44604 Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 154 / Friday, August 13, 2021 / Rules and Regulations 

assign the use of the airspace necessary 

to ensure the safety of aircraft and the 

efficient use of airspace. This regulation 

is within the scope of that authority as 

it establishes restricted area airspace at 

Cherry Point, NC, to enhance aviation 

safety and accommodate essential U.S. 

Marine Corps training activities. 

History 

The FAA published a notice of 

proposed rulemaking for Docket No. 

FAA–2019–0111 in the Federal Register 

(85 FR 16918; March 25, 2020), 

proposing to expand the restricted 

airspace at MCAS Cherry Point, NC, by 

establishing restricted area R–5306F, 

because the altitude constraints of the 

current airspace structure cannot fully 

support U.S. Marine Corps training and 

readiness requirements. Interested 

parties were invited to participate in 

this rulemaking effort by submitting 

written comments on the proposal. No 

comments were received. 

The Rule 

This action amends 14 CFR part 73 by 

establishing restricted area R–5306F, 

Cherry Point, NC, to overlie the existing 

restricted area R–5306A, and the 

adjacent Core MOA. Restricted area R– 

5306F extends from FL 180 to FL 290. 

The time of designation is Monday 

through Friday, 0800 to 0000 hours, 

local time; other times by NOTAM. 

In conjunction with R–5306A, R– 

5306F will provide the low-altitude to 

high-altitude restricted airspace needed 

to train in the variety of tactics as 

discussed above. 

There are no current Air Traffic 

Service routes (i.e., jet routes or Qroutes) or preferential IFR routes that 

are impacted by the restricted area. R– 

5306F is joint-use special use airspace; 

meaning that the using agency will 

return the restricted area to the 

controlling agency (FAA, Washington 

ARTCC) on a real-time basis when not 

in use by the using agency. Supersonic 

flight will not be conducted in R–5306F. 

Regulatory Notices and Analyses 

The FAA has determined that this 

regulation only involves an established 

body of technical regulations for which 

frequent and routine amendments are 

necessary to keep them operationally 

current. It, therefore: (1) Is not a 

‘‘significant regulatory action’’ under 

Executive Order 12866; (2) is not a 

‘‘significant rule’’ under Department of 

Transportation (DOT) Regulatory 

Policies and Procedures (44 FR 11034; 

February 26, 1979); and (3) does not 

warrant preparation of a regulatory 

evaluation as the anticipated impact is 

so minimal. Since this is a routine 

matter that only affects air traffic 

procedures and air navigation, it is 

certified that this rule does not have a 

significant economic impact on a 

substantial number of small entities 

under the criteria of the Regulatory 

Flexibility Act. 

Environmental Review 

The FAA has determined that this 

action of establishing restricted area 

R–5306F at MCAS Cherry Point, NC, 

qualifies for categorical exclusion under 

the National Environmental Policy Act 

(42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq.) and its 

implementing regulations at 40 CFR part 

1500, and in accordance with FAA 

Order 1050.1F, Environmental Impacts: 

Policies and Procedures, paragraph 

5–6.5f, which categorically excludes 

from further environmental impact 

review actions that increase the altitude 

of special use airspace. As such, this 

action is not expected to result in any 

potentially significant environmental 

impacts. In accordance with FAA Order 

1050.1F, paragraph 5–2 regarding 

Extraordinary Circumstances, the FAA 

has reviewed this action for factors and 

circumstances in which a normally 

categorically excluded action may have 

a significant environmental impact 

requiring further analysis. The FAA has 

determined that no extraordinary 

circumstances exist that warrant 

preparation of an environmental 

assessment or environmental impact 

study. The FAA’s categorical exclusion 

declaration and decision for this action 

is separately documented in a 

categorical exclusion dated August 25, 

2020. 

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 73 

Airspace, Prohibited areas, Restricted 

areas. 

The Amendment 

In consideration of the foregoing, the 

Federal Aviation Administration 

amends 14 CFR part 73 as follows: 

PART 73—SPECIAL USE AIRSPACE 

■ 1. The authority citation for part 73 

continues to read as follows: 

Authority: 49 U.S.C. 106(f), 106(g); 40103, 

40113, 40120; E.O. 10854, 24 FR 9565, 3 CFR, 

1959–1963 Comp., p. 389. 

§ 73.53 North Carolina [Amended] 

■ 2. Section 73.53 is amended as 

follows: 

* * * * * 

R–5306F Cherry Point, NC [New] 

Boundaries. Beginning at lat. 35°23′16′′ N, 

long. 76°34′39′′ W; 

to lat. 35°18′16′′ N, long. 76°16′39′′ W; 

to lat. 35°04′31′′ N, long. 76°04′29′′ W; 

to lat. 35°00′31′′ N, long. 76°00′59′′ W; 

to lat. 35°00′22′′ N, long. 76°00′51′′ W; 

thence southwest 3 NM from and parallel 

to the shoreline 

to lat. 34°40′16′′ N, long. 76°24′45′′ W; 

to lat. 34°40′41′′ N, long. 76°25′08′′ W; 

to lat. 34°46′01′′ N, long. 76°29′59′′ W; 

to lat. 35°08′01′′ N, long. 76°51′19′′ W; 

to the point of beginning. 

Designated altitudes. FL 180 to FL 290. 

Time of designation. Monday through 

Friday, 0800–0000; other times by NOTAM. 

Controlling agency. FAA, Washington 

ARTCC. 

Using agency. USMC, Commanding 

Officer, U.S. Marine Corps Air Station Cherry 

Point, NC. 

* * * * * 

Issued in Washington, DC, on August 9, 

2021. 

George Gonzalez, 

Acting Manager, Rules and Regulations 

Group. 

[FR Doc. 2021–17251 Filed 8–12–21; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4910–13–P 

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE 

COMMISSION 

17 CFR Part 241 

[Release No. 34–92565] 

Procedures for the Commission’s Use 

of Certain Authorities Under Rule 21F– 

3(b)(3) and Rule 21F–6 of the 

Securities Exchange Act of 1934 

AGENCY: Securities and Exchange 

Commission. 

ACTION: Policy statement. 

SUMMARY: The Securities and Exchange 

Commission (‘‘Commission’’ or ‘‘SEC’’) 

is issuing this statement to clarify how 

the SEC will proceed when addressing 

certain issues under Exchange Act Rule 

21F–3(b)(3) and Exchange Act Rule 

21F–6 while the staff is preparing and 

the Commission is considering potential 

amendments to those rules (‘‘Interim 

Policy-Review Period’’). These 

procedures will remain in effect until 

withdrawn by the Commission. 

DATES: The policy statement is effective: 

August 13, 2021. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Emily Pasquinelli, Acting Chief in the 

Office of the Whistleblower, Division of 

Enforcement, at (202) 551–5973; 

William K. Shirey, Counsel to the 

Solicitor, Office of the General Counsel, 

at (202) 551–5043; Securities and 

Exchange Commission, 100 F Street NE, 

Washington, DC 20549. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

I. Background 

Pursuant to the Dodd-Frank 

Consumer Protection and Wall Street 


jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 154 / Friday, August 13, 2021 / Rules and Regulations 44605 

1See Exchange Act 21F(a)(5) (defining related 

action); Exchange Act Rule 21F–3(b)(1) (same). 

2See also SEC’s Spring 2021 Regulatory Agenda 

(publicly available at: https://www.reginfo.gov/ 

public/do/ 

eAgendaViewRule?pubId=202104&RIN=3235- 

AN03) (‘‘The Commission is considering additional 

amendments to the rules governing the 

Whistleblower Program established by the DoddFrank Act.’’). 

3 In pertinent part, Section 36(a) provides that ‘‘by 

rule, regulation, or order, may conditionally or 

unconditionally exempt any person . . . from any 

provision or provisions of [the Exchange Act] or of 

any rule or regulation thereunder, to the extent that 

such exemption is necessary or appropriate in the 

public interest, and is consistent with the 

protection of investors.’’ 

4See, e.g., 12 U.S.C. 4205(d)(1) (establishing a 

whistleblower award program in connection with 

the Financial Institutions Reform, Recovery, and 

Enforcement Act of 1989, but capping awards at 

$1.6 million). 

5The Commission contemplates that there should 

be no impact on the timely processing of any 

related-action award claim that the staff deems to 

have a ‘‘more direct or relevant connection to the 

Commission’s whistleblower program.’’ However, if 

a majority of the Commission should subsequently 

disagree with that determination, the claimant shall 

be notified and may request to have the relatedaction award claim held in abeyance during the 

Interim Policy-Review Period. 

Reform Act of 2010 (‘‘Dodd-Frank Act’’), 

Section 21F was added to the Securities 

Exchange Act of 1934 (‘‘Exchange Act’’), 

15 U.S.C. 78u–1 et seq., to establish a 

new SEC whistleblower award program. 

Section 21F provides that, pursuant to 

regulations adopted by the SEC, a 

monetary award shall be paid to any 

eligible whistleblower who provides the 

SEC with original information about a 

securities law violation that leads to the 

SEC’s success in obtaining a monetary 

order of more than a million dollars in 

an SEC judicial or administrative 

enforcement action (‘‘covered action’’). 

If an eligible whistleblower qualifies for 

an award, the SEC must pay an award 

that is at least 10%, but no more than 

30%, of the amount of the monetary 

sanctions collected in the SEC 

enforcement action. 

Section 21F further provides that if 

the SEC makes a whistleblower award 

in connection with its own enforcement 

action, the whistleblower becomes 

potentially eligible for an award in 

connection with any related 

enforcement actions (‘‘related actions’’) 

that are successfully litigated using the 

whistleblower’s same original 

information. The potential related 

enforcement actions must be brought 

either by a self-regulatory organization 

or certain statutorily identified 

governmental authorities (such as the 

U.S. Department of Justice or a state 

attorney general in connection with a 

criminal proceeding).1

In May 2011, the Commission 

adopted rules to govern the operation of 

the whistleblower award program. In 

September 2020, the Commission 

adopted various amendments to the 

Whistleblower Program rules, including 

two amendments that whistleblower 

advocates and others have asserted are 

unfair to whistleblowers and may risk 

reducing the willingness of individuals 

to blow the whistle. These amendments 

were made to: (1) Exchange Act Rule 

21F–3, which addresses the criteria for 

making an award based on a 

whistleblower’s contributions to the 

successful resolution of a related action; 

and (2) Exchange Act Rule 21F–6, 

which establishes the criteria that the 

Commission may consider when 

determining the appropriate award 

amount. 

• Relevant Amendment to Exchange 

Act Rule 21F–3. The 2020 Amendments 

added new subparagraph (c) to Rule 

21F–3 to govern situations where a 

whistleblower has filed a claim for an 

award in connection with a potential 

related action but that action is 

potentially also covered by a second, 

separate award program (such as, for 

example, the federal whistleblower 

award program that the Internal 

Revenue Service administers, see 26 

U.S.C. 7623). New paragraph (c) 

authorizes the Commission to 

determine, based on the facts and 

circumstances of the claims and 

misconduct at issue in the potential 

related action (among other factors), 

whether the Commission’s 

whistleblower program or the other 

whistleblower program has the more 

‘‘direct or relevant connection to the 

[related] action.’’ And responsibility for 

making an award in connection with the 

potential related action will then rest 

with whichever award program is 

determined to have the more direct or 

relevant connection to the action. 

• Relevant Amendment to Exchange 

Act Rule 21F–6. The 2020 Amendments 

added language to permit the 

Commission to consider, in its 

discretion, the dollar amount of a 

potential award when making an award 

determination. Before this amendment, 

the text of the rule (with one limited 

exception) did not expressly afford the 

Commission authority to consider the 

potential dollar amount of an award 

when determining awards; rather, the 

text of the rule generally referred to 

setting awards as a percentage of the 

monetary sanctions recovered. 

II. Procedures Available During the 

Interim Policy-Review Period 

On August 2, 2021, Chair Gensler 

issued a public statement advising that 

he has directed the staff to prepare for 

the Commission’s consideration later 

this year potential changes to Rules 

21F–3(b)(3) and Rule 21F–6 to address 

policy concerns raised by whistleblower 

advocates and others about possible 

adverse effects of the 2020 

Amendments.2

While the staff is preparing and the 

Commission is considering potential 

additional rulemaking, the procedures 

discussed below are available to 

whistleblowers with claims pending 

during the Interim Policy-Review Period 

so that they are not disadvantaged under 

the components of Rule 21F–3(b)(3) and 

Rule 21F–6 that may be revised. These 

interim procedures are consistent with 

the SEC’s overarching goal of protecting 

investors and the United States capital 

markets by encouraging whistleblowers 

to come forward to report violations of 

the federal securities laws and then 

rewarding them when their information 

leads to successful enforcement actions. 

A. Exchange Act Rule 21F–3(b)(3) 

For any claim that may be subject to 

Rule 21F–3(b)(3) during the Interim 

Policy-Review Period, the Commission 

directs as follows: 

1. Before providing a preliminary 

determination to a claimant, or a 

proposed recommendation to the 

Commission, the staff shall consider 

whether to recommend that the 

Commission’s exemptive authority 

under Section 36(a) of the Exchange 

Act 3 should be utilized to permit an 

award on a potential related action 

irrespective of the limitations of Rule 

21F–3(b)(3) if: 

(a) The alternative whistleblower 

program has an award cap or award 

range that could disadvantage the 

particular claimant; 4 or 

(b) the Commission is aware or the 

claimant demonstrates a likelihood that 

a condition or exclusion would apply to 

his or her award claim under the 

alternative award program and the staff 

determines that the claimant would 

likely obtain an award were he or she 

permitted to proceed under the SEC’s 

award program. 

2. For any other award claim under 

Rule 21F–3(b)(3) for which the staff 

determines that an alternative 

whistleblower program has a ‘‘more 

direct or relevant connection’’ to the 

potential related action than the 

Commission’s award program does, the 

staff will inform the claimant of its 

assessment. The claimant may then 

request that the related-action award 

claim held in abeyance during the 

Interim Policy-Review Period.5 Further, 

any related-action award claim that is 

held in abeyance shall not impact the 


jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with RULES
44606 Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 154 / Friday, August 13, 2021 / Rules and Regulations 

6The extent to which the amendment was a 

clarification was a point of disagreement at the time 

that the Commission adopted the amended rules in 

2020. 

7 5 U.S.C. 553(b)(A). 

8 5 U.S.C. 601–612. 

9 5 U.S.C. 553(d)(3). 

timely processing of any award claim 

arising from a covered Commission 

enforcement action that is successfully 

litigated using the claimant’s same 

original information. 

B. Exchange Act Rule 21F–6 

With respect to Rule 21F–6, the 

Commission at the time it adopted the 

2020 rulemaking amendments 

explained that the amendment in 

question was a clarification of 

discretionary authority the Commission 

already possessed.6 The Commission 

anticipates that, going forward, it will 

continue its practice of considering 

dollar amounts only in connection with 

provisions of the rules that explicitly 

contemplate the use of such discretion 

to raise awards (i.e., law enforcement 

interest prong of 21F–6(a)(3) and the 

application of the presumption 

embodied in Rule 21F–6(c)). In the 

unlikely event that the staff or the 

Commission should consider deviating 

from this practice, the staff will inform 

the claimant that such action is being 

considered. The claimant may then 

request that the matter be held in 

abeyance during the Interim PolicyReview Period. 

III. Other Matters 

Publication for notice and comment is 

not required under the Administrative 

Procedure Act (‘‘APA’’) pursuant to the 

exemption for agency rules of 

organization, procedure, or practice.7 It 

follows that the requirements of the 

Regulatory Flexibility Act do not 

apply.8 The effective date is August 13, 

2021. In accordance with the APA,9 we 

find that there is good cause to establish 

an effective date less than 30 days after 

publication. The Commission believes 

that establishing an effective date less 

than 30 days after publication of this 

document is necessary to clarify how 

the SEC will proceed when addressing 

certain issues under Exchange Act Rule 

21F–3(b)(3) and Exchange Act Rule 

21F–6 while the staff is preparing and 

the Commission is considering potential 

amendments to those rules. 

The Commission has determined that 

the foregoing relates only to agency 

procedures and does not substantially 

affect the rights or obligations of nonagency parties. The foregoing is 

therefore not a ‘‘rule’’ under the 

Congressional Review Act, 5 U.S.C. 

804(3)(C). 

Finally, the Commission has adopted 

the foregoing under the authority set 

forth in Sections 3(b), 21F, and 23(a) of 

the Exchange Act. 

By the Commission. 

Dated: August 5, 2021. 

Vanessa A. Countryman, 

Secretary. 

[FR Doc. 2021–17019 Filed 8–12–21; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 8011–01–P 

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND 

SECURITY 

Coast Guard 

33 CFR Part 100 

[Docket Number USCG–2021–0598] 

RIN 1625–AA08 

Special Local Regulation; Cumberland 

River, Ashland City, TN 

AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS. 

ACTION: Temporary final rule. 

SUMMARY: The Coast Guard is 

establishing a temporary special local 

regulation for navigable waters on the 

Cumberland River. The special local 

regulation is needed to protect 

personnel, vessels, and the marine 

environment from potential hazards 

created by the Riverbluff Triathlon 

marine event. Entry of vessels or 

persons into this zone is prohibited 

unless specifically authorized by the 

Captain of the Port Sector Ohio Valley. 

DATES: This rule is effective on August 

29, 2021 from 6 a.m. to 10 a.m. 

ADDRESSES: To view documents 

mentioned in this preamble as being 

available in the docket, go to https://

www.regulations.gov, type USCG–2021– 

0598 in the search box and click 

‘‘Search.’’ Next, in the Document Type 

column, select ‘‘Supporting & Related 

Material.’’ 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: If 

you have questions on this rule, call or 

email Petty Officer Third Class 

Benjamin Gardner, Marine Safety 

Detachment Nashville, U.S. Coast 

Guard; telephone 615–736–5421, email 

Benjamin.t.gardner@uscg.mil. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

I. Table of Abbreviations 

CFR Code of Federal Regulations 

DHS Department of Homeland Security 

FR Federal Register 

MM Mile Marker 

NPRM Notice of proposed rulemaking 

§ 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 

notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) 

with respect to this rule because it is 

impracticable. We must establish this 

regulation by August 29, 2021 and lack 

sufficient time to provide a reasonable 

comment period and then consider 

those comments before issuing this rule. 

Under 5 U.S.C. 553(d)(3), the Coast 

Guard finds that good cause exists for 

making this rule effective less than 30 

days after publication in the Federal 

Register. Delaying the effective date of 

this rule would be contrary to public 

interest because immediate action is 

needed to ensure the safety of the 

participants and vessels during the 

Riverbluff Triathlon. It is impracticable 

to publish an NPRM because we must 

establish this special local regulation by 

August 29, 2021. 

III. Legal Authority and Need for Rule 

The Coast Guard is issuing this rule 

under authority in 46 U.S.C. 70034 

(previously 33 U.S.C. 1231). The 

Captain of the Port Sector Ohio Valley 

(COTP) has determined that potential 

hazards associated with Riverbluff 

Triathlon on August 29, 2021, will be a 

safety concern from MM 157.0 to MM 

159.0 of the Cumberland River for 4 

hours. This rule is needed to protect 

personnel, vessels, and the marine 

environment in the navigable waters 

within the special local regulation while 

the event is taking place. 

IV. Discussion of the Rule 

This rule establishes a special local 

regulation from MM 157.0 to MM 159.0 

on the Cumberland River. The safety 

zone will be in effect on August 29, 

2021 from 6 a.m. to 10 a.m.. The 

duration of the zone is intended to 

protect participants, and the marine 

environment in these navigable waters 

while the Riverbluff Triathlon is taking 

place. No vessel or person will be 

permitted to enter the regulated area 

without obtaining permission from the 

COTP or a designated representative. 


jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with RULES