificial
islands, installations, and other devices permanently or temporarily
attached to the (OCS) and in the waters adjacent thereto as it relates
to the safety of life to the Secretary of the Department in which the
Coast Guard is operating. Title 43 U.S.C. 1333(d)(1) states that the
Secretary ``shall have the authority to promulgate and enforce such
reasonable regulations with respect to lights and other warning
devices, safety equipment, and other matters relating to the promotion
of safety of life and property on the artificial islands,
installations, and other devices . . . as he may deem necessary.'' As
this SNPRM would improve the Coast Guard's ability to collect and
analyze casualty data for incidents on the OCS in order to maintain and
improve safety of life on OCS installations, it falls within the scope
of authority Congress granted exclusively to the Secretary. This
authority has been delegated to the Coast Guard and is exercised in
this rulemaking, and the States may not regulate within this category
of marine casualty reporting. Therefore, the rule is consistent with
the principles of federalism and preemption requirements in Executive
Order 13132.
    While it is well settled that States may not regulate in categories
in which Congress intended the Coast Guard to be the sole source of a
vessel's obligations, the Coast Guard recognizes the key role that
State and local governments may have in making regulatory
determinations. Additionally, for rules with implications and
preemptive effect, Executive Order 13132 specifically directs agencies
to consult with State and local governments during the rulemaking
process. If you believe this SNPRM would have implications for
federalism under Executive Order 13132, please call or email the person
listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section of this preamble.

F. Unfunded Mandates

    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 million (adjusted for inflation) or
more in any one year. Although this SNPRM would not result in such an
expenditure, we do discuss the potential effects of this SNPRM
elsewhere in this preamble.

G. Taking of Private Property

    This SNPRM would not cause a taking of private property or
otherwise have taking implications under Executive Order 12630
(Governmental Actions and Interference with Constitutionally Protected
Property Rights).

H. Civil Justice Reform

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

I. Protection of Children

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

J. Indian Tribal Governments

    This SNPRM 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.

K. Energy Effects

    We have analyzed this SNPRM under Executive Order 13211 (Actions
Concerning Regulations That Significantly Affect Energy Supply,
Distribution, or Use). We have determined that it is not a
``significant energy action'' under that order because it is not likely
to have a significant adverse effect on the supply, distribution, or
use of energy.

L. Technical Standards

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

M. Environment

    We have analyzed this SNPRM under Department of Homeland Security
Management 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 (NEPA) (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. 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.
    This SNPRM is likely to be categorically excluded under paragraphs
L54 and L57 of Appendix A, Table 1 of DHS Instruction Manual 023-01-
001-01, Rev. 1.\33\ Paragraph L54 pertains to regulations which are
editorial or procedural. Paragraph L57 pertains to regulations
concerning the manning, documentation, admeasurement, inspection, and
equipping of vessels. This rule involves changing the reporting
criteria for certain casualties that occur on the OCS for foreign
floating facilities, MODUs, and vessels engaged in OCS activities, and
better harmonizes the casualty reporting requirements with those in
place for similar U.S. FOFs, MODUs, and vessels. These proposed changes
would promote the Coast Guard's marine safety mission. We seek any
comments or information that may lead to the discovery of a significant
environmental impact from this SNPRM.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \33\ www.dhs.gov/sites/default/files/publications/DHS_InstructionManual023-01-001-01Rev01_508compliantversion.pdf.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

List of Subjects

33 CFR Part 140

    Continental shelf, Investigations, Marine safety, Occupational
safety and health, Penalties, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.

33 CFR Part 146

    Continental shelf, Marine safety, Occupational safety and health,
Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Vessels.

46 CFR Part 4

    Administrative practice and procedure, Drug testing,
Investigations, Marine safety, National Transportation Safety Board,
Nuclear vessels, Radiation protection, Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements, Safety, Transportation.

46 CFR Part 109

    Marine safety, Occupational safety and health, Oil and gas
exploration, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Vessels.

    For the reasons discussed in the preamble, the Coast Guard proposes
to amend 33 CFR parts 140 and 146 and 46 CFR parts 4 and 109 as
follows:

Title 33--Navigation and Navigable Waters

PART 140--GENERAL

0
1. The authority citation for part 140 is revised to read as follows:

    Authority:  43 U.S.C. 1333, 1348, 1350, 1356; Department of
Homeland Security Delegation No. 00170.1, Revision No. 01.3.

0
2. Amend Sec.  140.10 by revising the definition of ``Floating OCS
facility'' to read as follows:

Sec.  140.10  Definitions.

* * * * *
    Floating OCS facility means a U.S. or foreign buoyant OCS facility
that is dynamically positioned on location or securely and
substantially moored so that it cannot be moved without a special
effort. This term includes tension leg platforms and permanently moored
semisubmersibles or shipshape hulls, but does not include mobile
offshore drilling units and other vessels, as defined in this part.
* * * * *
0
3. Revise Sec.  140.201 to read as follows:

Sec.  140.201  General.

    The Coast Guard investigates casualties occurring on the OCS
including:
    (a) Casualties on floating OCS facilities, MODUs, and vessels as
described in 46 CFR part 4;
    (b) Casualties on fixed OCS facilities as described in 33 CFR
146.30;

    (c) Oil spillage exceeding 200 barrels of oil in one occurrence
during a 30-day period; and
    (d) Other injuries, casualties, accidents, complaints of unsafe
working conditions, fires, pollution, and incidents occurring as a
result of OCS activities as the Officer in Charge, Marine Inspection,
deems necessary to promote the safety of life or property or protect
the marine environment.

Sec.  140.203  [Amended]

0
4. Amend Sec.  140.203 as follows:
0
a. In paragraph (b) introductory text, remove the text ``Geological
Survey'' and add, in its place, the text ``Bureau of Safety and
Environmental Enforcement''.
0
b. In paragraph (b)(3), remove the text ``examing'' and add, in its
place, the text ``examining''.

PART 146--OPERATIONS

0
5. The authority citation for part 146 is revised to read as follows:

    Authority: 43 U.S.C. 1333, 1348, 1350, 1356; Sec. 109, Pub. L.
109-347, 120 Stat. 1884; Department of Homeland Security Delegation
No. 00170.1, Revision No. 01.3.

0
6. Revise Sec.  146.30 to read as follows:

Sec.  146.30  Notice of casualties.

    (a) The owner, operator, or person in charge of a fixed OCS
facility must ensure that the Coast Guard is notified as soon as
possible after a casualty occurs, and by the most rapid means
available, of each casualty involving the facility which results in:
    (1) Death;
    (2) Injury to five or more persons in a single incident;
    (3) Damage affecting the usefulness of primary lifesaving or
firefighting equipment;
    (4) Injury causing any person to be incapacitated for more than 72
hours;
    (5) Damage to the facility exceeding $75,000 resulting from a
collision by a vessel with the facility; or
    (6) Damage to the facility exceeding $75,000.
    (b) The notice required by paragraph (a) of this section must
identify the person giving the notice and the facility involved and
describe, insofar as practicable, the nature of the casualty and the
extent of injury to personnel and damage to property.
    (c) Damage costs referred to in paragraphs (a)(5) and (a)(6) of
this section include the cost of labor and material to restore the
facility to the service condition which existed prior to the casualty,
but does not include the cost of salvage, cleaning, or gas freeing
facility.
    (d) The owner, operator, or person in charge of any floating OCS
facility, mobile offshore drilling unit, or vessel engaged in an OCS
activity must report casualties in accordance with 46 CFR part 4.
    (e) The owner, operator, or person in charge of a foreign floating
OCS facility, mobile offshore drilling unit, or vessel engaged in an
OCS activity must include in the written casualty report required under
46 CFR 4.05-12 information relating to alcohol or drug involvement.

Subpart D [Removed]

0
7. Remove subpart D, comprising Sec. Sec.  146.301 and 146.303.

Subpart E [Redesignated as Subpart D]

0
8. Redesignate subpart E, comprising Sec. Sec.  146.401, 146.402 and
146.405, as subpart D.

Title 46--Shipping

PART 4--MARINE CASUALTIES AND INVESTIGATIONS

0
9. The authority citation for part 4 is revised to read as follows:

    Authority: 43 U.S.C. 1333; 46 U.S.C. 2103, 2303a, 2306, 6101,
6301, 6305, 56311, and 70034; Department of Homeland Security
Delegation No. 00170.1, Revision No. 01.3. Subpart 4.40 issued under
49 U.S.C. 1903(a)(1)(E).

0
10. Revise Sec.  4.01-1 to read as follows:

Sec.  4.01-1  Scope of regulation.

    The regulations in this part govern marine casualty reporting,
investigations of marine casualties, and submission of reports designed
to increase the likelihood of timely assistance to vessels in distress.
0
11. Revise Sec.  4.01-3(c) to read as follows:

Sec.  4.01-3  Reporting exclusion.

* * * * *
    (c) Vessels, floating OCS facilities, and MODUs are excluded from
the requirements of Sec.  4.05-1(a)(5) and (6) with respect to the
death or injury of shipyard or harbor workers when such accidents are
not the result of either a reportable casualty (e.g., collision) or a
reportable equipment casualty (e.g., cargo boom failure) and are
subject to the reporting requirements of Occupational Safety and Health
Administration (OSHA) under 29 CFR part 1904.
* * * * *
0
12. Add Sec.  4.03-0 to subpart 4.03 to read as follows:

Sec.  4.03-0  Definitions that apply to this subpart.

    This subpart contains terms defined for purposes of this part.
0
13. Revise Sec.  4.03-1 to read as follows:

Sec.  4.03-1  Marine casualty or accident.

    Marine casualty or accident means--
    (a) Any casualty or accident involving any vessel other than a
public vessel that--
    (1) Occurs upon the navigable waters of the United States, its
territories or possessions;
    (2) Involves any U.S. vessel wherever such casualty or accident
occurs; or
    (3) With respect to a foreign tank vessel operating in waters
subject to the jurisdiction of the United States, including the
Exclusive Economic Zone (EEZ), involves significant harm to the
environment or material damage affecting the seaworthiness or
efficiency of the vessel.
    (b) Any casualty or accident involving a vessel, floating OCS
facility, or MODU as defined in 33 CFR part 140, when they are engaged
in an OCS activity.
    (c) The term ``marine casualty or accident'' applies to events
including, but not limited to:
    (1) Any fall overboard, injury, or loss of life of any person;
    (2) Grounding;
    (3) Stranding;
    (4) Foundering;
    (5) Flooding;
    (6) Collision;
    (7) Allision;
    (8) Explosion;
    (9) Fire;
    (10) Reduction or loss of electrical power, propulsion, or steering
capabilities;
    (11) Failures or occurrences, regardless of cause, which impair any
aspect of operation, components, or cargo;
    (12) Any other circumstance that might affect or impair
seaworthiness, efficiency, or fitness for service or route;
    (13) Any incident involving significant harm to the environment;
    (14) Any occurrences of injury or loss of life to any person while
diving from a vessel, and using underwater breathing apparatus; or
    (15) Any incident described in Sec.  4.05-1(a).

Sec.  4.03-2  [Amended]

0
14. Amend Sec.  4.03-2 as follows:
0
a. In the introductory text, remove the text, ``in commercial
service'', and add in its place, ``, floating OCS facility, or MODU as
described in Sec.  4.03-1(a) and (b)''.
0
b. In paragraph (a) introductory text, add the text ``(c)'' following
the text, ``Sec.  4.03-1''.

0
c. In paragraph (a)(2), remove the text ``a vessel in commercial
service, which renders the individual unfit to perform routine vessel
duties;'', and add, in its place the text, ``, which renders the
individual unfit to perform routine duties;''.
0
d. In paragraph (a)(4), add the text ``, floating OCS facility, or
MODU'' following the text ``vessel''.
0
15. Revise Sec.  4.03-65(c)(1), (6), and (7), to read as follows:

Sec.  4.03-65  Significant harm to the environment.

* * * * *
    (c) * * *
    (1) Vessel, floating OCS facility, or MODU location and proximity
to land or other navigational hazards;
* * * * *
    (6) The nature of damage to the vessel, floating OCS facility, or
MODU; and
    (7) Failure or breakdown aboard the vessel, floating OCS facility,
or MODU, its machinery, or equipment.
0
16. Add Sec.  4.03-80 to read as follows:

Sec.  4.03-80  Outer Continental Shelf (OCS).

    Outer Continental Shelf or OCS means all submerged lands lying
seaward and outside of the area of ``lands beneath navigable waters''
as defined in section 2(a) of the Submerged Lands Act (43 U.S.C.
1301(a)) and of which the subsoil and seabed appertain to the United
States and are subject to its jurisdiction and control.
0
17. Add Sec.  4.03-85 to read as follows:

Sec.  4.03-85  OCS Activity.

    OCS activity means any offshore activity associated with
exploration for, or development or production of, the minerals of the
Outer Continental Shelf.
0
18. Add Sec.  4.03-90 to read as follows:

Sec.  4.03-90  Floating OCS facility.

    Floating OCS facility means a U.S. or foreign buoyant OCS facility
that is dynamically positioned on location or securely and
substantially moored so that it cannot be moved without a special
effort. This term includes tension leg platforms and permanently moored
semisubmersibles or shipshape hulls, but does not include mobile
offshore drilling units and other vessels, as defined in 33 CFR part
140.
0
19. Add Sec.  4.03-95 to read as follows:

Sec.  4.03-95  Mobile Offshore Drilling Unit (MODU).

    Mobile offshore drilling unit or MODU means a vessel, other than a
public vessel of the United States, capable of engaging in drilling
operations for exploration or exploitation of subsea resources.
0
20. Revise the heading of subpart 4.04 to read as follows:

Subpart 4.04--Notice of Potential Casualty

0
21. Revise Sec.  4.04-1 to read as follows:

Sec.  4.04-1  Reports of potential casualty.

    (a) An owner, charterer, managing operator, or agent of a vessel,
floating OCS facility, or MODU to which this part applies must
immediately notify either of the following Coast Guard officers if
there is reason to believe the vessel, floating OCS facility, or MODU
is lost or imperiled:
    (1) The Coast Guard district rescue coordination center (RCC)
cognizant over the area the vessel, floating OCS facility, or MODU was
last operating; or
    (2) The Coast Guard search and rescue authority nearest to where
the vessel, floating OCS facility, or MODU was last operating.
    (b) Reasons for belief that a vessel, floating OCS facility, or
MODU is in distress include, but are not limited to, lack of
communication with or nonappearance of the vessel, floating OCS
facility, or MODU.
0
22. Revise Sec.  4.04-3 to read as follows:

Sec.  4.04-3  Reports of lack of communication.

    The owner, charterer, managing operator or agent that is required
to report to the United States Flag Merchant Vessel Location Filing
System under the authority of section 212(A) of the Merchant Marine
Act, 1936 (46 App. U.S.C. 1122a), must immediately notify the Coast
Guard if more than 48 hours have passed since receiving communication.
This notification must be given to the Coast Guard district RCC
cognizant over the last known operating area.
0
23. Amend Sec.  4.04-5 by revising the introductory paragraph and
paragraph (a) to read as follows:

Sec.  4.04-5  Substance of reports.

    The owner, charterer, managing operator or agent, notifying the
Coast Guard under Sec.  4.04-1 or Sec.  4.04-3, must:
    (a) Provide the name and identification number of the vessel,
floating OCS facility, or MODU, the names of the individuals on board,
and other information that may be requested by the Coast Guard (when
providing the names of the individuals on board for a passenger vessel,
the list of passengers need only meet the requirements of 46 U.S.C.
3502); and
* * * * *

Sec.  4.05-1  [Amended]

0
24. Amend Sec.  4.05-1 by:
0
a. Revising the introductory text of paragraph (a);
0
b. In paragraphs (a)(2) and (a)(3), adding the text ``, floating OCS
facility, or MODU'' following the text, ``vessel'';
0
c. In paragraph (a)(4), after the text ``adversely affecting'',
removing the text ``the vessel's''; and
0
d. Revising paragraph (a)(6).
    The revisions read as follows:

Sec.  4.05-1  Notice of Marine Casualty.

    (a) Immediately after addressing resultant safety concerns, the
owner, agent, master, operator, or person in charge, shall notify any
one of the nearest Coast Guard units, to include Sector, Marine Safety
Office, Coast Guard District or Area Offices, whenever a vessel,
floating OCS facility or MODU to which this part applies is involved in
a marine casualty consisting in--
* * * * *
    (6) An injury that requires professional medical treatment
(treatment beyond first aid) and, if the person is engaged or employed
on board a vessel, floating OCS facility, or MODU in commercial
service, that renders the individual unfit to perform their routine
duties; or
* * * * *
0
25. Revise Sec.  4.05-5 to read as follows:

Sec.  4.05-5  Substance of marine casualty notice.

    The notice required in Sec.  4.05-1 must include the name and
official number of the vessel, floating OCS facility, or MODU involved,
the name of the owner or agent, the nature and circumstances of the
casualty, the locality in which it occurred, the nature and extent of
injury to persons, and the damage to property.
0
26. Revise Sec.  4.05-15(a) to read as follows:

Sec.  4.05-15  Voyage records, retention of.

    (a) The owner, agent, master, or person in charge of any vessel,
floating OCS facility, or MODU involved in a marine casualty must
retain such voyage records as are normally maintained, such as both
rough and smooth deck and engine room logs, bell books, navigation
charts, navigation work books, compass deviation cards, gyro records,
stowage plans, records of draft, aids to mariners, night order books,
radiograms sent and received, radio logs, crew and passenger lists,
articles of shipment, official logs and other material which might be
of assistance in investigating and determining the cause of the
casualty. The owner, agent, master, other officer or person responsible
for the custody thereof, shall make these records available upon

request, to a duly authorized investigating officer, administrative law
judge, officer or employee of the Coast Guard.
* * * * *
0
27. Revise Sec.  4.05-20 to read as follows:

Sec.  4.05-20  Report of accident to aid to navigation.

    Whenever a vessel, floating OCS facility, or MODU collides with a
buoy, or other aid to navigation under the jurisdiction of the Coast
Guard, or is connected with any such collision, the person in charge
must report the accident to the nearest Officer in Charge, Marine
Inspection. No report on Form CG-2692 is required unless one or more of
the results listed in Sec.  4.05-1 occur.
0
28. Revise the heading of subpart 4.06 to read as follows:

Subpart 4.06--Mandatory Chemical Testing Following Serious Marine
Incidents Involving Vessels, Floating OCS Facilities, or MODUs in
Commercial Service

0
29. Amend Sec.  4.06-1 by revising paragraphs (b) and (e) to read as
follows:

Sec.  4.06-1  Responsibilities of the marine employer.

* * * * *
    (b) When a marine employer determines that a casualty or incident
is, or is likely to become, a serious marine incident, the marine
employer must take all practicable steps to have each individual
engaged or employed on board the vessel, floating OCS facility, or MODU
who is directly involved in the incident chemically tested for evidence
of drug and alcohol use as required in this part.
* * * * *
    (e) The marine employer must ensure that all individuals engaged or
employed on board a vessel, floating OCS facility, or MODU are fully
indoctrinated in the requirements of this subpart, and that appropriate
vessel personnel are trained as necessary in the practical applications
of these requirements.

Sec.  4.06-3  [Amended]

0
30. Amend Sec.  4.06-3 in paragraphs (a)(1) introductory text and
(b)(1) introductory text, by adding the text ``, floating OCS facility,
or MODU'' following the text, ``vessel''.
0
31. Amend Sec.  4.06-5 by revising paragraphs (a) and (b) to read as
follows:

Sec.  4.06-5  Responsibility of individuals directly involved in
serious marine incidents.

    (a) Any individual engaged or employed on board a vessel, floating
OCS facility, or MODU who is determined to be directly involved in an
SMI must provide a blood, breath, saliva, or urine specimen for
chemical testing when directed to do so by the marine employer or a law
enforcement officer.
    (b) If the individual refuses to provide a blood, breath, saliva,
or urine specimen, this refusal must be noted on Forms CG-2692 and CG-
2692B and in the vessel's official log book, if a log book is required.
The marine employer must remove the individual as soon as practical
from duties that directly affect the safe operation of the vessel,
floating OCS facility, or MODU.
* * * * *
0
32. Amend Sec.  4.06-15 by:
0
a. In paragraphs (a)(1), (a)(3), and (b)(2), adding the text ``,
floating OCS facility, or MODU'' following the text, ``vessel''; and
0
b. Adding paragraph (b)(3).
    The addition reads as follows:

Sec.  4.06-15  Accessibility of chemical testing devices.

* * * * *
    (b) * * *
    (3) The owner, operator, or person in charge of a foreign vessel,
floating OCS facility, or MODU who is unable to meet the drug testing
requirements of 49 CFR part 40 may request approval for an alternative
drug testing process from the U.S. Coast Guard Drug and Alcohol
Prevention and Investigation Program Manager via email at
[email protected].

Sec.  4.06-30  [Amended]

0
33. In Sec.  4.06-30 amend paragraph (a) by adding the text ``,
floating OCS facility, or MODU'' following the text, ``vessel'' in the
first sentence.
0
34. Revise Sec.  4.06-60(a) to read as follows:

Sec.  4.06-60  Submission of reports and test results.

    (a) Whenever an individual engaged or employed on a vessel,
floating OCS facility, or MODU is identified as being directly involved
in a serious marine incident, the marine employer must complete Form
CG-2692B (Report of Mandatory Chemical Testing Following a Serious
Marine Incident Involving Vessels in Commercial Service).
* * * * *

Sec.  4.07-45  [Amended]

0
35. In Sec.  4.07-45, add the text ``, floating OCS facility
(facilities), or MODU(s)'' following the text, ``vessel(s)''.

PART 109--OPERATIONS

0
36. The authority citation for part 109 is revised to read as follows:

    Authority: 43 U.S.C. 1333; 46 U.S.C. 3306, 6101, 10104;
Department of Homeland Security Delegation No. 00170.1, Revision No.
01.3.

0
37. Revise Sec.  109.411 to read as follows:

Sec.  109.411  Notice and reporting of casualty.

    The owner, operator, or person in charge of a MODU regulated under
this part must provide notice and report marine casualties in
accordance with 46 CFR part 4.

    Dated: June 4, 2023.
Linda Fagan,
Admiral, U.S. Coast Guard, Commandant.
[FR Doc. 2023-12513 Filed 6-13-23; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 9110-04-P


[Federal Register Volume 86, Number 245 (Monday, December 27, 2021)]
[Notices]
[Pages 73271-73273]
[FR Doc No: 2021-28024]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Docket No. CP22-29-000]

Columbia Gas Transmission, LLC; Notice of Request Under Blanket
Authorization and Establishing Intervention and Protest Deadline

    Take notice that on December 8, 2021, Columbia Gas Transmission,
LLC (Columbia), 700 Louisiana Street, Suite 1300, Houston, Texas 77002-
2700, filed in the above referenced docket a prior notice pursuant to
sections 157.205 and 157.216(b) of the Commission's regulations under
the Natural Gas Act (NGA) and its blanket certificate issued in Docket
No. CP83-76-000 requesting authorization to abandon 11 injection/
withdrawal wells, 12 associated storage pipelines, and appurtenances at
its Holmes and Wayne Storage Field in Holmes and Wayne Counties, Ohio.
Columbia states that these wells provide little value with each
contributing a de minimis amount to the total deliverability of the
storage field and plugging and abandoning each well will reduce
integrity risk. Columbia also seeks to abandon 0.99 miles of storage
lines in place and 0.14 miles of storage lines by removal; Columbia
will no longer have a use for these lines once the wells are abandoned.
Columbia estimates the cost of the project to be approximately $7
million. Columbia avers that the proposed abandonment will have no
impact on its existing customers or affect its existing storage
operations. Columbia states that there will be no change its the
existing boundary, total inventory, reservoir pressure, reservoir and
buffer boundaries, or certificated capacity of the Holmes and Wayne
Storage Field as a result of the proposed abandonment, all as more
fully set forth in the request which is on file with the Commission and
open to public inspection.
    In addition to publishing the full text of this document in the
Federal Register, the Commission provides all interested persons an
opportunity to

view and/or print the contents of this document via the internet
through the Commission's Home Page (http://ferc.gov) using the
``eLibrary'' link. Enter the docket number excluding the last three
digits in the docket number field to access the document. At this time,
the Commission has suspended access to the Commission's Public
Reference Room, due to the proclamation declaring a National Emergency
concerning the Novel Coronavirus Disease (COVID-19), issued by the
President on March 13, 2020. For assistance, contact the Federal Energy
Regulatory Commission at [email protected] or call toll-free,
(886) 208-3676 or TYY,<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    Any questions concerning this application should be directed to
David Alonzo, Manager, Project Authorizations, Columbia Gas
Transmission, LLC, 700 Louisiana Street, Suite 1300, Houston, Texas
77002-2700, by phone at<PHONE_NUMBER> or by email at
[email protected].

Public Participation

    There are three ways to become involved in the Commission's review
of this project: You can file a protest to the project, you can file a
motion to intervene in the proceeding, and you can file comments on the
project. There is no fee or cost for filing protests, motions to
intervene, or comments. The deadline for filing protests, motions to
intervene, and comments is 5:00 p.m. Eastern Time on February 18, 2022.
How to file protests, motions to intervene, and comments is explained
below.

Protests

    Pursuant to section 157.205 of the Commission's regulations under
the NGA,\1\ any person \2\ or the Commission's staff may file a protest
to the request. If no protest is filed within the time allowed or if a
protest is filed and then withdrawn within 30 days after the allowed
time for filing a protest, the proposed activity shall be deemed to be
authorized effective the day after the time allowed for protest. If a
protest is filed and not withdrawn within 30 days after the time
allowed for filing a protest, the instant request for authorization
will be considered by the Commission.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ 18 CFR 157.205.
    \2\ Persons include individuals, organizations, businesses,
municipalities, and other entities. 18 CFR 385.102(d).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Protests must comply with the requirements specified in section
157.205(e) of the Commission's regulations,\3\ and must be submitted by
the protest deadline, which is February 18, 2022. A protest may also
serve as a motion to intervene so long as the protestor states it also
seeks to be an intervenor.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ 18 CFR 157.205(e).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Interventions

    Any person has the option to file a motion to intervene in this
proceeding. Only intervenors have the right to request rehearing of
Commission orders issued in this proceeding and to subsequently
challenge the Commission's orders in the U.S. Circuit Courts of Appeal.
    To intervene, you must submit a motion to intervene to the
Commission in accordance with Rule 214 of the Commission's Rules of
Practice and Procedure \4\ and the regulations under the NGA \5\ by the
intervention deadline for the project, which is February 18, 2022. As
described further in Rule 214, your motion to intervene must state, to
the extent known, your position regarding the proceeding, as well as
your interest in the proceeding. For an individual, this could include
your status as a landowner, ratepayer, resident of an impacted
community, or recreationist. You do not need to have property directly
impacted by the project in order to intervene. For more information
about motions to intervene, refer to the FERC website at https://www.ferc.gov/resources/guides/how-to/intervene.asp.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ 18 CFR 385.214.
    \5\ 18 CFR 157.10.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    All timely, unopposed motions to intervene are automatically
granted by operation of Rule 214(c)(1). Motions to intervene that are
filed after the intervention deadline are untimely and may be denied.
Any late-filed motion to intervene must show good cause for being late
and must explain why the time limitation should be waived and provide
justification by reference to factors set forth in Rule 214(d) of the
Commission's Rules and Regulations. A person obtaining party status
will be placed on the service list maintained by the Secretary of the
Commission and will receive copies (paper or electronic) of all
documents filed by the applicant and by all other parties.

Comments

    Any person wishing to comment on the project may do so. The
Commission considers all comments received about the project in
determining the appropriate action to be taken. To ensure that your
comments are timely and properly recorded, please submit your comments
on or before February 18, 2022. The filing of a comment alone will not
serve to make the filer a party to the proceeding. To become a party,
you must intervene in the proceeding.

How to File Protests, Interventions, and Comments

    There are two ways to submit protests, motions to intervene, and
comments. In both instances, please reference the Project docket number
CP22-29-000 in your submission. The Commission encourages electronic
filing of submissions.
    (1) You may file your protest, motion to intervene, and comments by
using the Commission's eFiling feature, which is located on the
Commission's website (www.ferc.gov) under the link to Documents and
Filings. New eFiling users must first create an account by clicking on
``eRegister.'' You will be asked to select the type of filing you are
making; first select ``General'' and then select ``Protest'',
``Intervention'', or ``Comment on a Filing.''
    The Commission's eFiling staff are available to assist you at (202)
502-8258 or [email protected]
    (2) You can file a paper copy of your submission. Your submission
must reference the Project docket number CP22-29-000.

To mail via USPS, use the following address: Kimberly D. Bose,
Secretary, Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street NE,
Washington, DC 20426
To mail via any other courier, use the following address: Kimberly D.
Bose, Secretary, Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 12225 Wilkins
Avenue, Rockville, Maryland 20852

    Protests and motions to intervene must be served on the applicant
either by mail or email (with a link to the document) at:
[email protected], 700 Louisiana Street, Suite 1300, Houston,
Texas 77002-2700. Any subsequent submissions by an intervenor must be
served on the applicant and all other parties to the proceeding.
Contact information for parties can be downloaded from the service list
at the eService link on FERC Online.

Tracking the Proceeding

    Throughout the proceeding, additional information about the project
will be available from the Commission's Office of External Affairs, at
(866) 208-FERC, or on the FERC website at www.ferc.gov using the
``eLibrary'' link as described above. The eLibrary link also provides
access to the texts of all

formal documents issued by the Commission, such as orders, notices, and
rulemakings.
    In addition, the Commission offers a free service called
eSubscription which allows you to keep track of all formal issuances
and submittals in specific dockets. This can reduce the amount of time
you spend researching proceedings by automatically providing you with
notification of these filings, document summaries, and direct links to
the documents. For more information and to register, go to
www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/esubscription.asp.

    Dated: December 20, 2021.
Kimberly D. Bose,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2021-28024 Filed 12-23-21; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 82, Number 62 (Monday, April 3, 2017)]
[Notices]
[Pages 16182-16183]
[FR Doc No: 2017-06469]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Project No. 14808-000]

Merchant Hydro Developers, LLC; Notice of Preliminary Permit
Application Accepted for Filing and Soliciting Comments, Motions To
Intervene, and Competing Applications

    On December 19, 2016, Merchant Hydro Developers, LLC, filed an
application for a preliminary permit, pursuant to section 4(f) of the
Federal Power Act (FPA), proposing to study the feasibility of the
Panther Pumped Storage Hydroelectric Project to be located near the
town of Simpson in Lackawanna and Wayne Counties, Pennsylvania. The
sole purpose of a preliminary permit, if issued, is to grant the permit
holder priority to file a license application during the permit term. A
preliminary permit does not authorize the permit holder to perform any
land-disturbing activities or otherwise enter upon lands or waters
owned by others without the owners' express permission.
    The proposed project would consist of the following: (1) A new
upper reservoir with a surface area of 175 acres and a storage capacity
of 2,625 acre-feet at a surface elevation of approximately 1,960 feet
above mean sea level (msl) created through construction of new roller-
compacted concrete or rock-filled dams and/or dikes; (2) excavating a
new lower reservoir with a surface area of 180 acres and a total
storage capacity of 4,500 acre-feet at a surface elevation of 1,325
feet msl; (3) a new 6,045-foot-long, 48-inch-diameter penstock
connecting the upper and lower reservoirs; (5) a new 150-foot-long, 50-
foot-wide powerhouse

containing two turbine-generator units with a total rated capacity of
172 megawatts; (6) a new transmission line connecting the powerhouse to
a nearby electric grid interconnection point with options to evaluate
multiple grid interconnection locations; and (7) appurtenant
facilities. Possible initial fill water and make-up water would come
from the Lackawanna River. The proposed project would have an annual
generation of 502,717 megawatt-hours.
    Applicant Contact: Adam Rousselle, Merchant Hydro Developers, LLC,
5710 Oak Crest Drive, Doylestown, PA 18902; phone:<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    FERC Contact: Tim Looney; phone:<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    Deadline for filing comments, motions to intervene, competing
applications (without notices of intent), or notices of intent to file
competing applications: 60 days from the issuance of this notice.
Competing applications and notices of intent must meet the requirements
of 18 CFR 4.36.
    The Commission strongly encourages electronic filing. Please file
comments, motions to intervene, notices of intent, and competing
applications using the Commission's eFiling system at http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/efiling.asp. Commenters can submit brief
comments up to 6,000 characters, without prior registration, using the
eComment system at http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/ecomment.asp. You
must include your name and contact information at the end of your
comments. For assistance, please contact FERC Online Support at
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>(866) 208-3676 (toll free), or (202) 502-
8659 (TTY). In lieu of electronic filing, please send a paper copy to:
Secretary, Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street NE.,
Washington, DC 20426. The first page of any filing should include
docket number P-14808-000.
    More information about this project, including a copy of the
application, can be viewed or printed on the ``eLibrary'' link of the
Commission's Web site at http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/elibrary.asp.
Enter the docket number (P-14808) in the docket number field to access
the document. For assistance, contact FERC Online Support.

    Dated: March 28, 2017.
 Kimberly D. Bose,
 Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2017-06469 Filed 3-31-17; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 82, Number 224 (Wednesday, November 22, 2017)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Page 55511]
[FR Doc No: 2017-25323]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 52

[EPA-R03-OAR-2017-0396; FRL-9971-13-Region 3]

Approval and Promulgation of Air Quality Implementation Plans;
Maryland; 2011 Base Year Inventory for the 2008 8-Hour Ozone National
Ambient Air Quality Standard for the Baltimore, Maryland Nonattainment
Area; Withdrawal of Direct Final Rule

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Withdrawal of direct final rule.

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

SUMMARY: Due to adverse comments received, the Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA) is withdrawing the October 3, 2017 direct final rule that
approved a state implementation plan (SIP) revision submitted by the
State of Maryland to add the 2011 base year inventory for the
Baltimore, Maryland moderate nonattainment area for the 2008 8-hour
ozone national ambient air quality standard (NAAQS) into Maryland's
SIP. EPA stated in the direct final rule that if EPA received adverse
comments by November 2, 2017, the rule would be withdrawn and not take
effect. EPA subsequently received adverse comments. EPA will address
the comments received in a subsequent final action based upon the
proposed rulemaking action also published on October 3, 2017. EPA will
not institute a second comment period on this action.

DATES: The direct final rule published at 82 FR 45997, on October 3,
2017, is withdrawn as of November 22, 2017.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Gavin Huang,<PHONE_NUMBER>, or by
email at [email protected].

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: On December 20, 2016, the State of Maryland
submitted the 2011 base year emission inventory through the Maryland
Department of the Environment (MDE) to meet the nonattainment
requirements for moderate ozone nonattainment areas for the 2008 8-hour
ozone NAAQS. In the direct final rule published on October 3, 2017 (82
FR 45997), EPA stated that if EPA received adverse comments by November
2, 2017, the rule would be withdrawn and not take effect. EPA
subsequently received adverse comments from anonymous commenters.
    Because adverse comments were received, EPA is withdrawing the
direct final rule approving the revisions to the Maryland SIP that
approves the 2011 base year inventory for the Baltimore, Maryland
moderate nonattainment area for the 2008 8-hour ozone NAAQS on October
3, 2017 (82 FR 45997). EPA will respond to the adverse comments in a
separate final rulemaking action.

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52

    Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Incorporation by
reference, Nitrogen dioxide, Ozone, Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements, Volatile organic compounds.

    Dated: November 9, 2017.
Cosmo Servidio,
Regional Administrator, Region III.

0
Accordingly, the amendments to 40 CFR part 52 published on October 3,
2017 (82 FR 45997) are withdrawn as of November 22, 2017.

[FR Doc. 2017-25323 Filed 11-21-17; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


[Federal Register Volume 88, Number 226 (Monday, November 27, 2023)]
[Notices]
[Pages 82921-82925]
[FR Doc No: 2023-26005]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-98987; File No. SR-BOX-2023-29]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; BOX Exchange LLC; Notice of Filing
and Immediate Effectiveness of Proposed Rule Change To Amend Its Rules
To Adopt Monthly Options Series

November 20, 2023.
    Pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934
(``Act''),\1\ and Rule 19b-4 thereunder,\2\ notice is hereby given that
on November 17, 2023, BOX Exchange LLC (``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 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 Exchange proposes to amend its Rules to adopt Monthly Options
Series. The text of the proposed rule change is available from the
principal office of the Exchange, at the Commission's Public Reference
Room and also on the Exchange's internet website at https://rules.boxexchange.com/rulefilings.

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

    In its filing with the Commission, the self-regulatory organization
included statements concerning the purpose of, and basis for, the
proposed rule change and discussed any comments it received on the
proposed rule change. The text of these statements may be examined at
the places specified in Item IV below. The self-regulatory organization
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 its Rules to accommodate the listing
of option series that would expire at the close of business on the last
business day of a calendar month (``Monthly Options Series''). This is
a competitive filing that is based on a proposal recently submitted
Cboe Exchange, Inc (``CBOE'').\5\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 98915 (November 13,
2023) (SR-CBOE-2023-049) (Order Approving a Proposed Rule Change to
Adopt Monthly Options Series).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange proposes to amend its Rules to accommodate the listing
of option series that would expire at the close of business on the last
business day of a calendar month (``Monthly Options Series''). Pursuant
to proposed IM-5050-13(1) and proposed IM-6090-4(i), the Exchange may
list Monthly Options Series for up to five currently listed option
classes that are either index options or options on exchange-traded
funds (``ETFs'').\6\ In addition, the Exchange may also list Monthly
Options Series on any options classes that are selected by other
securities exchanges that employ a similar program under their
respective rules.\7\ The Exchange may list 12 expirations for Monthly
Options Series. Monthly Options Series need not be for consecutive
months; however, the expiration date of a nonconsecutive expiration may
not be beyond what would be considered the last expiration date if the
maximum number of expirations were listed consecutively.\8\ Other
expirations in the same class are not counted as part of the maximum
numbers of Monthly Options Series expirations for a class.\9\ Monthly
Options Series will be P.M.-settled.\10\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ The Exchange proposes to amend Rule 5050(a) to provide that
proposed IM-5050-13 will describe how the Exchange will fix a
specific expiration date and exercise price for Monthly Options
Series and that proposed IM-5050-13 will govern the procedures for
opening Monthly Options Series, respectively. This is consistent
with language in current Rule 5050(a) for other Short Term Option
Series and Quarterly Options Series.
    \7\ The Exchange's proposal is based on a CBOE proposal and the
Exchange believes that other options exchanges will adopt similar
programs in the future.
    \8\ The Exchange notes this provision considers consecutive
monthly listings. In other words, as other expirations (such as
Quarterly Option Series) are not counted as part of the maximum,
those expirations would not be considered when considering when the
last expiration date would be if the maximum number were listed
consecutively. For example, if it is January 2024 and the Exchange
lists Quarterly Options Series in class ABC with expirations in
March, June, September, December, and the following March, the
Exchange could also list Monthly Options Series in class ABC with
expirations in January, February, April, May, July, August, October,
and November 2024 and January and February of 2025. This is because,
if Quarterly Option Series, for example, were counted, the Exchange
would otherwise never be able to list the maximum number of Monthly
Options Series. This is consistent with the listing provisions for
Quarterly Options Series, which permit give calendar quarter
expirations. The need to list series with the same expiration in the
current calendar year and the following calendar year (whether
Monthly or Quarterly expiration) is to allow market participants to
execute one-year strategies pursuant to which they may roll their
exposures in the longer-dated options (e.g., January 2025) prior to
the expiration of the nearer-dated option (e.g., January 2024).
    \9\ See proposed IM-5050-13(2) and proposed IM-6090-4(ii).
    \10\ See proposed IM-5050-13(3) and proposed IM-6090-4(iii).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The strike price of each Monthly Options Series will be fixed at a
price per share, with at least two, but no more than five, strike
prices above and at least two, but no more than five, strike prices
below the value of the underlying index or price of the underlying
security at about the time that a Monthly Options Series is opened for
trading on the Exchange. The Exchange will list strike prices for
Monthly Options Series that are reasonably related to the current price
of the underlying security or current index value of the underlying
index to which such series relates at about the time such series of
options is first opened for trading on the Exchange. The term
``reasonably related to the current price of the underlying security or
index value of the underlying index'' means that the exercise price is
within 30% of the current underlying security price or index value.\11\
Additional Monthly Options Series of the same class may be open for
trading on the Exchange when the Exchange deems it necessary to
maintain an orderly market, to meet customer demand, or when the market
price of the underlying security moves substantially from the initial
exercise price or prices. To the extent that any additional strike
prices are listed by the Exchange, such additional strike prices will
be within 30% above or below the closing price of the underlying index
or security on the preceding day. The Exchange may also open additional
strike prices of Monthly Options Series that are more than 30% above or
below the current price of the underlying security, provided that
demonstrated customer interest exists for such series, as expressed by
institutional, corporate, or individual customers or their brokers.
Market Makers trading for their own account will not be considered when
determining customer interest under this provision. The opening of the
new Monthly Options Series will not affect the series of options of the
same class previously opened.\12\ The interval between strike prices on
Monthly Options Series will be the same as the interval for strike
prices for series in that same options class that expire in accordance
with the normal monthly expiration cycle.\13\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \11\ See proposed IM-5050-13(4) and proposed IM-6090-4(iv). The
Exchange notes these proposed provisions are consistent with the
initial series provision for the Quarterly Options Series program in
IM-5050-4(d). While different than the initial strike listing
provision for the Quarterly Options Series program in current IM-
5050-4(c), the Exchange believes the proposed provision is
appropriate, as it contemplates classes that may have strike
intervals of $5 or greater. For consistency, the Exchange also
proposes to amend IM-5050-4(c) to incorporate the same provision for
initial series.
    \12\ See proposed IM-5050-13(5) and proposed IM-6090-4(v).
    \13\ See proposed IM-5050-13(6) and proposed IM-6090-4(vi); see
also Rule 5050, IM-5050-1 (Strike Price Intervals), IM-5050-2 ($1
Strike Price Interval Program), IM-5050-3 ($2.50 Strike Price
Program) and Rule 6090(c) (Procedures for Adding and Deleting Strike
Prices).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    By definition, Monthly Options Series can never expire in the same
week as a standard expiration series (which expire on the third Friday
of a month) in the same class expires. The same, however, is not the
case with regards to Short Term Options Series or Quarterly Options
Series. Therefore, to avoid any confusion in the marketplace, the
Exchange proposes to amend IM-5050-6 and IM-6090-2 to provide the
Exchange will not list a Short Term Options Series in a class on a date
on which a Monthly Options Series or Quarterly Options Series
expires.\14\ Similarly, proposed IM-5050-13(2) and IM-6090-4(ii)
provide that no Monthly

Options Series may expire on a date that coincides with an expiration
date of a Quarterly Options Series in the same index or ETF class. In
other words, the Exchange will not list a Short Term Options Series on
an index or ETF if a Monthly Options Series on that index or ETF were
to expire on the same date, nor will the Exchange list a Monthly
Options Series on an ETF or index if a Quarterly Options Series on that
index or ETF were to expire on the same date to prevent the listing of
series with concurrent expirations.\15\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \14\ The Exchange also proposes to make a nonsubstantive change
to IM-5050-6 and IM-6090-2 to change current references to ``monthly
options series'' to ``standard expiration options series'' (i.e.,
series that expire on the third Friday of a month), to eliminate
potential confusion. The current references to ``monthly options
series'' are intended to refer to those series that expire on the
third Friday of a month, which are generally referred to in the
industry as standard expirations.
    \15\ The Exchange notes this would not prevent the Exchange from
listing a P.M.-settled Monthly Options Series on an index with the
same expiration date as an A.M.-settled Short Term Options Series on
the same index, both of which may expire on a Friday. In other
words, the Exchange may list a P.M-settled Monthly Options Series on
an index concurrent with an A.M.-settled Short Term Options Series
on that index and both of which expire on a Friday. The Exchange
believes this concurrent listing would provide investors with yet
another hedging mechanism and is reasonable given these series would
not be identical (unlike if they were both P.M-settled). This could
not occur with respect to ETFs, as all Short Term Options Series on
ETFs are P.M.-settled.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    With respect to Monthly Options Series added pursuant to proposed
IM-5050-13(1) through (6) and proposed IM-6090-4(i) through (vi), the
Exchange will, on a monthly basis, review series that are outside a
range of five strikes above and five strikes below the current price of
the underlying index or security, and delist series with no open
interest in both the put and the call series having a: (i) strike
higher than the highest strike price with open interest in the put and/
or call series for a given expiration month; and (ii) strike lower than
the lowest strike price with open interest in the put and/or call
series for a given expiration month. Notwithstanding this delisting
policy, customer requests to add strikes and/or maintain strikes in
Monthly Options Series in series eligible for delisting will be
granted. In connection with this delisting policy, if the Exchange
identifies series for delisting, the Exchange will notify other options
exchanges with similar delisting policies regarding eligible series for
delisting and will work with such other exchanges to develop a uniform
list of series to be delisted, so as to ensure uniform series delisting
of multiply listed Monthly Options Series.\16\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \16\ See proposed IM-5050-13(7) and proposed IM-6090-4(vii).
Pursuant to Rule 3140, exercise limits for impacted index and ETF
classes would be equal to the applicable position limits. For an
Options Participant that has been granted an exemption to position
limits pursuant Rule 3130(c) (Exemption to Position Limits), the
number of contracts which can be exercised over a five (5) business
day period shall equal the Options Participant's exempted position.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange believes that Monthly Options Series will provide
investors with another flexible and valuable tool to manage risk
exposure, minimize capital outlays, and be more responsive to the
timing of events affecting the securities that underlie option
contracts. The Exchange believes limiting Monthly Options Series to
five classes will ensure the addition of these new series will have a
negligible impact on the Exchange's and the Options Price Reporting
Authority's (``OPRA's'') quoting capacity. The Exchange represents it
has the necessary systems capacity to support new options series that
will result from the introduction of Monthly Options Series. The
Exchange also proposes to amend Rules 3120, 6040, and 6050 to provide
that positions in Monthly Options Series will be aggregated with
positions in options contracts on the same underlying security or
index.\17\ This is consistent with how position (and exercise) limits
are currently imposed on series with other expirations (Short Term
Options Series and Quarterly Options Series). Therefore, positions in
options within class of index or ETF options, regardless of their
expirations, would continue to be subject to existing position (and
exercise) limits. The Exchange believes this will address potential
manipulative schemes and adverse market impacts surrounding the use of
options.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \17\ See proposed IM-3120-5 (regarding positions in options
contracts on the same underlying security), Rule 6040(d) (regarding
position limits for Broad-Based Index Options), and Rule 6050(d)
(regarding position limits for Industry Index Options). The Exchange
notes the proposed rule change adds IM-3120-5 to state that
positions in Short Term Option Series, Monthly Options Series, and
Quarterly Options Series shall be aggregated with positions in
options contracts on the same underlying security. This is currently
true with respect to Short Term Option Series and Quarterly Options
Series but was inadvertently omitted from Rule 3120.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange also represents its current surveillance programs will
apply to Monthly Options Series and will properly monitor trading in
the proposed Monthly Options Series. The Exchange currently lists
Quarterly Options Series in certain ETF classes, which expire at the
close of business at the end of four calendar months (i.e., the end of
each calendar quarter), and has not experienced any market disruptions
nor issues with capacity. The Exchange's surveillance programs
currently in place to support and properly monitor trading in these
Quarterly Options Series, as well as Short Term Option Series and
standard expiration series, will apply to the proposed Monthly Options
Series. The Exchange believes its surveillances continue to be designed
to deter and detect violations of its Rules, including position and
exercise limits and possible manipulative behavior, and these
surveillances will apply to Monthly Options Series that the Exchange
determines to list for trading. Ultimately, the Exchange does not
believe the proposed rule change raises any unique regulatory concerns
because existing safeguards--such as position and exercise limits (and
the aggregation of options overlying the same index or ETF) and
reporting requirements--would continue to apply.
2. Statutory Basis
    The Exchange believes that the proposal is consistent with the
requirements of Section 6(b) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934
(the ``Act''),\18\ in general, and Section 6(b)(5) of the Act,\19\ 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 mechanism of a free and open market and
a national market system, and, in general to protect investors and the
public interest. In particular, the Exchange believes the introduction
of Monthly Options Series will remove impediments to and perfect the
mechanism of a free and open market and a national market system by
expanding hedging tools available to market participants. The Exchange
believes the proposed monthly expirations will allow market
participants to transact in the index and ETF options listed pursuant
to the proposed rule change based on their timing as needed and allow
them to tailor their investment and hedging needs more effectively.
Further, the Exchange believes the availability of Monthly Options
Series would protect investors and the public interest by providing
investors with more flexibility to closely tailor their investment and
hedging decisions in these options, thus allowing them to better manage
their risk exposure.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \18\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b).
    \19\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange believes the Quarterly Options Series Program has been
successful to date and the proposed Monthly Options Series program
simply expands the ability of investors to hedge risk against market
movements stemming from economic releases or market events that occur
at months' ends in the same way the Quarterly

Options Series Program has expanded the landscape of hedging for
quarter-end news. Monthly Options Series will also complement Short
Term Options Series, which allow investors to hedge risk against events
that occur throughout a month. The Exchange believes the availability
of additional expirations should create greater trading and hedging
opportunities for investors, as well as provide investors with the
ability to tailor their investment objectives more effectively.
    The Exchange notes the proposed terms of Monthly Options Series,
including the limitation to five index and ETF option classes, are
substantively the same as the current terms of Quarterly Options
Series.\20\ Quarterly Options Series expire on the last business day of
a calendar quarter, which is the last business day of every third
month. The proposed Monthly Options Series would fill the gaps between
Quarterly Options Series expirations by permitting series to expire on
the last business day of every month, rather than every third month.
The proposed Monthly Options Series may be listed in accordance with
the same terms as Quarterly Options Series, including permissible
strikes. As is the case with Quarterly Options Series, no Short Term
Options Series may expire on the same day as a Monthly Options Series.
Similarly, as proposed, no Monthly Options Series may expire on the
same day as a Quarterly Options Series. The Exchange believes
preventing listing series with concurrent expirations in a class will
eliminate potential investors confusion and thus protect investors and
the public interest. Given that Quarterly Options Series the Exchange
currently lists are essentially Monthly Options Series that can expire
at the end of only certain calendar months, the Exchange believes it is
reasonable to list Monthly Options Series in accordance with the same
terms, as it will promote just and equitable principles of trade. The
Exchange believes limiting Monthly Options Series to five classes will
ensure the addition of these new series will have a negligible impact
on the Exchange's and OPRA's quoting capacity. The Exchange represents
it has the necessary systems capacity to support new options series
that will result from the introduction of Monthly Options Series.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \20\ Compare proposed IM-5050-13 and proposed IM-6090-4 to IM-
5050-4 and IM-6090-1, respectively.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange further believes the proposed rule change regarding
the treatment of Monthly Options Series with respect to determining
compliance with position and exercise limits is designed to prevent
fraudulent and manipulative acts and practices and promote just and
equitable principles of trade. Monthly Options Series will be
aggregated with options overlying the same ETF or index for purposes of
compliance with position (and exercise) limits, which is consistent
with how position (and exercise) limits are currently imposed on series
with other expirations (Short Term Options Series and Quarterly Options
Series). Therefore, options positions within ETF or index option
classes for which Monthly Options Series are listed, regardless of
their expirations, would continue to be subject to existing position
(and exercise) limits. The Exchange believes this will address
potential manipulative schemes and adverse market impacts surrounding
the use of options. The Exchange also represents its current
surveillance programs will apply to Monthly Options Series and will
properly monitor trading in the proposed Monthly Options Series. The
Exchange currently trades Quarterly Options Series in certain ETF
classes, which expire at the close of business at the end of four
calendar months (i.e., the end of each calendar quarter), and has not
experienced any market disruptions nor issues with capacity. The
Exchange's surveillance programs currently in place to support and
properly monitor trading in these Quarterly Options Series, as well as
Short Term Option Series and standard expiration series, will apply to
the proposed Monthly Options Series. The Exchange believes its
surveillances continue to be designed to deter and detect violations of
its Rules, including position and exercise limits and possible
manipulative behavior, and these surveillances will apply to Monthly
Options Series that the Exchange determines to list for trading.
Ultimately, the Exchange does not believe the proposed rule change
raises any unique regulatory concerns because existing safeguards--such
as position and exercise limits (and the aggregation of options
overlying the same ETF or index) and reporting requirements would
continue to apply.

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 not necessary or appropriate in
furtherance of the purposes of the Act. In this regard and as indicated
above, the Exchange notes that the rule change is being proposed as a
competitive response to a filing submitted by CBOE.
    The Exchange does not believe the proposed rule change to list
Monthly Options Series will impose any burden on intramarket
competition that is not necessary or appropriate in furtherance of the
purposes of the Act, as any Monthly Options Series the Exchange lists
for trading will be available in the same manner for all market
participants who wish to trade such options. The Exchange notes the
proposed terms of Monthly Options Series, including the limitation to
five index and ETF option classes, are substantively the same as the
current terms of Quarterly Options Series.\21\ Quarterly Options Series
expire on the last business day of a calendar quarter, which is the
last business day of every third month, making the concept of Monthly
Options Series in a limited number of index and ETF options not novel.
The proposed Monthly Options Series will fill the gaps between
Quarterly Options Series expirations by permitting series to expire on
the last business day of every month, rather than every third month.
The proposed Monthly Options Series may be listed in accordance with
the same terms as Quarterly Options Series, including permissible
strikes. Monthly Options Series will trade on the Exchange in the same
manner as other options in the same class. The Exchange does not
believe the proposed rule change to list Monthly Options Series will
impose any burden on intermarket competition that is not necessary or
appropriate in furtherance of the purposes of the Act, as nothing
prevents other options exchanges from proposing similar rules. As
discussed above, the proposed rule change would permit listing of
Monthly Options Series in five index or ETF options, as well as any
other classes that other exchanges may list under similar programs. To
the extent that the availability of Monthly Options Series makes the
Exchange a more attractive marketplace to market participants at other
exchanges, market participants are free to elect to become market
participants on the Exchange. The Exchange believes that the proposed
rule change may relieve any burden on, or otherwise promote,
competition. Similar to Short Term Options Series and Quarterly Options
Series, the Exchange believes the introduction of Monthly Options
Series will not impose an undue burden on competition. The Exchange
believes that it will, among other things, expand hedging tools
available to market participants. The Exchange believes

Monthly Options Series will allow market participants to purchase
options based on their timing as needed and allow them to tailor their
investment and hedging needs more effectively. The Exchange does not
believe the proposed rule change to provide that positions in Monthly
Options Series will be aggregated with positions in options contracts
on the same underlying index or security for purposes of determining
compliance with position (and exercise) limits will impose any burden
on intramarket competition that is not necessary or appropriate in
furtherance of the purposes of the Act, as it will apply in the same
manner to all market participants. The Exchange proposes to apply
position (and exercise) limits to Monthly Options Series in the same
manner it applies position limits to series with other expirations
(Short Term Options Series and Quarterly Options Series). Therefore,
positions in options in a class of ETF or index options, regardless of
their expirations, would continue to be subject to existing position
(and exercise) limits. Additionally, the Exchange does not believe this
proposed change will impose any burden on intermarket competition that
is not necessary or appropriate in furtherance of the purposes of the
Act, because it will address potential manipulative schemes and adverse
market impacts surrounding the use of options.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \21\ See IM-5050-4 and IM-6090-1.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

    The Exchange has neither solicited nor received comments on the
proposed rule change.

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

    The Exchange has filed the proposed rule change pursuant to Section
19(b)(3)(A)(iii) of the Act \22\ and Rule 19b-4(f)(6) thereunder.\23\
Because the foregoing proposed rule change does not: (i) significantly
affect the protection of investors or the public interest; (ii) impose
any significant burden on competition; and (iii) become operative for
30 days from the date on which it was filed, or such shorter time as
the Commission may designate, it has become effective pursuant to
Section 19(b)(3)(A)(iii) of the Act \24\ and subparagraph (f)(6) of
Rule 19b-4 thereunder.\25\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \22\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A)(iii).
    \23\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6).
    \24\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A)(iii).
    \25\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6). In addition, Rule 19b-4(f)(6)(iii)
requires a self-regulatory organization to give the Commission
written notice of its intent to file the proposed rule change, along
with a brief description and 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 satisfied this requirement.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    A proposed rule change filed pursuant to Rule 19b-4(f)(6) under the
Act \26\ normally does not become operative for 30 days after the date
of its filing. However, Rule 19b-4(f)(6)(iii) \27\ permits the
Commission to designate a shorter time if such action is consistent
with the protection of investors and the public interest. The Exchange
has requested that the Commission waive the 30-day operative delay so
that the Exchange may establish Monthly Options Series at the same time
as CBOE, which the Exchange believes is consistent with the protection
of investors and the public interest because it will ensure fair
competition among the exchanges. The Exchange notes that its proposal
is substantially similar in all material respects to a proposal
submitted by CBOE to implement the Monthly Options Series program, that
was recently approved by the Commission.\28\ The Commission believes
that the proposed rule change presents no novel issues and that waiver
of the 30-day operative delay is consistent with the protection of
investors and the public interest. Accordingly, the Commission hereby
waives the operative delay and designates the proposed rule change
operative upon filing.\29\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \26\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6).
    \27\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6)(iii).
    \28\ See supra, note 5, order approving CBOE's proposed rule
change.
    \29\ 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 (https://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml); or
     Send an email to [email protected]. Please include
file number SR-BOX-2023-29 on the subject line.

Paper Comments

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

All submissions should refer to file number SR-BOX-2023-29. This file
number should be included on the subject line if email is used. To help
the Commission process and review your comments more efficiently,
please use only one method. The Commission will post all comments on
the Commission's internet website (https://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml). Copies of the submission, all subsequent amendments, all
written statements with respect to the proposed rule change that are
filed with the Commission, and all written communications relating to
the proposed rule change between the Commission and any person, other
than those that may be withheld from the public in accordance with the
provisions of 5 U.S.C. 552, will be available for website viewing and
printing in the Commission's Public Reference Room, 100 F Street NE,
Washington, DC 20549, on official business days between the hours of 10
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. Do not
include personal identifiable information in submissions; you should
submit only information that you wish to make available publicly. We
may redact in part or withhold entirely from publication submitted
material that is obscene or subject to copyright protection. All
submissions should refer to file number SR-BOX-2023-29 and should be
submitted on or before December 18, 2023.

    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets,
pursuant to delegated authority.\30\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \30\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12), (59).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Sherry R. Haywood,
Assistant Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2023-26005 Filed 11-24-23; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011-01-P