[Federal Register Volume 88, Number 195 (Wednesday, October 11, 2023)]
[Notices]
[Pages 70428-70431]
[FR Doc No: 2023-22437]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-98684; File No. SR-CboeBZX-2023-075]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; Cboe BZX Exchange, Inc.; Notice of
Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of a Proposed Rule Change To Amend
Its Fee Schedule Regarding Rebate Tiers

October 4, 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 September 29, 2023, Cboe BZX Exchange, Inc. (the ``Exchange'' or
``BZX'') filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission
(``Commission'') the proposed rule change as described in Items I, II,
and III below, which Items have been prepared by the Exchange. The
Commission is publishing this notice to solicit comments on the
proposed rule change from interested persons.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

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

    Cboe BZX Exchange, Inc. (the ``Exchange'' or ``BZX'') proposes to
amend its Fee Schedule. The text of the proposed rule change is
provided in Exhibit 5.
    The text of the proposed rule change is also available on the
Exchange's website (http://markets.cboe.com/us/equities/regulation/rule_filings/bzx/), at the Exchange's Office of the Secretary, and at
the Commission's Public Reference Room.

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

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

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

1. Purpose
    The Exchange proposes to amend its Fee Schedule applicable to its
equities trading platform (``BZX Equities'') by (1) discontinuing Step-
Up Tier 1; and (2) adopting a new Cross Asset Tier. The Exchange
proposes to implement these changes effective October 2, 2023.
    The Exchange first notes that it operates in a highly competitive
market in which market participants can readily direct order flow to
competing venues if they deem fee levels at a particular venue to be
excessive or incentives to be insufficient. More specifically, the
Exchange is only one of 16 registered equities exchanges, as well as a
number of alternative trading systems and other off-exchange venues
that do not have similar self-regulatory responsibilities under the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (the ``Act''), to which market
participants may direct their order flow. Based on publicly available
information,\3\ no single registered equities exchange has more than
14% of the market share. Thus, in such a low-concentrated and highly
competitive market, no single equities exchange possesses significant
pricing power in the execution of order flow. The Exchange in
particular operates a ``Maker-Taker'' model whereby it pays rebates to
members that add liquidity and assesses fees to those that remove
liquidity. The Exchange's Fee Schedule sets forth the standard rebates
and rates applied per share for orders that provide and remove
liquidity, respectively. Currently, for orders in securities priced at
or above $1.00, the Exchange provides a standard rebate of $0.00160 per
share for orders that add liquidity and assesses a fee of $0.0030 per
share for orders that remove liquidity.\4\ For orders in securities
priced below $1.00, the Exchange provides a standard rebate of $0.00009
per share for orders that add liquidity and assesses a fee of 0.30% of
the total dollar value for orders that remove liquidity.\5\
Additionally, in response to the competitive environment, the Exchange
also offers tiered pricing which provides Members opportunities to
qualify for higher rebates or reduced fees where certain volume
criteria and thresholds are met. Tiered pricing provides an incremental
incentive for Members to strive for higher tier levels, which provides
increasingly higher benefits or discounts for satisfying increasingly
more stringent criteria.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ See Cboe Global Markets, U.S. Equities Market Volume
Summary, Month-to-Date (September 22, 2023), available at https://www.cboe.com/us/equities/_statistics/.
    \4\ See BZX Equities Fee Schedule, Standard Rates.
    \5\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Under footnote 2 of the Fee Schedule, the Exchange currently offers
various Step-Up Tiers that provide enhanced rebates for orders yielding
fee codes B,\6\ V \7\ and Y \8\ where a Member reaches certain add
volume-based criteria, including ``growing'' its volume over a certain
baseline month. The Exchange now proposes to discontinue Step-Up Tier 1
as the Exchange no longer wishes to, nor is required to, maintain such
tier. More specifically, the proposed change removes this tier as the
Exchange would rather redirect future resources and funding into other
programs and tiers intended to incentivize increased order flow.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ Fee code B is appended to orders that add liquidity to BZX
in Tape B securities.
    \7\ Fee code V is appended to orders that add liquidity to BZX
in Tape A securities.
    \8\ Fee code Y is appended to orders that add liquidity to BZX
in Tape C securities.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange also proposes to introduce a new Cross Asset Tier
under footnote 2, which is designed to incentivize Members to achieve
certain levels of participation on both the Exchange's equities and
options platform (``BZX Options''). The proposed criteria is as
follows:
     Cross Asset Tier 1 provides a rebate of $0.0033 per share
for securities priced above $1.00 for qualifying orders (i.e., orders
yielding fee codes B, V or Y) where (1) Member has a Step-Up ADAV \9\
from June 2023 >= 7,000,000; and (2) Member has a Customer ADAV \10\ on
BZX Options >= 10,000.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \9\ Step-Up ADAV means ADAV in the relevant baseline month
subtracted from current ADAV. ADAV means average daily volume
calculated as the number of shares added per day. ADAV is calculated
on a monthly basis.
    \10\ Customer ADAV means average daily volume calculated as the
number of contracts added for the account of a Priority Customer as
defined in BZX Rule 16.1. ADAV is calculated on a monthly basis. See
BZX Options Fee Schedule, Definitions.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The proposed Cross Asset Tier is intended to provide an additional
manner to incentive Members to add displayed liquidity on the Exchange
while also increasing participation on BZX Options. The Exchange
believes the addition of the Cross Asset Tier will incentivize Members
to grow their volume on the Exchange, thereby contributing to a deeper
and more liquid market, which benefits all market participants and
provides greater execution opportunities on the Exchange.
    Additionally, the Exchange notes that the proposed Cross Asset Tier
will

expire no later than December 31, 2023, which the Exchange will
indicate on the Exchange's fee schedule. Step-Up Tiers in general are
designed to provide Members with additional opportunities to receive
enhanced rebates by increasing their order flow to the Exchange, which
further contributes to a deeper, more liquid market and provides even
more execution opportunities for active market participants. Like other
Step-Up Tiers on the Exchange,\11\ the proposed Cross Asset Tier is
designed to give members an additional opportunity to receive an
enhanced rebate for orders meeting the applicable criteria. Increased
overall order flow benefits all Members by contributing towards a
robust and well-balanced market ecosystem.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \11\ See BZX Equities Fee Schedule, Footnote 2, Step-Up Tiers.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

2. Statutory Basis
    The Exchange believes the proposed rule change is consistent with
the Act and the rules and regulations thereunder applicable to the
Exchange and, in particular, the requirements of section 6(b) of the
Act.\12\ Specifically, the Exchange believes the proposed rule change
is consistent with the section 6(b)(5) \13\ requirements that the rules
of an exchange be designed to prevent fraudulent and manipulative acts
and practices, to promote just and equitable principles of trade, to
foster cooperation and coordination with persons engaged in regulating,
clearing, settling, processing information with respect to, and
facilitating transactions in securities, to remove impediments to and
perfect the mechanism of a free and open market and a national market
system, and, in general, to protect investors and the public interest.
Additionally, the Exchange believes the proposed rule change is
consistent with the section 6(b)(5) \14\ requirement that the rules of
an exchange not be designed to permit unfair discrimination between
customers, issuers, brokers, or dealers as well as section 6(b)(4) \15\
as it is designed to provide for the equitable allocation of reasonable
dues, fees and other charges among its Members and other persons using
its facilities.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \12\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b).
    \13\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5).
    \14\ Id.
    \15\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(4).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    As described above, the Exchange operates in a highly competitive
market in which market participants can readily direct order flow to
competing venues if they deem fee levels at a particular venue to be
excessive or incentives to be insufficient. The Exchange believes that
its proposal to introduce a Cross Asset Tier reflects a competitive
pricing structure designed to incentivize market participants to direct
their order flow to the Exchange, which the Exchange believes would
enhance market quality to the benefit of all Members. Additionally, the
Exchange notes that relative volume-based incentives and discounts have
been widely adopted by exchanges,\16\ including the Exchange,\17\ and
are reasonable, equitable and non-discriminatory because they are open
to all Members on an equal basis and provide additional benefits or
discounts that are reasonably related to (i) the value to an exchange's
market quality and (ii) associated higher levels of market activity,
such as higher levels of liquidity provision and/or growth patterns.
Competing equity exchanges offer similar tiered pricing structures,
including schedules of rebates and fees that apply based upon members
achieving certain volume and/or growth thresholds, as well as assess
similar fees or rebates for similar types of orders, to that of the
Exchange.\18\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \16\ See e.g., EDGX Equities Fee Schedule, Footnote 1, Add/
Remove Volume Tiers.
    \17\ See e.g., BZX Equities Fee Schedule, Footnote 1, Add/Remove
Volume Tiers.
    \18\ See e.g., MIAX Pearl Options Fee Schedule, Transaction
Rebates/Fees; The Nasdaq Options Market LLC (``NOM'') Pricing
Schedule, Options 7, Section 2.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In particular, the Exchange believes its proposal to introduce a
Cross Asset Tier is reasonable because the revised tier will be
available to all Members and provide all Members with an additional
opportunity to receive an enhanced rebate. The Exchange further
believes the proposed Cross Asset Tier will provide a reasonable means
to encourage liquidity adding displayed orders in Members' order flow
to the Exchange and to incentivize Members to continue to provide
liquidity adding volume to the Exchange by offering them an additional
opportunity to receive an enhanced rebate on qualifying orders. An
overall increase in activity would deepen the Exchange's liquidity
pool, offers additional cost savings, support the quality of price
discovery, promote market transparency and improve market quality, for
all investors.
    The Exchange believes that the proposed Cross Asset Tier represents
an equitable allocation of fees and rebates and is not unfairly
discriminatory because all Members will be eligible for the proposed
tier and have the opportunity to meet the tier's criteria and receive
the corresponding enhanced rebate if such criteria is met. To the
extent a Member participates on BZX Equities but not on BZX Options,
the Exchange continues to believe that its proposal represents an
equitable allocation of fees and rebates and is not unfairly
discriminatory with respect to such Member based on the overall benefit
to the Exchange resulting from the success of its options platform.
Particularly, the Exchange believes that additional such success allows
the Exchange to continue to provide and potentially expand its existing
incentive programs to the benefit of all participants on the Exchange,
regardless of whether they participate on BZX Options or not. Without
having a view of activity on other markets and off-exchange venues, the
Exchange has no way of knowing whether this proposed rule change would
definitely result in any Members qualifying the new proposed tiers.
While the Exchange has no way of predicting with certainty how the
proposed changes will impact Member activity, based on the prior months
volume, the Exchange anticipates that at least one Member will be able
to satisfy the proposed criteria for the proposed Cross Asset Tier. The
Exchange also notes that proposed changes will not adversely impact any
Member's ability to qualify for enhanced rebates or reduced fees
offered under other tiers. Should a Member not meet the proposed new
criteria for the proposed Cross Asset Tier, the Member will merely not
receive that corresponding enhanced rebate.
    Additionally, the Exchange believes that its proposal to eliminate
Step-Up Tier 1 is reasonable because the Exchange is not required to
maintain this tier or provide Members an opportunity to receive
enhanced rebates. The Exchange believes the proposal to eliminate this
tier is also equitable and not unfairly discriminatory because it
applies to all Members (i.e., the tier will not be available for any
Member). The Exchange also notes that the proposed rule change to
remove this tier merely results in Members not receiving an enhanced
rebate, which, as noted above, the Exchange is not required to offer or
maintain. Furthermore, the proposed rule change to eliminate Step-Up
Tier 1 enables the Exchange to redirect resources and funding into
other programs and tiers intended to incentivize increased order flow.

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

    The Exchange does not believe that the proposed rule change will
impose any burden on competition that is not necessary or appropriate
in furtherance

of the purposes of the Act. Rather, as discussed above, the Exchange
believes that the proposed changes would encourage the submission of
additional order flow to a public exchange, thereby promoting market
depth, execution incentives and enhanced execution opportunities, as
well as price discovery and transparency for all Members. As a result,
the Exchange believes that the proposed changes further the
Commission's goal in adopting Regulation NMS of fostering competition
among orders, which promotes ``more efficient pricing of individual
stocks for all types of orders, large and small.''
    The Exchange believes the proposed rule changes do not impose any
burden on intramarket competition that is not necessary or appropriate
in furtherance of the purposes of the Act. Particularly, the proposed
Cross Asset Tier will apply to all Members equally in that all Members
are eligible for the tier, have a reasonable opportunity to meet the
tier's criteria and will receive the enhanced rebate on their
qualifying orders if such criteria is met. The Exchange does not
believe the proposed changes burden competition, but rather, enhances
competition as it is intended to increase the competitiveness of BZX by
adopting pricing incentives in order to attract order flow and
incentivize participants to increase their participation on the
Exchange, providing for additional execution opportunities for market
participants and improved price transparency. Additionally, the
Exchange believes that the proposed criteria based on total options
volume applicable to BZX Options Priority Customers will provide an
additional incentive to those Priority Customers to send additional
orders to BZX Options, which in turn provides additional liquidity in
the market. Greater overall order flow, trading opportunities, and
pricing transparency benefits all market participants on the Exchange,
as well as its affiliate options exchange, by enhancing market quality
and continuing to encourage Members to send orders, thereby
contributing towards a robust and well-balanced market ecosystem. The
proposed change to discontinue Step-Up Tier 1 will not impose any
burden on intramarket competition because the changes apply to all
Members uniformly, as in, the tier will not longer be available to any
Member.
    Next, the Exchange believes the proposed rule changes does not
impose any burden on intermarket competition that is not necessary or
appropriate in furtherance of the purposes of the Act. As previously
discussed, the Exchange operates in a highly competitive market.
Members have numerous alternative venues that they may participate on
and direct their order flow, including other equities exchanges, off-
exchange venues, and alternative trading systems. Additionally, the
Exchange represents a small percentage of the overall market. Based on
publicly available information, no single equities exchange has more
than 14% of the market share.\19\ Therefore, no exchange possesses
significant pricing power in the execution of order flow. Indeed,
participants can readily choose to send their orders to other exchange
and off-exchange venues if they deem fee levels at those other venues
to be more favorable. Moreover, the Commission has repeatedly expressed
its preference for competition over regulatory intervention in
determining prices, products, and services in the securities markets.
Specifically, in Regulation NMS, the Commission highlighted the
importance of market forces in determining prices and SRO revenues and,
also, recognized that current regulation of the market system ``has
been remarkably successful in promoting market competition in its
broader forms that are most important to investors and listed
companies.'' \20\ The fact that this market is competitive has also
long been recognized by the courts. In NetCoalition v. Securities and
Exchange Commission, the D.C. Circuit stated as follows: ``[n]o one
disputes that competition for order flow is `fierce.' . . . As the SEC
explained, `[i]n the U.S. national market system, buyers and sellers of
securities, and the broker-dealers that act as their order-routing
agents, have a wide range of choices of where to route orders for
execution'; [and] `no exchange can afford to take its market share
percentages for granted' because `no exchange possesses a monopoly,
regulatory or otherwise, in the execution of order flow from broker
dealers' . . . .''.\21\ Accordingly, the Exchange does not believe its
proposed fee change imposes any burden on competition that is not
necessary or appropriate in furtherance of the purposes of the Act.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \19\ Supra note 3.
    \20\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 51808 (June 9,
2005), 70 FR 37496, 37499 (June 29, 2005).
    \21\ NetCoalition v. SEC, 615 F.3d 525, 539 (D.C. Cir. 2010)
(quoting Securities Exchange Act Release No. 59039 (December 2,
2008), 73 FR 74770, 74782-83 (December 9, 2008) (SR-NYSEArca-2006-
21)).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

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

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

    The foregoing rule change has become effective pursuant to section
19(b)(3)(A) of the Act \22\ and paragraph (f) of Rule 19b-4 \23\
thereunder. At any time within 60 days of the filing of the proposed
rule change, the Commission summarily may temporarily suspend such rule
change if it appears to the Commission that such action is necessary or
appropriate in the public interest, for the protection of investors, or
otherwise in furtherance of the purposes of the Act. If the Commission
takes such action, the Commission will institute proceedings to
determine whether the proposed rule change should be approved or
disapproved.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \22\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A).
    \23\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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-CboeBZX-2023-075 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-CboeBZX-2023-075. 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-CboeBZX-2023-075 and should be submitted on or before November 1,
2023.
    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets,
pursuant to delegated authority.\24\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \24\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12).

Sherry R. Haywood,
Assistant Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2023-22437 Filed 10-10-23; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 78, Number 237 (Tuesday, December 10, 2013)]
[Notices]
[Pages 74222-74223]
[FR Doc No: 2013-29413]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration

[Docket No. FMCSA-2013-0451]

Hours of Service of Drivers: Oregon Trucking Associations;
Application for Exemption

AGENCY: Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration (FMCSA), DOT.

ACTION: Notice of application for exemption; request for comments.

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

SUMMARY: FMCSA announces that the Oregon Trucking Associations (OTA)
has applied for a limited exemption from the 30-minute rest-break
requirement of the Agency's hours-of-service regulations [49 CFR
395.3(a)(3)(ii)]. It seeks the exemption for motor carriers and their
commercial motor vehicle (CMV) drivers who transport timber from Oregon
forestlands during periods in which fire safety restrictions limit
their hours of operation. FMCSA requests public comment on the
application for exemption.

DATES: Comments must be received on or before January 9, 2014.

ADDRESSES: You may submit comments identified by Federal Docket
Management System Number FMCSA-2013-0451 by any of the following
methods:
     Federal eRulemaking Portal: www.regulations.gov. Follow
the online instructions for submitting comments.
     Fax: 1-202-493-2251.
     Mail: Docket Management Facility, U.S. Department of
Transportation, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., West Building, Ground
Floor, Room W12-140, Washington, DC 20590-0001.
     Hand Delivery or Courier: West Building, Ground Floor,
Room W12-140, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m. ET,
Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays.
    Instructions: All submissions must include the Agency name and
docket number. For detailed instructions on submitting comments and
additional information on the exemption process, see the Public
Participation heading below. Note that all comments received will be
posted without change to www.regulations.gov, including any personal
information provided. Please see the Privacy Act heading below.
    Privacy Act: Anyone is able to search the electronic form of all
comments received into any of our dockets by the name of the individual
submitting the comment (or signing the comment, if submitted on behalf
of an association, business, labor union, etc.). You may review a
Privacy Act notice regarding our public dockets in the January 17,
2008, issue of the Federal Register (73 FR 3316).
    Public Participation: The Federal eRulemaking Portal is available
24 hours each day, 365 days each year. You can get electronic
submission and retrieval help and guidelines under the ``help'' section
of the Federal eRulemaking Portal Web site. If you want us to notify
you that we received your comments, please include a self-addressed,
stamped envelope or postcard, or print the acknowledgement page that
appears after submitting comments online.
    Submitting Comments: You may submit your comments and material
online or by fax, mail, or hand delivery, but please use only one of
these means. To submit your comment online, go to www.regulations.gov
and in the search box insert the docket number ``FMCSA-2013-0451'' and
click the SEARCH button. When the new screen appears, click on the blue
``Comment Now!'' button on the right hand side of the page. On the new
page, enter information required including the specific section of this
document to which each comment applies, and provide a reason for each
suggestion or recommendation. If you submit your comments by mail or
hand delivery, submit them in an unbound format, no larger than 8\1/2\
by 11 inches, suitable for copying and electronic filing. If you submit
comments by mail and would like to know that they reached the facility,
please enclose a stamped, self-addressed postcard or envelope.
    Viewing Comments and Documents: To view comments, as well as any
documents mentioned in this notice, go to www.regulations.gov and in
the search box insert the docket number ``FMCSA-2013-0451'' and click
``Search.'' Next, click ``Open Docket Folder'' and you will find all
documents and comments related to the proposed rulemaking.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr. Thomas Yager, Chief, FMCSA Driver
and Carrier Operations Division; Office of Carrier, Driver, and Vehicle
Safety Standards; Telephone:<PHONE_NUMBER>. Email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Background

    FMCSA has authority under 49 U.S.C. 31136(e) and 31315 to grant
exemptions from certain parts of the Federal Motor Carrier Safety
Regulations. FMCSA must publish a notice of each exemption request in
the Federal Register (49 CFR 381.315(a)). The Agency must provide the
public an opportunity to inspect the information relevant to the
application, including any safety analyses that have been conducted.
The Agency must also provide an opportunity for public comment on the
request.
    The Agency reviews safety analyses and public comments submitted,
and determines whether granting the exemption would likely achieve a
level of safety equivalent to, or greater than, the level that would be
achieved by the current regulation (49 CFR 381.305). The Agency may
grant an exemption subject to specified terms and conditions. The
decision of the Agency must be published in the Federal Register (49
CFR 381.315(b)) with the reasons for denying or granting the
application and, if granted, the name of the person or class of persons
receiving the exemption, and the regulatory provision from which the
exemption is granted. The notice must also specify the effective period
and explain the terms and conditions of the exemption. The exemption
may be renewed (49 CFR 381.300(b)).
    On December 27, 2011, FMCSA published a final rule establishing
mandatory rest breaks for CMV drivers (76 FR 81133). Effective July 1,
2013, drivers may not operate a CMV if 8 hours or more have elapsed
since the end of the driver's last off-duty or sleeper-berth period of
at least 30 minutes [49 CFR 395.3(a)(3)(ii)]. FMCSA did not specify
when drivers must take the 30-minute break. Drivers who already take
shorter breaks during the duty day could comply with the rule by
extending one of these breaks to 30 minutes.

Exemption Request of Oregon Trucking Associations

    OTA applies for exemption on behalf of motor carriers and drivers
who operate CMVs on Oregon forestlands to transport logs to lumber
mills for processing. OTA states that lumber mills depend on a regular
volume of logs for their economic viability, and that environmental
restrictions limit the amount of timber that can be harvested from
Oregon forestlands. In addition, when the risk of fire increases, the
Oregon Department of Forestry (ODF) further limits logging operations.
For example, OTA states that at the time of its application (August 26,
2013), a Level III fire safety restriction barred CMVs from Oregon
forestlands at 1:00 p.m. daily. OTA asserts that fire-safety
restrictions are often in place from July to late October each year. If
logging operators have to leave the forest lands by 1:00 p.m. during
fire restrictions, they need all available time prior to 1:00 p.m. as
on-duty time, without a rest break.
    OTA asserts that the new 30-minute break requirement makes it
impossible for log trucks to provide a sufficient volume of logs to the
mills when operations are time-limited by fire restrictions. OTA seeks
relief from this requirement when operating CMVs on Oregon forestland
when that land is restricted by fire safety rules. OTA states that its
members engaged in these operations are willing to restrict their duty
day when operating under the exemption to a maximum of 12 hours in lieu
of the 14-hour limit of the HOS rules. OTA states that during these
periods of limited operations, its members would achieve the same level
of safety with this exemption in place as they would achieve if
required to observe the rest-break requirement.

Request for Comments

    In accordance with 49 U.S.C. 31136(e) and 31315(b)(4), FMCSA
requests public comment on OTA's application for an exemption from the
rest-break requirement of 49 CFR 395.3(a)(3)(ii). The Agency will
consider all comments received by close of business on January 9, 2014.
Comments will be available for examination in the docket at the
location listed under the ADDRESSES section of this notice. The Agency
will consider to the extent practicable comments received in the public
docket after the closing date of the comment period.

    Issued on: December 2, 2013.
Larry W. Minor,
Associate Administrator for Policy.
[FR Doc. 2013-29413 Filed 12-9-13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-EX-P


[Federal Register Volume 84, Number 110 (Friday, June 7, 2019)]
[Notices]
[Page 26692]
[FR Doc No: 2019-11988]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Coast Guard

[Docket No. USCG-2019-0351]

Notice of Public Meeting in Preparation for the IMO's Sixty-Ninth
Session of IMO's Technical Cooperation Committee

AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS.

ACTION: Notice of meeting.

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

SUMMARY: The United States Coast Guard will conduct an open meeting in
Washington, DC in preparation for the upcoming sixty-ninth session of
IMO Council to be held at the IMO Headquarters, United Kingdom, June
25-27, 2019.

DATES: This meeting will be held on Thursday, June 20, 2019, beginning
at 10:30 a.m., Eastern Time. This meeting is open to the public.

ADDRESSES: The public meeting will be held in Room 5L18-01 of the
Douglas A. Munro Coast Guard Headquarters Building at St. Elizabeth's,
2703 Martin Luther King, Jr. Avenue SE, Washington, DC 20593. Due to
security requirements, each visitor must present two valid, government-
issued forms of identification in order to gain entrance to the
building. Those desiring to attend the public meeting should contact
the Coast Guard ahead of the meeting (see FOR FURTHER INFORMATION
CONTACT) to facilitate the security process related to building access,
or to request reasonable accommodation.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For additional information about this
public meeting you may contact Lieutenant Commander Staci Weist by
telephone at<PHONE_NUMBER> or by email at<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The primary purpose of this meeting is to
prepare for the upcoming sixty-ninth session of IMO's Technical
Cooperation Committee (TC 69). The agenda items for this session
include:

[cir] Adoption of the agenda
[cir] Work of other bodies and organizations
[cir] Integrated Technical Cooperation Programme
[cir] Resource mobilization and partnerships
[cir] Long-term strategy for the review and reform of technical
cooperation
[cir] The 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development
[cir] Regional presence and coordination
[cir] IMO Member State Audit Scheme
[cir] Review and status of implementation of the recommendations of the
Impact Assessment Exercise for the period 2012-2015
[cir] Capacity-building: Strengthening the impact of women in the
maritime sector
[cir] Global maritime training institutions
[cir] Application of the document on the Organization and method of
work of the Technical Cooperation Committee
[cir] Work Programme
[cir] Election of Chair and Vice-Chair for 2020
[cir] Any other business
[cir] Consideration of the report of the Committee on its sixty-ninth
session

    Members of the public may attend this meeting up to the seating
capacity of the room. To facilitate the building security process, and
to request reasonable accommodation, those who plan to attend should
contact the meeting coordinator, Lieutenant Commander Staci Weist, not
later than June 17, 2019. Requests made after June 17, 2019, may not be
able to be accommodated. It is recommended that attendees arrive to
Coast Guard Headquarters no later than 30 minutes ahead of the
scheduled meeting for the security screening process. Parking in the
vicinity of the building is extremely limited. Additional information
regarding this and other IMO public meetings may be found at:
www.uscg.mil/imo.

    Dated: June 3, 2019.
Benjamin J. Hawkins,
Acting Director, Commercial Regulations and Standards, U.S. Coast
Guard.
[FR Doc. 2019-11988 Filed 6-6-19; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE P


[Federal Register: December 5, 2007 (Volume 72, Number 233)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Page 68503-68504]
[DOCID:fr05de07-9]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Coast Guard

33 CFR Part 117

[CGD01-07-158]

Drawbridge Operation Regulations; Cheesequake Creek, Morgan, NJ

AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS.

ACTION: Notice of temporary deviation from regulations.

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

SUMMARY: The Commander, First Coast Guard District, has issued a
temporary deviation from the regulation governing the operation of the
New Jersey Transit Rail Operation (NJTRO) Railroad Bridge across
Cheesequake Creek, mile 0.2, at Morgan, New Jersey. Under this
temporary deviation, the bridge may remain in the closed position from
January 2, 2008 through March 31, 2008. Vessels that can pass under the
draw without a bridge opening may do so at all times. This deviation is
necessary to facilitate scheduled bridge maintenance.

DATES: This deviation is effective from January 2, 2008 through March
31, 2008.

ADDRESSES: Materials referred to in this document are available for
inspection or copying at the First Coast Guard District, Bridge Branch
Office, One South Street, New York, New York 10004, between 7 a.m. and
3 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays. The telephone
number is<PHONE_NUMBER>. The First Coast Guard District Bridge Branch
Office maintains the public docket for this temporary deviation.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Joe Arca, Project Officer, First Coast
Guard District, at<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The NJTRO railroad bridge has a vertical
clearance of 3 feet at mean high water, and 8 feet at mean low water in
the closed position. The existing drawbridge operating regulations,
listed at 33 CFR 117.709(b), require the bridge to open on signal;
except that, at least

a four hour notice for bridge openings is required from January 1
through March 31 from 6 p.m. to 6 a.m.
    The bridge owner, New Jersey Transit Rail Operations (NJTRO),
requested a bridge closure to facilitate structural and mechanical
rehabilitation at the NJTRO railroad bridge.
    Under this temporary deviation, the NJTRO railroad bridge may
remain closed to navigation from January 1, 2008 through March 31,
2008. Vessels that can pass under the bridge without an opening may do
so at all times.
    A small number of fishing boats are docked upstream from the NJTRO
railroad bridge; however, Cheesequake Creek is predominantly a
recreational waterway. From January through March, the recreational
vessels are in winter storage and the waterway is normally not
transited. The Coast Guard met with the mariners to discuss this bridge
project and related closure. The mariners agreed with the closure dates
since that is the time period the bridge seldom opens and the waterway
is normally frozen.
    In accordance with 33 CFR 117.35(e), the bridge must return to its
regular operating schedule immediately at the end of the designated
time period. This deviation from the operating regulations is
authorized under 33 CFR 117.35.
    Should the bridge maintenance authorized by this temporary
deviation be completed before the end of the effective period published
in this notice, the Coast Guard will rescind the remainder of this
temporary deviation, and the bridge shall be returned to its normal
operating schedule. Notice of the above action shall be provided to the
public in the Local Notice to Mariners and the Federal Register, where
practicable.

    Dated: November 26, 2007.
Gary Kassof,
Bridge Program Manager, First Coast Guard District.
[FR Doc. E7-23568 Filed 12-4-07; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4910-15-P


[Federal Register Volume 81, Number 77 (Thursday, April 21, 2016)]
[Notices]
[Page 23551]
[FR Doc No: 2016-09247]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Office of the Secretary

Application Of Delux Public Charter, LLC for Commuter Air Carrier
Authority

AGENCY: Department of Transportation.

ACTION: Notice of Order to Show Cause (Order 2016-4-13) Docket DOT-OST-
2015-0208.

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

SUMMARY: The Department of Transportation is directing all interested
persons to show cause why it should not issue an order finding Delux
Public Charter, LLC fit, willing, and able, and awarding it commuter
air carrier authorization.

DATES: Persons wishing to file objections should do so no later than
April 22, 2016.

ADDRESSES: Objections and answers to objections should be filed in
Docket DOT-OST-2015-0208 and addressed to Docket Operations (M-30, Room
W12-140), U.S. Department of Transportation, 1200 New Jersey Avenue
SE., Washington, DC 20590, and should be served upon the parties listed
in Attachment A to the order.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Shabu Thomas, Air Carrier Fitness
Division (X-56, Room W86-469), U.S. Department of Transportation, 1200
New Jersey Avenue SE., Washington, DC 20590,<PHONE_NUMBER>.

    Dated: April 15, 2016.
Robert Goldner,
Special Counsel to the Assistant Secretary for Aviation and
International Affairs.
[FR Doc. 2016-09247 Filed 4-20-16; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 4910-9X-P


[Federal Register Volume 77, Number 58 (Monday, March 26, 2012)]
[Notices]
[Pages 17470-17471]
[FR Doc No: 2012-7138]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[EL11-22-000, QF11-115-001, QF11-116-001, et al.]

Notice of Compliance Filing

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                   Docket Nos.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
OREG 1, Inc............................  EL11-22-000
OREG 2, Inc............................  QF11-115-001
OREG 3, Inc............................  QF11-116-001
OREG 4, Inc............................  QF11-117-001
                                         QF11-118-001
                                         QF11-119-001
                                         QF11-120-001
                                         QF11-121-001
                                         QF11-122-001
                                         QF11-123-001
                                         QF11-124-001
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Take notice that on March 19, 2012, OREG 1, Inc., OREG 2, Inc.,
OREG 3, Inc., and OREG 4, Inc filed compliance refund reports, pursuant
to the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission's (Commission) Orders
issued in this proceeding on May 19, 2011, 135 FERC ] 61,150 (2011),
and February 16, 2012, 138 FERC ] 61,110 (2012) and the Notice
Extending the Date to Make Refunds, issued on June 15, 2011.
    Any person desiring to intervene or to protest this filing must
file in accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of the Commission's Rules of
Practice and Procedure (18 CFR 385.211, 385.214). Protests will be
considered by the Commission in determining the appropriate action to
be taken, but will not serve to make protestants parties to the
proceeding. Any person wishing to become a party must file a notice of
intervention or motion to intervene, as appropriate. Such notices,
motions, or

protests must be filed on or before the comment date. Anyone filing a
motion to intervene or protest must serve a copy of that document on
the Applicant and all the parties in this proceeding.
    The Commission encourages electronic submission of protests and
interventions in lieu of paper using the ``eFiling'' link at http://www.ferc.gov. Persons unable to file electronically should submit an
original and 14 copies of the protest or intervention to the Federal
Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street NE., Washington, DC
20426.
    This filing is accessible on-line at http://www.ferc.gov, using the
``eLibrary'' link and is available for review in the Commission's
Public Reference Room in Washington, DC. There is an ``eSubscription''
link on the web site that enables subscribers to receive email
notification when a document is added to a subscribed docket(s). For
assistance with any FERC Online service, please email
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or call<PHONE_NUMBER> (toll free). For
TTY, call<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on April 9, 2012.

    Dated: March 19, 2012.
Nathaniel J. Davis, Sr.,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2012-7138 Filed 3-23-12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register: January 3, 2008 (Volume 73, Number 2)]
[Notices]
[Page 512-513]
[DOCID:fr03ja08-55]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

Submission for OMB Review; Comment Request

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

Extension: Rule 206(4)-7; SEC File No. 270-523; OMB Control No.
3235-0585.

    Notice is hereby given that pursuant to the Paperwork Reduction Act
of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.) the Securities and Exchange Commission
(the ``Commission'') has submitted to the Office of Management and
Budget (``OMB'') a request for extension of the previously approved
collection of information discussed below.
    The title for the collection of information is ``Investment
Advisers Act rule 206(4)-7 (17 CFR 275.206(4)-7), Compliance procedures
and practices.'' Rule 206(4)-7 requires each investment adviser
registered with the Commission to (i) adopt and implement internal
compliance policies and procedures, (ii) review those policies and
procedures annually, (iii) designate a chief compliance officer, and
(iv) maintain certain compliance records. Rule 206(4)-7 is designed to
protect investors by fostering better compliance with the securities
laws. The collection of information under rule 206(4)-7 is necessary to
assure that investment advisers maintain comprehensive internal
programs that promote the advisers' compliance with the Advisers Act.
The information collection in the rule also assists the Commission's
examination staff in assessing the

adequacy of advisers' compliance programs. This collection of
information is mandatory.
    The information documented pursuant to rule 206(4)-7 is reviewed by
the Commission's examination staff, it will be accorded the same level
of confidentiality accorded to other responses provided to the
Commission in the context of its examination and oversight program. An
agency may not conduct or sponsor, and a person is not required to
respond to, a collection of information unless it displays a currently
valid control number.
    The respondents to this information collection are investment
advisers registered with the Commission. Our latest data indicate that
there were 10,817 advisers registered with the Commission as of
September 30, 2007. The Commission has estimated that compliance with
rule 206(4)-7 imposes an annual burden of approximately 80 hours per
respondent. Based on this figure, the Commission estimates a total
annual burden of 865,360 hours for this collection of information.
    Please direct general comments regarding the above information to
the following persons: (i) Desk Officer for the Securities and Exchange
Commission, Office of Management and Budget, Room 10102, New Executive
Office Building, Washington, DC 20503 or e-mail to:
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>and (ii) R. Corey Booth, Director/Chief Information

Officer, Securities and Exchange Commission, C/O Shirley Martinson,
6432 General Green Way, Alexandria, VA 22312 or send an e-mail to:
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Comments must be submitted to OMB within 30 days

of this notice.

    Dated: December 20, 2007.
Florence E. Harmon,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. E7-25523 Filed 1-2-08; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


Comment Info: =================

General Comment:Dear Mr. Zeller,

I am writing as an individual consumer to request an extension of the comment period for the Food and Drug Administration's ("FDA") Proposed Rule Deeming Tobacco Products to be Subject to the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act, as amended by the Family Smoking and Prevention and Tobacco Control Act (the "Proposed Rule") published at 79 Fed. Reg. 23,142 and Federal Register No. 2014-09491. On behalf of myself, I am requesting that the comment period for the Proposed Rule be extended by the FDA for an additional 105 days, from its current 75-day period, to 180 days.

These rules greatly impact me as I am a consumer of e-cigarette products which have helped me quit a 10 year deadly tobacco habit.  There are many proposed rules and I do not believe 75 days is ample time for myself or the vaping community to intelligently and accurately respond to the FDA's proposed rule.  This community has regulated itself without the FDA or any government interference for many years and if we are given the time you will find a very health conscious group of consumers that spend a lot of time doing research on these products.  I have seen many dishonest vendors put out of business in a matter of days due to the commitment of the community in keeping this tobacco alternative as safe as possible.

This tobacco free alternative could very well end up saving my life.  I am not against keeping these products away from persons under the age of eighteen or labeling the products as addictive.  However there are so many other points to your proposed rules that with a full time job and attending college courses there is no way people like me will have time to comment in only 75 days.  I realize that the FDA has the authority under 21 CFR 10.40 to extend this time frame and that the FDA has exercised this authority on numerous occasions in the past.  If all of these products are banned at once because they do submit the required applications this will drive many people back to deadly tobacco products.  Some of these vendors are part of very small businesses, some are doing these things as private citizens.  This is how the industry has moved forward and become far safer than it was years ago, small businesses that have pioneered and listened to the community when creating products.  Some of these rules will destroy that ingenuity and destroy this rising industry.

Please give us the time we need to research the proposals and make educated and informed comments on the FDA's proposal.  I appreciate your consideration of my request and am happy to discuss this issue with you further.


Chemistry Report Analyzing the Substitutes

for Urea-Formaldehyde (UF) Resins to Reduce

Emissions from Composite Wood Products

Prepared by:

Greg Fritz, Chemist

USEPA / OCSPP / OPPT / EETD

Industrial Chemistry Branch

Through:

Tracy Williamson

Branch Chief

USEPA / OCSPP / OPPT / EETD

Industrial Chemistry Branch

CONTAINS NO TSCA CBI

06 July 2011

Introduction

The purpose of this document is to provide chemistry information to
assist the workgroup in assessing risk to both workers and consumers
from exposures and hazards associated with additives to or substitutes
for urea-formaldehyde (UF) resins used to manufacture composite wood
products.  This document examines the resin composition, additives used
to enhance resin adhesive function, and additives used to scavenge
either unreacted or released formaldehyde.  The document does not
consider the contribution of chemicals that are inherently present in
the wood, although formaldehyde is one of those chemicals.  The
chemicals reviewed in this document were chosen based on the California
Air Resources Board’s (CARB) research into the methods composite wood
product manufacturers would use to comply with the formaldehyde emission
standards that CARB promulgated in 2008 (REF 1-2).  The different
chemicals that could be used to reduce or eliminate formaldehyde
emissions were then subject to a hazard prioritization process by
EPA’s Risk Assessment Division (RAD) to eliminate additives or resin
monomers with low toxicity (REF 3).  Only those chemicals with moderate
to high hazard potential were subject to a detailed exposure analysis.
A physicochemical properties table of the chemicals of interest is
provided in the Appendix at the end of this report.

Resins

The resins used today are manufactured with high oligomeric content that
is crosslinked with the wood and cured under high temperature/pressure
conditions to form an adhesive which binds the different wood feedstocks
together to form the composite wood products.  UF resins are commonly
used to manufacture hardwood plywood (HWPW), medium density fiberboard
(MDF), and particle board (PB).   Other wood products, like softwood [or
structural] plywood (SWPW) and oriented strandboard (OSB), are formed
predominantly using phenol formaldehyde (PF) resins.

Urea-Formaldehyde (UF) Resin

Three sources of formaldehyde that can be released from UF resin bonded
composite wood products have been reported (REF 4):  1) free (unreacted)
formaldehyde in the UF resin,   2) formaldehyde generated during resin
curing and use when processed wood products are being  manufactured; and
3) formaldehyde generated from the exposure of the processed wood
products to heat and humidity .  The amount of free formaldehyde depends
on the U:F ratio and the reaction conditions (pH, temperature, time)
during the UF resin formation.  Most resins are formed in a two-step
process that consists of adding formaldehyde and urea under basic
conditions followed by an additional charge of urea under acidic
conditions (REF 5).  Unlike most thermoset resins that form irreversible
chemical bonds, the UF resin is believed to degrade and release
formaldehyde in the presence of moisture.  Regardless of source,
formaldehyde emissions are why scavengers and barrier techniques are
often used.  Any excess urea will be discussed in the context of
additives and scavengers based on the processing methodology [urea
additions occur after the initial UF resin is formed].

Phenol Formaldehyde (PF) Resins

The phenol formaldehyde (PF) resins used in wood products are another
major product used as wood adhesives. (REF 2)   While most studies
indicate that the PF resins have low formaldehyde emissions , this is
only the case for the phenyl methylene bridge formation that occurs in
the latter state of curing and adhesive formation.  Varying pH,
temperature, time, and feedstock P/F ratio all affect the type and
properties of the product formed and the amount of potential
formaldehyde that can be released.  The initial reaction of formaldehyde
and phenol is prepared with molar excess of formaldehyde that produces
an intermediate that has multiple hydroxymethyl groups attached to the
aromatic rings.  In addition, there are methyl ether linkages that can
release formaldehyde during condensation and curing stages of wood
processing.  It is highly unlikely that the PF resin have uncured
oligomeric content which would contribute to release of or consumer
exposure to formaldehyde, since the termini are active methylol groups
that are known to cure even at room temperature.  The final high
temperature and pressure cure will completely and irreversibly bond
resin to the wood substrate (REF 5,6,7).  The final products are stable
to high humidity and temperature and can be used for outdoor and
bathroom/kitchen applications where exposure to moisture will occur
without losing product efficacy (REF 8).  	Since the initial reaction
occurs with excess formaldehyde the phenol is the limiting reagent and
is consumed in the reaction.

Tannins containing Resins

Other phenolic products, namely tannins, have been used to make PF-like
resins for wood adhesives (REF 2).   However, these products are too
expensive to be used as one for one substitutes for UF resins, so the
tannins [or other plant phenolic sources like cashew nut shell liquid
(CNSL)] are typically used as additives.  In the case of tannin
containing resins, methanol can be added to the formulation to slow the
fast curing time which improves product shelf life (REF 2).  Any excess
methanol would likely be driven off during wood processing because of
its high volatility.

Methylene Diphenyl Diisocyanate (MDI)

PolyMDI (pMDI) is generally a more viscous version of MDI monomer.  The
production of pMDI, used for composite wood products resins, involves
multiple steps.  First, the acid catalyzed condensation of aniline with
formaldehyde occurs to give oligomeric di- and poly- amines (MDA).  The
percentage distribution of the homologues and isomers of MDA varies.  In
the next reaction, the MDA mixtures are phosgenated without
purification to produce pMDI  which contain high concentration of MDI
monomer.  Most commercial pMDI resins have at least 20% unreacted MDI
listed on their material safety data sheets (MSDS) (REF 1).  The pMDI
resins are generally low molecular weight components that penetrate into
the wood surface and react with moisture or cellulosic molecules to form
a stronger bond than one expects with the other types of adhesives (REF
9).  The chemistry and reactivity of these resins and the corresponding
adhesive formation with wood has been demonstrated using 2-D NMR
techniques (REF 10, 11).  Furthermore, the strong bonds and fast
reactivity of pMDI resins make them useful additives to UF and PF resins
to further lower formaldehyde emissions (REF 11).   The MDI is consumed
in these applications.

Protein Based Resins

Historically, protein based resins derived from natural sources were the
initial adhesive of choice for wood based products (REF 1, 2, 12).
Their use declined substantially after World War II with the
availability of low-cost, durable synthetic adhesives (REF 5).  However,
because of concerns about formaldehyde exposure, use of protein based
resins in composite wood products has increased in recent years.   One
protein based resin (PureBond) uses a prepolymer which is based on amine
epichlorohydrin coupling products that makes binding with the protein
based resin more efficacious as a wood adhesive  (REF 1, 2, 13).  The
Pure Bond product couples protein with a polyamine –epichlorohydrin
pre-polymer resin to make the wood adhesive.  The polyamine
epichlorohydrin resin is manufactured by Hercules Corp.   This
pre-adhesive prepolymer protein resin has been manufactured at a
separate facility for decades with documentation that there is no
unreacted epichlorhydrin present in the downstream products (REF 14).

Polyvinyl Alcohol/Acetate (PVA/PVAC) Resins

Polyvinyl alcohol / polyvinyl acetate (PVA/PVAC) based adhesives are
thermoplastic resin chemicals.  They are different from the thermoset
resins in that the mode of action is not chemical reactivity but a
change in physical form [from liquid to solid phase] to produce the
bonding property.  Residual vinyl acetate monomer in the polymer is
generally limited to much less than 1% (MSDS sheets report below 0.3%
typical composition). Vinyl acetate monomer (VAM) is known to undergo
acid, base, or metal catalyzed hydrolysis and alcoholysis at fast rates
of conversion (REF 15).   The moisture content of the wood, alcohol
groups in the wood, and the adhesive formulation components should
provide sufficient reactants to consume any unreacted VAM, making it
unlikely that the composite wood products would contain the unreacted
monomer.  Finally, PVA modification and partial hydrolysis to form some
alcohol species that can react with the wood chemicals has been
demonstrated with positive adhesion results (REF 16).  The added benefit
to using PVAC that has been partially hydrolyzed to PVA is that the
hydrolysis reaction destroys any residual monomer.    Some manufacturers
list no monomer contamination on those MSDS documents (REF 17, 18).

Additives and Scavengers

Different additives and scavengers are sometimes used for enhanced wood
bonding and formaldehyde capture.  There are three classes of products
that will be discussed in this report.

 Crosslinking / binding agents

Triacetin [glycerol triacetate] is used with both phenol urea
formaldehyde (PUF) and pMDI resins to enhance bonding and reduce
formaldehyde emissions (REF 2, 19, 20).  The triacetin additives are
believed to penetrate wood like the other low molecular weight chemicals
and react with trapped moisture.   The initial byproducts of triacetin
hydrolysis are acetic acid and glycerol, which crosslink the wood fiber
with the resin components.  While the exact mechanism is unknown, the
resulting bonded wood is stronger, curing times and temperatures are
reduced, and these pressed wood products have fewer unreacted resin
monomers remaining compared to wood bonded with resin without the added
triacetin.  Alternatively, binding can be accomplished by reacting the
alcohol type resins (like PVA) with pMDI (REF 21) and converting the
thermoplastic resin into a thermoset resin.  The small pMDI molecules
crosslink PVA alcohol groups or can be used as described previously and
react with the wood chemistry.  Certain chromium metal salts have been
added to PVA resin formulations to promote adhesion by crosslinking the
PVA alcohols and wood structure alcohols to form metal oxide bonds,
which are water resistant (REF 1, 2, 22).  These salts are in the
Cr(III) oxidation state, but Cr(III) ions have the theoretical ability
to leach out of treated substrates.  There is no literature evidence
that such leaching or migration of the Cr(III) salt occurs.  It is
contrary to the noted stability and water resistance of chromium treated
products.  If the Cr(III) salt were to leach out, it could potentially
convert to the Cr(VI) oxidation state, which would be a concern.

Nitrogen based formaldehyde scavengers

Nitrogen based additives (urea, melamine, hexamine, ammonia, proteins)
are used during resin formation, producing the corresponding mixed
resins like MUF [melamine / urea / formaldehyde] .  When incorporated
into the resin backbone these additives are significantly less likely to
be released during the lifetime of the composite wood product.  (REF 23)
 The additives that are formulated after the resin has been formed are
added to scavenge the unreacted formaldehyde or any potential
formaldehyde that forms from resin decomposition.  Since these additives
may not be chemically bound in a polymer background, they are
potentially available to be released from the final composite wood
product.   These additives may alternatively be impregnated into barrier
components of composite wood products (e.g. melamine placed in paper
sheets that are laminated onto the surface of wood products) which
function to bind formaldehyde as it is released or physically prevent
the formaldehyde from leaving the coated substrate.   The additives with
low molecular weight may have the potential to diffuse from the wood
matrix in the final product, but the P-Chem properties of these neat
chemicals would generally preclude much volatility.  In addition, should
the additives react with formaldehyde, as intended, the corresponding
adducts will be much more likely to irreversibly bind to the wood
chemical moieties based on the chemistry of Mannich type base adducts
(REF 1, 2, 24).

Phenolic based formaldehyde scavengers

Phenols or other aromatic plant sources of phenolic compounds can be
additives in pressed wood products much the way the nitrogen based
additives are used.   They can be incorporated into the polymer backbone
[phenol urea formaldehyde (PUF) resins] or they can be added separately
to capture formaldehyde as it is generated before it is released.
Formaldehyde reacts with phenolic additives to form methylol groups
which can further react with the wood or with other resin chemicals (REF
1, 2).   While there is little research on the process of how additives
work, there is much evidence that they do effectively reduce
formaldehyde emissions from treated composite wood products (REF 25,
26).  In some cases, additional methylene sources are added to enhance
the resin formation, using compounds like tris(hydroxymethyl)
nitromethane  (TN) to crosslink with phenolic active sites present with
the other wood or resin chemicals (REF 27).

References

REF 1.    State of California, California Environmental Protection
Agency, Air Resources Board

Supplement To The Final Statement Of Reasons For Rulemaking Adoption Of
The Airborne Toxic Control Measure To Reduce Formaldehyde Emissions From
Composite Wood Products.  April 26, 2007

REF 2.   State of California, California Environmental Protection
Agency,  Air Resources Board

Staff Report: Initial Statement Of Reasons For Proposed Rulemaking
Public Hearing To Consider

Adoption Of The Proposed Airborne Toxic Control Measure To Reduce
Formaldehyde Emissions From Composite Wood.

Products.   March 9, 2007

REF 3.  Risk Assessment Divison USEPA.  Human Health Hazard Summaries
for Chemicals Used in Alternative Resin Technologies Replacing
Urea-Formaldehyde Resins (Draft).  2011

REF 4.  Shin-ichiro Tohmura, Chung-Yun Hse, and Mitsuo Higuchi.
Formaldehyde emission and high-temperature stability of cured

urea-formaldehyde resins  Journal of Wood Science  46, 303-309.  2000

REF 5.  A.H. Connor. Wood: Adhesives. In: Buschow KHJ (ed). Encyclopedia
of Materials: Science and Technology, p. 9583-9599. Elsevier Science
Ltd., Amsterdam. ISBN: 0-08-0431526.  2001

REF 6.   Gilles Finaz, Robert Michon, Michele Rasclard, Michel.  United
States Patent 4,467,051. Method of producing a cellular resin suitable
for use as an Insulating material.  1984

REF 7.   John A. Emery.  “Formaldehyde Release from Wood Products
Bonded with Phenol Formaldehyde

Adhesives”, Chapter 3 in Formaldehyde Release from Wood Products,
American Chemical Society

Symposium 316, American Chemical Society, Washington DC.  1986

REF 8.  Young-Kyu Lee, Dae-Jun Kim, Hyun-Joong Kim, Teak-Sung Hwang,
Miriam Rafailovich, and Jonathan Sokolov. Activation Energy and Curing
Behavior of Resol- and Novolac-Type Phenolic Resins by Differential
Scanning Calorimetry and Thermogravimetric Analysis; Journal of Applied
Polymer Science, Vol. 89, 2589–2596.  2003

REF 9.   US EPA Sources and Factors Affecting Indoor Emissions from
Engineered Wood Products: Summary and Evaluation of Current Literature
EPA/600/SR-96/067.  1996

REF 10.   Charles R. Frihart, Daniel J. Yellea, John Ralph, Robert J.
Moon, Donald S. Stone, and Joseph E. Jakes. Enhanced understanding of
the relationship between chemical modification and mechanical properties
of wood.  presented at the 9th Pacific Rim Biobased Composites Symposium
Rotorua, New Zealand 2008

REF 11.   Mike Gruver.   Penetration and Performance of pMDI Resin on
Selected Wood Species presented at the Wood Adhesives USDA Forest
Service Conference San Diego , CA.  2005

REF 12.  Diane Greer.  New Crop of Innovative Materials Aims for Green
Benefits, Durability: Soy-Based Adhesives for Plywood. Construction
Resources, p. 3, March 2006

REF 13.  USEPA Presidential Green Chemistry Awards Summary : Greener
Synthetic Pathway Award Winner.  Development and Commercial Application
of Environmentally Friendly Adhesives for Wood Composites.  2007.

REF 14.   U. Mass, Lowell  Chapter 4:  Formaldehyde in the Five
Chemicals Alternatives Assessment Study June 2006

REF 15.   H. Yildirim Erbil   Vinyl acetate emulsion polymerization and
copolymerization with acrylic monomers ISBN 0-8493-2303-7  pg. 130 CRC
Press LLC Boca Raton, FL.  2000

REF 16.   Lijun Qiao, Phil K. Coveny, Allan J. Easteal, Modifications of
poly(vinyl alcohol) for use in poly(vinyl acetate) emulsion wood
adhesives.  Pigment & Resin Technology  31(2) 88 – 95. 2002

REF 17.   Acros Organics Poly(vinyl alcohol) hydrolyzed  CASRN:
9002-89-5 MSDS 2009

REF 18.  Alfa Aesar Poly(vinyl acetate) CASRN: 9003-20-7 MSDS 2009

REF 19.  Krishnakumar  Rangachari and Kays Chinai  for Rayoneir Products
and Financial Services Co. United States Patent 6310268 Non-ionic
plasticizer additives for wood pulps and absorbent cores.  2001

REF 20.  David W. Park and Frank R. Hunter for  Weyerhaeuser Corp. US
Patent 5,710,434 Isocyanate Impregnating Compositions. 1998

REF 21.  Helmut Zecha, Rudolf Weissgerber, and Francis Petrocelli  for
Air Products and Polymers.  United States Patent 6,794,466.  Shear
thinning vinyl acetate based polymer latex composition, especially for
adhesives.  2004

REF 22.  Hartmut Brabetz, Christof Kemenater, Franz Six, and Wilhelm
Kaiser for Wacker-Chemie GmbH.  US Patent 4,118,357 Adhesive aqueous
dispersions of polyvinyl alcohol graft polymers with acidic hardeners
and process of production.  1978

REF 23.  Antonio Pizzi - Some considerations on future trends in wood
adhesives.  Presented at COST E34 Conference Innovations in Wood
Adhesives.   Beil, Switzerland.  2004

REF 24.  Syed H. Imam, Sherald H. Gordon, Lijun Mao and Liang Chen.
Environmentally friendly wood adhesive from a renewable plant polymer:
characteristics and optimization.  Polymer Degradation and Stability,
73(3), 529-533.  2001

REF 25 .  Composite Panel Association Technical Bulletin.   The Role of
Laminates and Coatings as VOC Emission Barriers in Composite Wood
Panels.  2003

REF 26.  Manfred Dunky, Antonio Pizzi, and Marc Van Leemput.  COST
ACTION E13 Work Group #1 Report on State of the Art.  Wood Adhesion and
Glued Products.  ISBN 92-894-4891-1. 2002

REF 27.  Jeffrey E. Martin, Albert F. Vozella, Golden F. Watts, and
Edwin R. Luckman  for  Ashland Oil, Inc.  United States Patent 4,341,668
Aqueous Composition Containing Aldehyde Condensate and Use Thereof. 1982

Physical and Chemical Properties of Select Chemicals Used in Processed
Wood Products

Common Chemical

Name	  HYPERLINK "http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CAS_registry_number" \o
"CAS registry number"  CAS Registry  Number	  HYPERLINK
"http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chemical_formula" \o "Chemical formula"
Molecular Formula

	  HYPERLINK "http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Melting_point" \o "Melting
point"  Melting Point

(°C)	Boiling Point

(°C)	Vapor Pressure

Pa (°C)	  HYPERLINK "http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Solubility" \o
"Solubility"  Solubility  in   HYPERLINK
"http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Water" \o "Water"  Water

g / L  ( °C)

Ammoniaa	[7664-41-7]	NH3	Gas @ 25	-33.4	857 kPa (20 °C)	517 (20 °C)

Ureaa	[  HYPERLINK
"http://www.commonchemistry.org/ChemicalDetail.aspx?ref=57-13-6" \o
"http://www.commonchemistry.org/ChemicalDetail.aspx?ref=57-13-6"
57-13-6 ]	CH4N2O	133–135(dec)	not applicable	80  (20 °C)	1080  (20
°C)

Melaminea	[108-78-1]	C3H6N6	>  280  (dec)	not applicable	4.7 x 10-8 (20
°C)	3.1  (20 °C)

Hexaminea	[100-97-0]	C6H12N4	280  (dec)

	Sublimesc	0.35 (20 °C)

	895  (20  °C)

Glycerol triacetatea	[102-76-1]	C9H14O6	3	258	0.33 (25 °C)	70  (25
°C)

Tris(hydroxymethyl)a

nitromethane	[126-11-4]	C4H9NO5	175 (dec)	not applicable	20  (25 °C)
est              1950 (94  °C)  	2200 (20 °C)                 500
(sat’d 10 °C)             _

Methanola	[67-56-1]	CH4O	-97	64 – 65 	12700  (20 °C)	Miscible

Methylene Diphenylisocyanateb	[101-68-8]	C15H10N2O2	39 - 43 	> 300 (dec)
                	0.13 (40 °C)	Reacts with water

Vinyl acetatea

(monomer)	[108-05-4]	C5H6O2	-93	72 - 73	11 – 12 kPa (20 °C)	20 - 23
(20 °C)

Phenola	[108-95-2]	C6H6O	40 - 41	181 - 182	29 - 48 (20 °C)	82 - 84 (20
°C)

Epichlorohydrina 	[106-89-8]	C3H5ClO	-57	115 - 117	1.3 – 1.7 kPa (20
°C)	65 (20 °C)

Chromium (III)b nitrate	[13548-38-4]

[7789-02-8] 	Cr [NO3]3

+ (9 H2O)

66

	not applicable	not applicable	Soluble

810 g/Ld

P-Chem properties are provided from a variety of sources including but
not limited to: a) OECD SIDS, USEPA HPV Robust summaries or IUCLID
reports; b) WHO IARC and IPCS reports; c) manufacturer MSDS, or d) WWW
sites ChemSpider, Wikipedia, ChemLook

   For more information on the other chemicals associated with wood
products see Baumann M., et al. Volatile organic chemical emissions from
composite wood products: a review. USDA Forest Service, Forest Products
Laboratory, Technology Summaries; 1996. p. 5–12 where composite wood
product emissions were compared with sawdust emissions.

  EPA received a public comment from Arclin, Georgia-Pacific Chemicals,
and Hexion indicating that the free formaldehyde content of the base
resin does not “predict the potential of the resin to emit
formaldehyde in either the manufacturing plant or from the final
product.” (EPA-HQ-OPPT-2008-0627-0072  (  HYPERLINK
"http://www.regulations.gov"  http://www.regulations.gov )  )

   HYPERLINK
"http://www.gmzinc.com/index.php?page=lupranate---polymeric-mdi-and-deri
vatives"
http://www.gmzinc.com/index.php?page=lupranate---polymeric-mdi-and-deriv
atives   is one example of many.


[Federal Register: August 7, 2006 (Volume 71, Number 151)]
[Notices]
[Page 44714-44715]
[DOCID:fr07au06-96]

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

DEPARTMENT OF LABOR

Occupational Safety and Health Administration

[Docket No. ICR-1218-0NEW-(2006)-01]

Peer Review, Conflict of Interest and Disclosure Form; Request
for the Office of Management and Budget's (OMB) Approval of Information
Collection (Paperwork) Requirements

AGENCY: Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA), labor.

ACTION: Request for public comment.

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

SUMMARY: OSHA solicits public comment on the proposed Conflict of
Interest and Disclosure Form (COI) form, which will be used to
determine whether or not a conflict of interest exists for a potential
peer review panel member.

DATES: Comments must be submitted by the following dates:
    Hard copy: Your comments must be submitted (postmarked or received)
by October 6, 2006.
    Facsimile and electronic transmission: Your comments must be
received by October 6, 2006.

ADDRESSES: You may submit comments, identified by OSHA Docket No. ICR-
1218-0NEW-01-(2006), by any of the following methods:
    Regular mail, express delivery, hand delivery, and messenger
service: Submit your comments and attachments to the OSHA Docket
Office, Room N-2625, U.S. Department of Labor, 200 Constitution Avenue,
NW., Washington, DC 20210; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER> (OSHA's TTY number
is<PHONE_NUMBER>). OSHA Docket Office and Department of Labor hours
are 8:15 to 4:45 p.m., e.t.
    Facsimile: If your comments are 10 pages or fewer, including
attachments, you may fax them to the OSHA Docket Office at (202) 693-
1648.
    Electronic: You may submit comments through the Internet at http://ecomments.osha.gov.
 Follow instructions on the OSHA Web page for

submitting comments.
    Docket: For access to the docket to read or download comments or
background materials, such as the complete Information Collection
Request (ICR) (containing the Supporting Statement, OMB-83-I Form, and
attachments), go to OSHA's Web page at http://www.OSHA.gov. In

addition, the ICR, comments and submissions are available for
inspection and copying at the OSHA Docket Office at the address above.
You may also contact Todd Owen at the address below to obtain a copy of
the ICR. For additional information on submitting comments, please see
the ``Public Participation'' section in SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Todd Owen, Directorate of Standards
and Guidance, OSHA, Room N-3609, 200 Constitution Avenue, NW.,
Washington, DC 20210; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Background

    The Department of Labor, as part of its continuing effort to reduce
paperwork and respondent (i.e., employer) burden, conducts a
preclearance consultation program to provide the public with an
opportunity to comment on proposed and continuing information
collection requirements in accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act
of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3506(c)(2)(A)). This program ensures that
information is in the desired format, reporting burden (time and costs)
is minimal, collection instruments are clearly understood, and OSHA's
estimate of the information collection burden is accurate. The
Occupational Safety and Health Administration conducts peer reviews to
review a draft product for quality by specialists in the field who were
not involved in producting the draft. The selection of participants in
a peer review is based on expertise, with due consideration of
independence. The Office of Management and Budget published the Final
Information Quality Bulletin for Peer Review on December 15, 2004. The
Bulletin states ``* * * the agency must address reviewers' potential
conflicts of interest (including those stemming from ties to regulated
businesses and other stakeholders) and independence from the agency.''
The Bulletin requires agencies to adopt or adapt the committee
selection policies employed by the National Academy of Sciences (NAS)
when selecting peer reviewers who are not government employees. To
fulfill this requirement OSHA has developed a Conflict of Interest and
Disclosure Form, based on NAS, Conflict of Interest Disclosure form.
This form will be used to determine whether or not a conflict exists
for a potential peer review panel member.

II. Special Issues for Comment

    OSHA has a particular interest in comments on the following issues:
     Whether the proposed information collection requirements
are necessary for the proper performance of the Agency's functions,
including whether the information is useful;
     The accuracy of OSHA's estimate of the burden (time and
costs) of the information collection requirements, including the
validity of the methodology and assumptions used;
     The quality, utility, and clarity of the information
collected; and
     Ways to minimize the burden on employers who must comply;
for example, by using automated or other technological information
collection and transmission techniques.

III. Proposed Actions

    OSHA is requesting OMB to approve OSHA's COI form. The COI form
would add 27 hours to OSHA's 114 million burden hour inventory. The
Agency will summarize the comments submitted in response to this
notice, and will include this summary in its request to OMB.
    Type of Review: New information collection requirements.
    Title: OSHA's Conflict of Interest and Disclosure Form (COI) form.
    OMB Number: 1218-0NEW.
    Affected Public: Individuals or households.
    Number of Respondents: 36.
    Frequency: On occasion.
    Average Time Per Response: One half hour for respondents to
complete Tier 1 for ``influential scientific assessments;'' and 1 hour
for respondent to complete both Tier 1 and Tier 2 for ``highly
influential scientific assessments.''
    Estimated Total Burden Hours: 27 hours.
    Estimated Cost (Operation and Maintenance): $0

IV. Public Participation--Submission of Comments on this Notice and
Internet Access to Comments and Submissions.

    You may submit comments and supporting materials in response to
this notice by (1) hardy copy, (2) FAX transmission (facsimile), or (3)
electronically through the OSHA Web page. Because of security-related
problems, there may be a significant delay in the receipt of comments
by regular mail. Please contact the OSHA Docket Office at (202) 693-
2350 (FFY<PHONE_NUMBER>) for information about security procedures
concerning the delivery of submissions by express delivery, hand
delivery, and courier service.
    All comments, submissions, and background documents are available
for inspection and copying at the OSHA Docket Office at the above
address. Comments and submissions posted on OSHA's Web page are
available at http://www.OSHA.gov. Contact the OSHA Docket Office for

information about materials not available through the OSHA Web page and
for assistance using the Web page to locate docket submissions.
    Electronic copies of this Federal Register notice as well as other
relevant documents are available on OSHA's Web page. Since all
submissions become public, private information such as social security
numbers should not be submitted.

V. Authority and Signature

    Edwin G. Foulke, Jr., Assistant Secretary of Labor for Occupational
Safety and Health, directed the preparation of this notice. The
authority for this notice is the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44
U.S.C. 3506 et seq.) and Secretary of Labor's Order No. 5-2002 (67 FR
65008).

    Signed at Washington, DC, on July 31, 2006.
Edwin G. Foulke, Jr.,
Assistant Secretary of Labor.
[FR Doc. 06-6738 Filed 7-4-06; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4510-26-M


[Federal Register Volume 81, Number 133 (Tuesday, July 12, 2016)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 45022-45024]
[FR Doc No: 2016-16364]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Coast Guard

33 CFR Part 165

[Docket Number USCG-2016-0462]
RIN 1625-AA00

Safety Zone; Hudson River, South Nyack and Tarrytown, NY

AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS.

ACTION: Temporary interim final rule.

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

SUMMARY: The Coast Guard is establishing a temporary moving safety zone
for navigable waters of the Hudson River within a 200-yard radius of
the LEFT COAST LIFTER crane barge during heavy lift operations. The
safety zone is needed to protect personnel, vessels, and the marine
environment from potential hazards created by heavy lift operations
conducted by the crane barge in the vicinity of the Tappan Zee Bridge.
Entry of vessels or persons into this zone is prohibited unless
specifically authorized by the Captain of the Port.

DATES: This rule is effective without actual notice from July 12, 2016
through December 31, 2018. For the purposes of enforcement, actual
notice will be used from June 22, 2016 through July 12, 2016. Comments
and related material must be received by the Coast Guard on or before
August 11, 2016.

ADDRESSES: You may submit comments identified by docket number USCG-
2016-0462 using the Federal e-Rulemaking Portal at http://www.regulations.gov. See the ``Public Participation and Request for
Comments'' portion of the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section for further
instructions on submitting comments.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: If you have questions on this rule,
call or email MST1 Kristina Pundt, Waterways Management Division, U.S.
Coast Guard; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>, email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Table of Abbreviations

COTP Captain of the Port
CFR Code of Federal Regulations
DHS Department of Homeland Security
FR Federal Register
NPRM Notice of proposed rulemaking
NYSTA New York State Thruway Authority
Sec.  Section
U.S.C. United States Code

II. Background Information and Regulatory History

    The Coast Guard is issuing this temporary rule without prior notice
and opportunity to comment pursuant to authority under section 4(a) of
the Administrative Procedure Act (APA) (5 U.S.C. 553(b)). This
provision authorizes an agency to issue a rule without prior notice and
opportunity to comment when the agency for good cause finds that those
procedures are ``impracticable, unnecessary, or contrary to the public
interest.'' Under 5 U.S.C. 553(b)(B), the Coast Guard finds that good
cause exists for not publishing a NPRM with respect to this rule
because publishing a NPRM would be impracticable. A delay or
cancellation of the currently ongoing bridge project in order to
accommodate a full notice and comment period would delay necessary
operations, result in increased costs, and delay the date when the
bridge is expected to reopen for normal operations. For these reasons,
the Coast Guard finds it impracticable to delay this regulation for
purposes of a comment period.
    We are issuing this rule, and under 5 U.S.C. 553(d)(3), the Coast
Guard finds that good cause exists for making it effective less than 30
days after publication in the Federal Register. Delaying the effective
date of this rule would be impracticable for the same reasons specified
above.

III. Legal Authority and Need for Rule

    The Coast Guard is issuing this rule under authority in 33 U.S.C.
1231. The COTP has determined that the potential hazards associated
with the LEFT COAST LIFTER's cable and anchor system create a serious
safety concern for anyone transiting within a 200-yard radius of the
LEFT COAST LIFTER during heavy lift operations. This rule is needed to
protect personnel, vessels, and the marine environment in the navigable
waters within the safety zone while constructing the New NY Bridge and
demolishing the existing Tappan Zee Bridge.
    Construction on the Tappan Zee Bridge replacement project began on
October 1, 2013. Heavy lift operations to install the new bridge
superstructure over the Hudson River have presented new safety hazards
and risks to vessels transiting the area due to the Left Coast Lifter's
crane barge four-point anchor and cable system deployed while lifting
heavy loads over the navigable waters of the Hudson River. The anchor
and cable system extends outward from the crane barge, up to 200 yards,
in four varying directions, at various heights above, and below, the
water surface of the Hudson River. This presents a risk to mariners who
may become entangled in the anchor cable system if they transit too
close to the crane barge. We believe that a safety zone is needed to
protect mariners during this period of construction.

IV. Discussion of the Rule

    This rule establishes a safety zone from June 22, 2016, through
December 31, 2018. The safety zone will cover all navigable waters of
the Hudson River within 200 yards of the crane barge LEFT COAST LIFTER.
The duration of the zone is intended to protect personnel, vessels, and
the marine environment in these navigable waters during heavy lift
operations. No vessel or person will be permitted to enter the safety
zone without obtaining permission from the COTP or a designated
representative.

V. Regulatory Analyses

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

A. Regulatory Planning and Review

    Executive Orders 12866 and 13563 direct agencies to assess the
costs and benefits of available regulatory alternatives and, if
regulation is necessary, to select regulatory approaches that maximize
net benefits. Executive Order 13563 emphasizes the importance of
quantifying both costs and benefits, of reducing costs, of harmonizing
rules, and of promoting flexibility. This rule has not been designated
a ``significant regulatory action,'' under Executive Order 12866.
Accordingly, it has not been reviewed by the Office of Management and
Budget.
    This regulatory action determination is based on the size,
location, and duration of the safety zone. The implementation of this
temporary safety zone is necessary for the protection of all waterway
users. The size of the zone is the minimum necessary to provide
adequate protection for the waterway users, adjoining areas, and the
public. Vessel traffic will be able to safely transit around this
safety zone. Any hardships experienced by persons or vessels are
considered minimal compared to the interest in protecting the public.

B. Impact on Small Entities

    The Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980, 5 U.S.C. 601-612, as
amended, requires Federal agencies to consider the potential impact of
regulations on small entities during rulemaking. The term ``small
entities'' comprises small businesses, not-for-profit organizations
that are independently owned and operated and are not dominant in their
fields, and governmental jurisdictions with populations of less than
50,000. The Coast Guard certifies under 5 U.S.C. 605(b) that this rule
will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of
small entities.
    While some owners or operators of vessels intending to transit the
safety zone may be small entities, for the reasons stated in section
V.A above, this rule will not have a significant economic impact on any
vessel owner or operator.
    Under section 213(a) of the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement
Fairness Act of 1996 (Pub. L. 104-121), we want to assist small
entities in understanding this rule. If the rule would affect your
small business, organization, or governmental jurisdiction and you have
questions concerning its provisions or options for compliance, please
contact the person listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT
section.
    Small businesses may send comments on the actions of Federal
employees who enforce, or otherwise determine compliance with, Federal
regulations to the Small Business and Agriculture Regulatory
Enforcement Ombudsman and the Regional Small Business Regulatory
Fairness Boards. The Ombudsman evaluates these actions annually and
rates each agency's responsiveness to small business. If you wish to
comment on actions by employees of the Coast Guard, call 1-888-REG-FAIR
(1-888-734-3247). The Coast Guard will not retaliate against small
entities that question or complain about this rule or any policy or
action of the Coast Guard.

C. Collection of Information

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

D. Federalism and Indian Tribal Governments

    A rule has implications for federalism under Executive Order 13132,
Federalism, if it has a substantial direct effect on the States, on the
relationship between the national government and the States, or on the
distribution of power and responsibilities among the various levels of
government. We have analyzed this rule under that Order and have
determined that it is consistent with the fundamental federalism
principles and preemption requirements described in Executive Order
13132.
    Also, this rule does not have tribal implications under Executive
Order 13175, Consultation and Coordination with Indian Tribal
Governments, because it does not have a substantial direct effect on
one or more Indian tribes, on the relationship between the Federal
Government and Indian tribes, or on the distribution of power and
responsibilities between the Federal Government and Indian tribes. If
you believe this rule has implications for federalism or Indian tribes,
please contact the person listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT
section above.

E. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act

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

F. Environment

    We have analyzed this rule under Department of Homeland Security

Management Directive 023-01 and Commandant Instruction M16475.lD, which
guide the Coast Guard in complying with the National Environmental
Policy Act of 1969 (42 U.S.C. 4321-4370f), and have determined that
this action is one of a category of actions that do not individually or
cumulatively have a significant effect on the human environment. This
rule involves a safety zone that will prohibit entry within 200 yards
of the crane barge LEFT COAST LIFTER during heavy lift operations. It
is categorically excluded from further review under paragraph 34(g) of
Figure 2-1 of the Commandant Instruction. An environmental analysis
checklist supporting this determination and a Categorical Exclusion
Determination will be available in the docket where indicated under
ADDRESSES. We seek any comments or information that may lead to the
discovery of a significant environmental impact from this rule.

G. Protest Activities

    The Coast Guard respects the First Amendment rights of protesters.
Protesters are asked to contact the person listed in the FOR FURTHER
INFORMATION CONTACT section to coordinate protest activities so that
your message can be received without jeopardizing the safety or
security of people, places or vessels.

VI. Public Participation and Request for Comments

    We view public participation as essential to effective rulemaking,
and will consider all comments and material received during the comment
period. Your comment can help shape the outcome of this rulemaking. If
you submit a comment, please include the docket number for this
rulemaking, indicate the specific section of this document to which
each comment applies, and provide a reason for each suggestion or
recommendation.
    We encourage you to submit comments through the Federal eRulemaking
Portal at http://www.regulations.gov. If your material cannot be
submitted using http://www.regulations.gov, contact the person in the
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section of this document for alternate
instructions.
    We accept anonymous comments. All comments received will be posted
without change to http://www.regulations.gov and will include any
personal information you have provided. For more about privacy and the
docket, you may review a Privacy Act notice regarding the Federal
Docket Management System in the March 24, 2005, issue of the Federal
Register (70 FR 15086).
    Documents mentioned in this NPRM as being available in the docket,
and all public comments, will be in our online docket at http://www.regulations.gov and can be viewed by following that Web site's
instructions. Additionally, if you go to the online docket and sign up
for email alerts, you will be notified when comments are posted or a
final rule is published.

List of Subjects in 33 CFR Part 165

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

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

PART 165--REGULATED NAVIGATION AREAS AND LIMITED ACCESS AREAS

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

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

0
2. Add Sec.  165.T01-0462 to read as follows:

Sec.  165.T01-0462  Safety Zone; Tappan Zee Bridge Construction
Project, Hudson River, South Nyack and Tarrytown, NY.

    (a) Location. The following area is a safety zone: All navigable
waters within 200 yards of the crane barge LEFT COAST LIFTER while
conducting heavy lift operations on the Hudson River.
    (b) Definitions. As used in this section, designated representative
means is any Coast Guard commissioned, warrant or petty officer who has
been designated by the COTP to act on the COTP's behalf. The designated
representative may be on a Coast Guard vessel or New York State Police,
Westchester County Police, Rockland County Police, or other designated
craft; or may be on shore and will communicate with vessels via VHF-FM
radio or loudhailer. Members of the Coast Guard Auxiliary may be
present to inform vessel operators of this regulation.
    (c) Regulations. (1) Under the general safety zone regulations in
subpart C of this part, you may not enter the safety zone described in
paragraph (a) of this section unless authorized by the COTP or a COTP
designated representative.
    (2) To seek permission to enter, contact the COTP or the COTP's
representative by VHF-FM channel 16 or by phone at<PHONE_NUMBER>
(Sector New York Command Center). Those in the safety zone must comply
with all lawful orders or directions given to them by the COTP or a
COTP designated representative.
    (d) Enforcement period. This section will be enforced from June 22,
2016 through December 31, 2018.

    Dated: June 22, 2016.
M.H. Day,
Captain, U.S. Coast Guard, Captain of the Port New York.
[FR Doc. 2016-16364 Filed 7-11-16; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 9110-04-P