[Federal Register Volume 84, Number 242 (Tuesday, December 17, 2019)]
[Notices]
[Pages 68985-68989]
[FR Doc No: 2019-27081]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-87717; File No. SR-OCC-2019-009]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; the Options Clearing Corporation;
Order Approving Proposed Rule Change Related to Proposed Changes to the
Options Clearing Corporation's Rules, Clearing Fund Methodology Policy,
and Clearing Fund and Stress Testing Methodology

December 11, 2019.

I. Introduction

    On October 10, 2019, the Options Clearing Corporation (``OCC'')
filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (``Commission'') the
proposed rule change SR-OCC-2019-009 (``Proposed Rule Change'')
pursuant to Section 19(b) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934
(``Exchange Act'') \1\ and Rule 19b-4 \2\ thereunder to make changes to
OCC's Clearing Fund and stress testing rules and methodology.\3\ The
Proposed Rule Change was published for public comment in the Federal
Register on October 29, 2019.\4\ The Commission has received no
comments regarding the Proposed Rule Change.\5\ This order approves the
Proposed Rule Change.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1).
    \2\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4.
    \3\ See Notice of Filing infra note 4, at 84 FR 57911.
    \4\ Securities Exchange Act Release No. 87386 (Oct. 23, 2019),
84 FR 57911 (Oct. 29, 2019) (SR-OCC-2019-009) (``Notice of
Filing''). OCC also filed a related advance notice (SR-OCC-2019-806)
(``Advance Notice'') with the Commission pursuant to Section
806(e)(1) of Title VIII of the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and
Consumer Protection Act, entitled the Payment, Clearing, and
Settlement Supervision Act of 2010 and Rule 19b-4(n)(1)(i) under the
Exchange Act. 12 U.S.C. 5465(e)(1). 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1) and 17 CFR
240.19b-4, respectively. The Advance Notice was published in the
Federal Register on November 12, 2019. Securities Exchange Act
Release No. 87475 (Nov. 6, 2019), 84 FR 61120 (Nov. 12, 2019) (SR-
OCC-2019-806).
    \5\ Since the proposal contained in the Proposed Rule Change was
also filed as an advance notice, all public comments received on the
proposal are considered regardless of whether the comments are
submitted on the Proposed Rule Change or Advance Notice.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

II. Background 6
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ Capitalized terms used but not defined herein have the
meanings specified in OCC's Rules and By-Laws, available at https://www.theocc.com/about/publications/bylaws.jsp.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    As noted above, OCC proposes to revise its Clearing Fund and stress
testing rules and methodology. Specifically, OCC proposes to: (1)
Incorporate a new set of stress test scenarios to be used in the
monthly sizing of OCC's Clearing Fund that are designed to capture the
risks of extreme moves in individual or small subsets of securities;
(2) revise OCC's stress testing methodology for modeling certain
volatility index futures; (3) modify OCC's methodology for allocating
Clearing Fund contribution requirements to standardize the margin risk
component of the allocation formula for all Clearing Members; and (4)
adopt an additional threshold for notifying senior management of intra-
day margin calls based on certain stress test results. OCC also
proposes to correct certain rules concerning OCC's cooling-off period
and replenishment/assessment powers.\7\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ Additionally, OCC proposes clarifying and conforming changes
to its Rules, Clearing Fund Methodology Policy (``Policy''), and
Stress Testing and Clearing Fund Methodology Description
(``Methodology Description'').
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

A. Sizing Stress Test Scenarios

    On a monthly basis, OCC establishes the size of its Clearing Fund
at the level it believes is necessary to maintain sufficient financial
resources to cover losses arising from the default of the two Clearing
Member Groups that would

potentially cause the largest aggregate credit exposure to OCC under
certain stress scenarios.\8\ OCC determines the size of its Clearing
Fund each month through an approach based on broad-based market and
systemic shocks (``Systemic Scenarios'').\9\ OCC proposes to
incorporate an additional set of stress test scenarios to be used in
the monthly sizing of OCC's Clearing Fund that are designed to capture
the risks of extreme moves in individual or small subsets of securities
(``Idiosyncratic Scenarios''). The Idiosyncratic Scenarios would be in
addition to the existing Systemic Scenarios. Because OCC's monthly
Clearing Fund sizing process is designed to cover OCC's largest
aggregate stress test exposures, the expansion of the set of Clearing
Fund sizing stress tests could not result in a smaller Clearing Fund
than would be the case without such an expansion.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \8\ See Notice of Filing, 84 FR at 57912.
    \9\ See Notice of Filing, 84 FR at 57913. See also, Securities
Exchange Act Release No. 83735 (Jul. 27, 2018), 83 FR 37855, 37857
(Aug. 2, 2019) (SR-OCC-2018-008) (describing OCC's Clearing Fund
sizing stress test scenarios as an approach based on hypothetical
stress scenarios that assume shocks to the Cboe S&P 500 Index
(``SPX'') associated with a 1-in-80-year market event).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In constructing the Idiosyncratic Scenarios, OCC would shock each
single-name equity (i.e., excluding exchange-traded funds, exchange-
traded notes, indices, and non-equity products). OCC would evaluate the
effects of such shocks on every Clearing Member Group's portfolios.
Within each Clearing Member Group's portfolio, OCC would identify the
four single-name equities for which such shocks would result in the
largest losses. OCC would then identify the two Clearing Member Groups
with the largest aggregate losses. The combined losses of the two
identified Clearing Member Groups would represent the loss that OCC
would seek to cover in its monthly Clearing Fund sizing process. OCC
believes that implementing the proposed Idiosyncratic Scenarios would
enhance OCC's stress testing methodology and overall resiliency by
providing a more comprehensive suite of sizing stress tests to ensure
that OCC maintains an appropriate level of financial resources to cover
its credit exposures under scenarios addressing both systemic market
risks and idiosyncratic risks.\10\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \10\ See Notice of Filing, 84 FR at 57913.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

B. Volatility Index Futures

    Under OCC's current stress testing methodology, prices shocks for
futures based on the Cboe Volatility Index (``VIX'') \11\ are
equivalent to a price shock for the underlying. Because the VIX has no
term structure, this process produces a uniform shock across
expirations of the VIX futures contracts. Futures contracts for
different expirations, however, generally trade at different prices
reflecting the differing future price expectations of the underlying
asset.\12\ OCC believes that applying a uniform shock across
expirations is unrealistic, and that it would lead to an overestimation
of VIX futures price shocks, particularly in market decline
scenarios.\13\ As noted above, OCC proposes to revise its stress
testing methodology for modeling certain volatility index futures.
Specifically, the proposed change would produce differing price shocks
for VIX futures across the term structure. The proposed methodology
would be based on SPX volatility shocks across different expirations,
as opposed to the current methodology's reliance on a single shock to
the VIX. OCC believes that implementation of the proposed methodology
would improve pricing for VIX futures as well as VIX options.\14\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \11\ The VIX is an index designed to measure the 30-day expected
volatility of the SPX.
    \12\ When there is a large shock to the VIX it has consistently
been observed that the change in price of near-term VIX future
contracts is much larger than for further out expirations. See
Notice of Filing, 84 FR at 57913, n. 11.
    \13\ See Notice of Filing, 84 FR at 57913.
    \14\ See Notice of Filing, 84 FR at 57914. OCC uses VIX futures
to calculate theoretical values for VIX options.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

C. Clearing Fund Allocation

    OCC allocates Clearing Fund contribution requirements to individual
Clearing Members, in part, based on each Clearing Member's
proportionate share of risk margin, which OCC refers to as ``total
risk.'' \15\ The majority of Clearing Member margin requirements are
based on OCC's System for Theoretical Analysis and Numerical
Simulations (``STANS''), which is OCC's proprietary risk management
system. The margin requirement for certain Clearing Members' accounts,
however, is calculated using the Standard Portfolio Analysis of Risk
Margin Calculation System (``SPAN''), which reflects customer gross
margining.\16\ OCC proposes to define ``total risk'' as based on the
same margin model for all Clearing Members.\17\ OCC believes it is more
appropriate to use the same margin risk measurement for all Clearing
Members when allocating Clearing Fund contribution requirements to
allow for a more equitable comparison across all accounts.\18\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \15\ Currently, OCC uses the following weighting in its
allocation of clearing fund requirements: 70 percent total risk, 15
percent open interest, and 15 percent volume. See Securities
Exchange Act Release No. 83735 (Jul. 27, 2018), 83 FR 37855, 37863
(Aug. 2, 2019) (SR-OCC-2018-008).
    \16\ See Notice of Filing, 84 FR at 57914, n. 16 (stating that
``OCC calculates margin requirements for segregated futures accounts
using both SPAN on a gross basis and STANS on a net basis, and if at
any time OCC staff observes a segregated futures account where
initial margin calculated pursuant to STANS on a net basis exceeds
the initial margin calculated pursuant to SPAN on a gross basis, OCC
collateralizes this risk exposure by applying an additional margin
charge in the amount of such difference to the account'' (citation
omitted)).
    \17\ Specifically, OCC proposes to use STANS plus certain add-on
charges as the basis for determining each Clearing Member's
proportionate share of total risk.
    \18\ See Notice of Filing, 84 FR at 57914.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

D. Margin Call Notification

    On a daily basis, OCC evaluates the sufficiency of its financial
resources based on OCC's potential exposure to Clearing Member Groups
under certain stress test scenarios (``Sufficiency Stress Tests'').
Based on the results of the Sufficiency Stress Tests, OCC may call for
additional collateral to ensure that it maintains sufficient financial
resources to guard against potential losses. For example, OCC is
authorized to make an intra-day margin call against a Clearing Member
Group whose Sufficiency Stress Test exposures breach a pre-determined
threshold. Currently, OCC's rules require that written notification of
such intra-day margin calls in excess of $500 million be provided to
OCC's Executive Chairman, Chief Executive Officer, and Chief Operating
Officer (``Office of the CEO''). OCC proposes to revise its rules to
require that written notification of stress test-related intra-day
margin calls also be sent to the Office of the CEO when a stress test-
related intra-day margin call would exceed 75 percent of the Clearing
Member's excess net capital. OCC believes that this additional
notification requirement is appropriate because it would allow OCC's
senior management to be informed as soon as practicable of, and to
subsequently monitor, circumstances where a margin call may strain a
particular Clearing Member's ability to meet such requirements based on
its financial condition or the amount of collateral it has available to
pledge when certain pre-identified thresholds have been exceeded.\19\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \19\ See Notice of Filing, 84 FR at 57914.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

E. Cooling-Off Period

    In 2018, OCC implemented a set of recovery tools, including
revisions to OCC's authority to assess its Clearing Members for funds
to replenish OCC's

Clearing Fund.\20\ For example, OCC implemented a ``cooling-off
period'' during which its authority to levy such assessments is capped,
which provides certainty to Clearing Members regarding their potential
obligations to OCC. In proposing such revisions, OCC intended that the
cooling-off period would be triggered by any proportionate Clearing
Fund charges to Clearing Members related to the default of a Clearing
Member.\21\ OCC's current rules, however, do not provide for a cooling-
off period based on proportionate Clearing Fund charges arising out of
two specific sets of circumstances: (1) In connection with protective
transactions effected for the account of OCC pursuant to Chapter XI of
OCC's Rules and (2) as a result of a failure of any Clearing Member to
make any other required payment or render any other required
performance (as provided in clauses (v) and (vi) of OCC Rule 1006(a)).
OCC proposes to revise its rules such that any proportionate Clearing
Fund charges to Clearing Members related to the default of a Clearing
Member, including the two listed above, would trigger a cooling-off
period.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \20\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 83916 (Aug. 23,
2018), 83 FR 44076 (Aug. 29, 2018) (SR-OCC-2017-020).
    \21\ See Notice of Filing, 84 FR at 57915. Such triggers include
the assessments arising out of a Clearing Member's failure to meet
its obligations regarding confirmed trades, exercised or assigned
contracts, stock loan transactions, or the liquidation of a Clearing
Member's open positions. See id. at n. 22.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

III. Discussion and Commission Findings

    Section 19(b)(2)(C) of the Exchange Act directs the Commission to
approve a proposed rule change of a self-regulatory organization if it
finds that such proposed rule change is consistent with the
requirements of the Exchange Act and the rules and regulations
thereunder applicable to such organization.\22\ After carefully
considering the Proposed Rule Change, the Commission finds that the
proposal is consistent with the requirements of the Exchange Act and
the rules and regulations thereunder applicable to OCC. More
specifically, the Commission finds that the proposal is consistent with
Section 17A(b)(3)(F) of the Exchange Act \23\ and Rules 17Ad-22(e)(2)
and (4) thereunder.\24\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \22\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(2)(C).
    \23\ 15 U.S.C. 78q-1(b)(3)(F).
    \24\ 17 CFR 240.17Ad-22(e)(2) and 17 CFR 240.17Ad-22(e)(4).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

A. Consistency With Section 17A(b)(3)(F) of the Exchange Act

    Section 17A(b)(3)(F) of the Exchange Act requires, among other
things, that the rules of a clearing agency be designed to (i) promote
the prompt and accurate clearance and settlement of securities
transactions, and to the extent applicable, derivatives agreements,
contracts, and transactions; (ii) assure the safeguarding of securities
and funds which are in the custody or control of the clearing agency or
for which it is responsible; and (iii), in general, protect investors
and promote the public interest.\25\ Based on its review of the record,
the Commission believes that the proposed changes are designed to
promote prompt and accurate clearance and settlement, assure the
safeguarding of securities and funds which are in OCC's custody or
control or for which OCC is responsible, and, in general, protect
investors and promote the public interest for the reasons set forth
below.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \25\ 15 U.S.C. 78q-1(b)(3)(F).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Commission believes that the proposed changes to OCC's stress
testing methodology are designed to promote the prompt and accurate
clearance and settlement of securities transactions. As an initial
matter, OCC is the only clearing agency for standardized U.S.
securities options listed on Commission-registered national securities
exchanges (``listed options'').\26\ OCC provides central counterparty
services for the listed-options markets.\27\ OCC's role as the sole CCP
for all listed options contracts in the U.S. makes it an integral part
of the national system for clearance and settlement.\28\ As described
above, OCC proposes to expand the suite of stress tests it uses to size
the Clearing Fund each month, and to revise OCC's estimation of VIX
futures prices for stress testing. The introduction of the
Idiosyncratic Scenarios to the monthly sizing of OCC's Clearing Fund
would be in addition to the Systemic Scenarios OCC already uses to size
its Clearing Fund and would help OCC address risks not currently
contemplated by OCC's Systemic Scenarios, which in turn should enhance
OCC's ability to accurately and appropriately size its Clearing Fund.
Additionally, OCC proposes to revise its process for shocking VIX
futures prices to reflect the actual term structure dynamics of such
futures. OCC's current use of a uniform shock for VIX futures
contracts, regardless of tenure, is not consistent with OCC's
observation that futures contracts with different expirations generally
trade at different prices reflecting the differing future price
expectations of the underlying asset. By enhancing its methodology for
modeling price shocks for VIX futures, OCC should be able to produce
more appropriate VIX futures price shocks in its stress scenarios,
which in turn also should enhance OCC's ability to accurately and
appropriately size its Clearing Fund. OCC relies on the resources in
its Clearing Fund to manage the potential losses arising out of the
default of a Clearing Member under extreme but plausible market
conditions. Strengthening the methodology that OCC uses to manage its
financial resources by enhancing its ability to accurately and
appropriately size the Clearing Fund, therefore, would enhance OCC's
ability to manage Clearing Member defaults, which, in turn, facilitates
the continued clearance and settlement of listed options. The
Commission believes, therefore, that the proposed changes to OCC's
stress testing methodology, taken together, are consistent with the
promotion of prompt and accurate clearance and settlement of
derivatives contracts.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \26\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 85121 (Feb. 13,
2019), 84 FR 5157 (Feb. 20, 2019) (File No. SR-OCC-2015-02).
    \27\ See id., 84 FR at 5158.
    \28\ See id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Commission believes that the proposed changes regarding notice
of intra-day margin requirements and allocation of Clearing Fund
requirements are consistent with assuring the safeguarding of
securities and funds. Currently, OCC notifies its Office of the CEO
when intra-day margin calls generated in response to OCC's daily stress
tests are large in absolute terms (i.e., in excess of $500 million).
OCC proposes to also notify its Office of the CEO when such margin
calls are large relative to the Clearing Member against which they are
made (i.e., in excess of 75 percent of the Clearing Member's excess net
capital). The Commission believes that such notification would provide
OCC's senior management with additional risk management information,
which in turn could be used to inform critical decisions related to
margin or other protective measures that could help OCC avoid drawing
on resources from surviving Clearing Members to manage a Clearing
Member default. In the Commission's view, such measures would be
consistent with assuring the safeguarding of securities and funds which
are in OCC's custody or control or for which OCC is responsible.
    Additionally, OCC proposes to revise its method of allocating
Clearing Fund contribution requirements across

Clearing Members. OCC proposes to redefine the ``total risk'' component
of its Clearing Fund allocation formula such that it would rely on the
same underlying model for all Clearing Members when calculating total
risk (as opposed to using different models for different Clearing
Members depending on their cleared positions). The proposed change
would not alter the allocation weighting, but, in the Commission's
view, it would provide a more consistent metric by which to assess
risks across Clearing Members and determine how much risk each Clearing
Member should bear in terms of Clearing Fund requirements.\29\ The
Commission believes that these changes as well are consistent with
assuring the safeguarding of securities and funds which are in OCC's
custody or control or for which OCC is responsible.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \29\ While the proposed change would not affect the total size
of the Clearing Fund, it would result in changes to Clearing
Members' proportionate share of the Clearing Fund.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Finally, the Commission believes that the proposed expansion of
triggers for the cooling-off period is designed, in general, to protect
investors and promote the public interest. The Commission continues to
believe that the cooling-off period provides certainty and
predictability regarding Clearing Members' maximum liability for
Clearing Fund contributions.\30\ Currently, however, the cooling-off
period would be triggered by some, but not all proportionate Clearing
Fund charges to Clearing Members arising out of a Clearing Member's
failure to meet certain obligations under OCC's rules. OCC proposes to
expand the set of events that would trigger the cooling-off period to
include certain protective transactions and the failure of a Clearing
Member to meets its obligations under certain of OCC's rules. The two
events to be added as cooling-off period triggers are similar to the
current triggers in that they pertain to proportionate Clearing Fund
charges designed to manage the failure of a Clearing Member to meet its
obligations to OCC. The Commission believes that including these two
additional events as cooling-off period triggers would provide Clearing
Members with additional certainty and predictability regarding their
potential maximum liability for Clearing Fund contributions, which in
turn is consistent with the protection investors and promotion of the
public interest.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \30\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 83916 (Aug. 23,
2018), 83 FR 44076, 44082 (Aug. 29, 2018) (SR-OCC-2017-020).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Commission believes, therefore, that the Proposed Rule Change
is consistent with the requirements of Section 17A(b)(3)(F) of the
Exchange Act.\31\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \31\ 15 U.S.C. 78q-1(b)(3)(F).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

B. Consistency With Rule 17Ad-22(e)(2) Under the Exchange Act

    Rule 17Ad-22(e)(2)(v) under the Exchange Act requires that a
covered clearing agency establish, implement, maintain, and enforce
written policies and procedures reasonably designed to provide for
governance arrangements that, among other things, specify clear and
direct lines of responsibility.\32\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \32\ 17 CFR 240.17Ad-22(e)(2)(v).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    As described above, OCC proposes to add a new internal reporting
requirement regarding certain intra-day margin calls. OCC may call for
additional margin from Clearing Members based on the results of its
Sufficiency Stress Tests. In addition to notifying its Office of the
CEO when such margin calls are large in absolute terms (i.e., in excess
of $500 million), OCC now proposes to also notify to its Office of the
CEO when such margin calls are large relative to the Clearing Member
against which they are made (i.e., in excess of 75 percent of the
Clearing Member's excess net capital). The Commission believes that
such notification would inform OCC's senior management, who could then
monitor circumstances as appropriate, when an intra-day margin call
could strain the resources of a particular Clearing Member based on its
financial condition. Accordingly, the Commission believes that the
adoption of such a notification requirement is consistent with Rule
17Ad-22(e)(2)(v) under the Exchange Act.\33\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \33\ 17 CFR 240.17Ad-22(e)(2)(v).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

C. Consistency With Rule 17Ad-22(e)(4) Under the Exchange Act

    Rule 17Ad-22(e)(4) under the Exchange Act requires, in part, that a
covered clearing agency establish, implement, maintain, and enforce
written policies and procedures reasonably designed to effectively
identify, measure, monitor, and manage its credit exposures to
participants and those arising from its payment, clearing, and
settlement processes.\34\ Based on its review of the record, the
Commission believes that the proposed rule change is consistent with
Rule 17Ad-22(e)(4) under the Exchange Act.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \34\ 17 CFR 240.17Ad-22(e)(4).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

1. Stress Testing
    Rules 17Ad-22(e)(4)(i) and (iii) under the Exchange Act require
that a covered clearing agency's policies and procedures meet the
requirements of Rule 17Ad-22(e)(4) by maintaining financial resources
at the minimum to enable OCC to cover a wide range of foreseeable
stress scenarios that include, but are not limited to, the default of
the participant family that would potentially cause the largest
aggregate credit exposure for OCC in extreme but plausible market
conditions.\35\ Further, Rule 17Ad-22(e)(4)(vi) under the Exchange Act
requires that a covered clearing agency's policies and procedures meet
the requirements of Rule 17Ad-22(e)(4) by testing the sufficiency of a
covered clearing agency's total financial resources available to meet
the minimum financial resource requirements under Rules 17Ad-
22(e)(4)(i) through (iii).\36\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \35\ 17 CFR 240.17Ad-22(e)(4)(i) and 17 CFR 240.17Ad-
22(e)(4)(iii).
    \36\ 17 CFR 240.17Ad-22(e)(4)(vi).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    As described above, OCC proposes to expand the set of stress tests
that it uses to size the Clearing Fund by adding the Idiosyncratic
Scenarios to its current suite of stress tests. The Idiosyncratic
Scenarios are designed to capture the risk of extreme moves in
individual securities or small subsets of securities, while the current
Systemic Scenarios are based on broad-based market and systemic shocks.
Consistent with the general view that expanding the types of scenarios
that a clearing agency uses in its monthly sizing process makes the
clearing agency's risk management robust to a broader range of shocks,
the Commission believes that OCC's proposal to add the Idiosyncratic
Scenarios to its suite of stress tests would be a strengthening
change--meaning it would enhance OCC's ability to accurately and
appropriately size its Clearing Fund--that is consistent with the
requirements of Rules 17Ad-22(e)(4)(i) and (iii) under the Exchange
Act.\37\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \37\ 17 CFR 240.17Ad-22(e)(4)(i) and 17 CFR 240.17Ad-
22(e)(4)(iii).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Additionally, OCC proposes to revise its stress testing methodology
to produce differing price shocks for VIX futures across the term
structure. The proposed methodology would be based on SPX volatility
shocks across different expirations, as opposed to the current
methodology's reliance on a single shock to the VIX. As discussed
above, these changes would help OCC produce VIX futures price shocks in
its stress scenarios that are consistent with OCC's observation that
futures contracts with different expirations generally trade at
different prices reflecting the differing future price expectations of
the underlying asset, which in turn should

enhance OCC's ability to accurately and appropriately size its Clearing
Fund, consistent with the requirements of Rule 17Ad-22(e)(4)(vi).
    Accordingly, the Commission believes that, taken together, OCC's
proposed changes to its stress testing methodology would be consistent
with the requirements of Rules 17Ad-22(e)(4)(i), (iii), and (vi).\38\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \38\ 17 CFR 240.17Ad-22(e)(4)(i); 17 CFR 240.17Ad-22(e)(4)(iii);
and 17 CFR 240.17Ad-22(e)(4)(vi).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

2. Clearing Fund Allocation
    As noted above, Rule 17Ad-22(e)(4) under the Exchange Act generally
requires that a covered clearing agency establish, implement, maintain,
and enforce written policies and procedures reasonably designed to
effectively identify, measure, monitor, and manage its credit exposures
to participants and those arising from its payment, clearing, and
settlement processes.\39\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \39\ 17 CFR 240.17Ad-22(e)(4).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    OCC relies on the Clearing Fund as a source of mutualized resources
available to manage losses arising out of a Clearing Member's default.
OCC's method for allocating contributions to the Clearing Fund among
Clearing Members is aligned primarily with the credit risk posed by
each Clearing Member.\40\ OCC proposes to redefine the margin risk
component of its Clearing Fund allocation formula such that it would
rely on the same underlying model--STANS--for all Clearing Members (as
opposed to relying on STANS for most Clearing Members and SPAN for
certain Clearing Members with segregated futures accounts). The
proposed change would not change the overall allocation weighting
(i.e., margin risk would still account for 70 percent of the Clearing
Fund allocation among Clearing Members), but the Commission believes it
would provide a more consistent metric by which to assess margin risk
across Clearing Members. Accordingly, the Commission believes that the
proposed change is reasonably designed to support the management of
OCC's credit exposures to its participants. The Commission believes,
therefore, that OCC's proposed change to its Clearing Fund allocation
methodology is consistent with the requirements of Rule 17Ad-
22(e)(4).\41\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \40\ Clearing Fund allocations are based on a weighting of 70
percent margin risk, what OCC refers to as the ``total risk''
component of its Clearing Fund allocation formula, with open
interest and cleared volume weighted at 15 percent each.
    \41\ 17 CFR 240.17Ad-22(e)(4).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

3. Cooling-Off Period
    Rule 17Ad-22(e)(4)(ix) under the Exchange Act requires, in part,
that a covered clearing agency establish, implement, maintain, and
enforce written policies and procedures reasonably designed to describe
its process to replenish any financial resources it may use following a
default or other event in which use of resources is contemplated.\42\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \42\ 17 CFR 240.17Ad-22(e)(4)(ix).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    As noted above, OCC's current recovery tools include a cooling-off
period, during which OCC's authority to assess Clearing Members for
funds to replenish OCC's Clearing Fund is limited. Recognizing the
limit that such a cooling-off period places on the financial resources
available to OCC, the Commission continues to believe that the cooling-
off period provides certainty and predictability regarding Clearing
Members' maximum liability for Clearing Fund contributions.\43\ OCC
proposes to expand the set of events that would start the cooling-off
period to include proportionate Clearing Fund charges to Clearing
Members triggered by certain protective transactions or the failure of
a Clearing Member to meet certain obligations under OCC's rules,
consistent with OCC's original intention with its prior filing. The two
events to be added as triggers for the cooling-off period are similar
to the current triggers in that they pertain to amounts paid out of the
Clearing Fund to manage the failure of a Clearing Member to meet its
obligations to OCC. Consistent with the Commission's statements
regarding the current formulation of the cooling-off period, the
Commission believes that the proposed expansion is consistent with
OCC's obligations to describe its process to replenish any financial
resources it may use following a default or other event in which use of
resources is contemplated as required under Rule 17Ad-22(e)(4)(ix).\44\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \43\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 83916 (Aug. 23,
2018), 83 FR 44076, 44082 (Aug. 29, 2018) (SR-OCC-2017-020).
    \44\ 17 CFR 240.17Ad-22(e)(4)(ix).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Accordingly, and for the reasons stated above, the Commission
believes the changes proposed in the Proposed Rule Change are
consistent with Rule 17Ad-22(e)(4) under the Exchange Act.\45\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \45\ 17 CFR 240.17Ad-22(e)(4).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

IV. Conclusion

    On the basis of the foregoing, the Commission finds that the
Proposed Rule Change is consistent with the requirements of the
Exchange Act, and in particular, the requirements of Section 17A of the
Exchange Act \46\ and the rules and regulations thereunder.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \46\ In approving this Proposed Rule Change, the Commission has
considered the proposed rules' impact on efficiency, competition,
and capital formation. See 15 U.S.C. 78c(f).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    It is therefore ordered, pursuant to Section 19(b)(2) of the
Exchange Act,\47\ that the Proposed Rule Change (SR-OCC-2019-009) be,
and hereby is, approved.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \47\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(2).
    \48\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12).

    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets,
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
pursuant to delegated authority.\48\

J. Matthew DeLesDernier,
Assistant Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2019-27081 Filed 12-16-19; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


[Federal Register: September 17, 2008 (Volume 73, Number 181)]
[Notices]
[Page 53888-53889]
[DOCID:fr17se08-107]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Federal Emergency Management Agency

[FEMA-3291-EM]

Mississippi; Emergency and Related Determinations

AGENCY: Federal Emergency Management Agency, DHS.

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: This is a notice of the Presidential declaration of an
emergency for the State of Mississippi (FEMA-3291-EM), dated August 30,
2008, and related determinations.

DATES: Effective Date: August 30, 2008.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Peggy Miller, Disaster Assistance
Directorate, Federal Emergency Management Agency, 500 C Street, SW.,
Washington, DC 20472,<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Notice is hereby given that, in a letter
dated

August 30, 2008, the President declared an emergency declaration under
the authority of the Robert T. Stafford Disaster Relief and Emergency
Assistance Act, 42 U.S.C. 5121-5207 (the Stafford Act), as follows:

    I have determined that the emergency conditions in the State of
Mississippi resulting from Hurricane Gustav beginning on August 28,
2008, and continuing, are of sufficient severity and magnitude to
warrant an emergency declaration under the Robert T. Stafford
Disaster Relief and Emergency Assistance Act, 42 U.S.C. 5121-5206
(the Stafford Act). Therefore, I declare that such an emergency
exists in the State of Mississippi.
    You are authorized to provide appropriate assistance for
required emergency measures, authorized under Title V of the
Stafford Act, to save lives, protect property and public health and
safety, or to lessen or avert the threat of a catastrophe in the
designated areas. Specifically, you are authorized to provide
assistance for emergency protective measures (Category B), including
direct Federal assistance, under the Public Assistance program. This
assistance excludes regular time costs for subgrantees' regular
employees. In addition, you are authorized to provide such other
forms of assistance under Title V of the Stafford Act as you may
deem appropriate.
    Consistent with the requirement that Federal assistance be
supplemental, any Federal funds provided under the Stafford Act for
Public Assistance will be limited to 75 percent of the total
eligible costs. In order to provide Federal assistance, you are
hereby authorized to allocate from funds available for these
purposes such amounts as you find necessary for Federal emergency
assistance and administrative expenses.
    Further, you are authorized to make changes to this declaration
to the extent allowable under the Stafford Act.

    The Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) hereby gives notice
that pursuant to the authority vested in the Administrator, Department
of Homeland Security, under Executive Order 12148, as amended, Michael
L. Parker, of FEMA is appointed to act as the Federal Coordinating
Officer for this declared emergency.
    The following areas of the State of Mississippi have been
designated as adversely affected by this declared emergency:

    All 82 counties in the State of Mississippi for emergency
protective measures (Category B), including direct Federal
assistance, under the Public Assistance program.

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

R. David Paulison,
Administrator, Federal Emergency Management Agency.
[FR Doc. E8-21671 Filed 9-16-08; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 9110-10-P


[Federal Register Volume 78, Number 104 (Thursday, May 30, 2013)]
[Notices]
[Pages 32415-32416]
[FR Doc No: 2013-12800]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Federal Emergency Management Agency

[Internal Agency Docket No. FEMA-4114-DR; Docket ID FEMA-2013-0001]

Iowa; Major Disaster and Related Determinations

AGENCY: Federal Emergency Management Agency, DHS.

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: This is a notice of the Presidential declaration of a major
disaster for the State of Iowa (FEMA-4114-DR), dated May 6, 2013, and
related determinations.

DATES: Effective Date: May 6, 2013.

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

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Notice is hereby given that, in a letter
dated May 6, 2013, the President issued a major disaster declaration
under the authority of the Robert T. Stafford Disaster Relief and
Emergency Assistance Act, 42 U.S.C. 5121 et seq. (the ``Stafford
Act''), as follows:

    I have determined that the damage in certain areas of the State
of Iowa resulting from a severe winter storm during the period of
April 9-11, 2013, is of sufficient severity and magnitude to warrant
a major disaster declaration under the Robert T. Stafford Disaster
Relief and Emergency Assistance Act, 42 U.S.C. 5121 et seq. (the
``Stafford Act''). Therefore, I declare that such a major disaster
exists in the State of Iowa.
    In order to provide Federal assistance, you are hereby
authorized to allocate from funds available for these purposes such
amounts as you find necessary for Federal disaster assistance and
administrative expenses.
    You are authorized to provide Public Assistance in the
designated areas and Hazard Mitigation throughout the State. Direct
Federal assistance is authorized. Consistent with the requirement
that Federal assistance is supplemental, any Federal funds provided
under the Stafford Act for Public Assistance and Hazard Mitigation
will be limited to 75 percent of the total eligible costs.
    Further, you are authorized to make changes to this declaration
for the approved assistance to the extent allowable under the
Stafford Act.

    The Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) hereby gives notice
that pursuant to the authority vested in the Administrator, under
Executive Order 12148, as amended, Joe M. Girot, of FEMA is appointed
to act as the Federal Coordinating Officer for this major disaster.
    The following areas of the State of Iowa have been designated as
adversely affected by this major disaster:

    Dickinson, Lyon, O'Brien, Osceola, and Sioux Counties for Public
Assistance. Direct federal assistance is authorized.
    All counties within the State of Iowa are eligible to apply for
assistance under the Hazard Mitigation Grant Program.

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

(Presidentially Declared Disasters); 97.039, Hazard Mitigation
Grant.

W. Craig Fugate,
Administrator, Federal Emergency Management Agency.
[FR Doc. 2013-12800 Filed 5-29-13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 9111-23-P


[Federal Register Volume 82, Number 221 (Friday, November 17, 2017)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 54304-54306]
[FR Doc No: 2017-24814]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. FAA-2017-1025; Product Identifier 2017-NM-137-AD]
RIN 2120-AA64

Airworthiness Directives; Bombardier, Inc., Airplanes

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM).

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

SUMMARY: We propose to adopt a new airworthiness directive (AD) for
certain Bombardier, Inc., Model CL-600-2C10 (Regional Jet Series 700,
701, & 702), CL-600-2D15 (Regional Jet Series 705), CL-600-2D24
(Regional Jet Series 900), and CL-600-2E25 (Regional Jet Series 1000)
airplanes. This proposed AD was prompted by several incidents of
electrical shorting and sparks caused by de-icing fluid leaks between
flight deck windshields and side windows. This proposed AD would
require water spray tests and general visual inspections for water in
the flight compartment, and water removal and sealant application if
necessary. We are proposing this AD to address the unsafe condition on
these products.

DATES: We must receive comments on this proposed AD by January 2, 2018.

ADDRESSES: You may send comments, using the procedures found in 14 CFR
11.43 and 11.45, by any of the following methods:
     Federal eRulemaking Portal: Go to http://www.regulations.gov. Follow the instructions for submitting comments.
     Fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>.
     Mail: U.S. Department of Transportation, Docket
Operations, M-30, West Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140, 1200 New
Jersey Avenue SE., Washington, DC 20590.
     Hand Delivery: Deliver to Mail address above between 9
a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays.
    For service information identified in this NPRM, contact
Bombardier, Inc., 400 C[ocirc]te Vertu Road West, Dorval, Qu[eacute]bec
H4S 1Y9, Canada; Widebody Customer Response Center North America toll-
free telephone 1-866-538-1247 or direct-dial telephone 1-514-855-2999;
fax<PHONE_NUMBER>; email [email protected]; Internet http://www.bombardier.com. You may view this service information at the FAA,
Transport Standards Branch, 1601 Lind Avenue SW., Renton, WA. For
information on the availability of this material at the FAA, call 425-
227-1221.

Examining the AD Docket

    You may examine the AD docket on the Internet at http://www.regulations.gov by searching for and locating Docket No. FAA-2017-
1025; or in person at the Docket Management Facility between 9 a.m. and
5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays. The AD docket
contains this NPRM, the regulatory evaluation, any comments received,
and other information. The street address for the Docket Operations
office (telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>) is in the ADDRESSES section. Comments
will be available in the AD docket shortly after receipt.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Steven Dzierzynski, Aerospace
Engineer, Avionics and Administrative Services Section, FAA, New York
ACO Branch, 1600 Stewart Avenue, Suite 410, Westbury, NY 11590;
telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Comments Invited

    We invite you to send any written relevant data, views, or
arguments about this proposed AD. Send your comments to an address
listed under the ADDRESSES section. Include ``Docket No. FAA-2017-1025;
Product Identifier 2017-NM-137-AD'' at the beginning of your comments.
We specifically invite comments on the overall regulatory, economic,
environmental, and energy aspects of this NPRM. We will consider all
comments received by the closing date and may amend this NPRM based on
those comments.
    We will post all comments we receive, without change, to http://www.regulations.gov, including any personal information you provide. We
will also post a report summarizing each substantive verbal contact we
receive about this NPRM.

Discussion

    Transport Canada Civil Aviation (TCCA), which is the aviation
authority for Canada, has issued Canadian Airworthiness Directive CF-
2017-28, dated August 23, 2017 (referred to after this as the Mandatory
Continuing Airworthiness Information, or ``the MCAI''), to correct an
unsafe condition for certain Bombardier, Inc., Model CL-600-2C10
(Regional Jet Series 700, 701, & 702), CL-600-2D15 (Regional Jet Series
705), CL-600-2D24 (Regional Jet Series 900), and CL-600-2E25 (Regional
Jet Series 1000) airplanes. The MCAI states:

    Several incidents of electrical shorting and sparks have been
reported in the cockpit of CL-600-2C10 and CL-600-2D24 aeroplanes.
De-icing fluid can leak between the windshields and side windows,
leading to possible damage to the cockpit floodlight wires and
electrical connections. If not corrected, this condition may result
in a flight compartment fire.
    This [Canadian] AD is issued to mandate a water spray test and
[general visual] inspection for evidence of fluid ingress into the
flight compartment. It also provides mandatory instructions for
sealant application if required.

    You may examine the MCAI in the AD docket on the Internet at http://www.regulations.gov by searching for and locating Docket No. FAA-2017-
1025.

Related Service Information Under 1 CFR Part 51

    Bombardier, Inc., has issued Service Bulletin 670BA-56-003,
Revision A, dated April 13, 2016. This service information describes
procedures for doing water spray tests on the flight deck windows,
doing general visual inspections for water in the flight compartment,
removing water, and applying sealant to the flight deck windows. This
service information is reasonably available because the interested
parties have access to it through their normal course of business

or by the means identified in the ADDRESSES section.

FAA's Determination and Requirements of This Proposed AD

    This product has been approved by the aviation authority of another
country, and is approved for operation in the United States. Pursuant
to our bilateral agreement with the State of Design Authority, we have
been notified of the unsafe condition described in the MCAI and service
information referenced above. We are proposing this AD because we
evaluated all pertinent information and determined an unsafe condition
exists and is likely to exist or develop on other products of these
same type designs.

Costs of Compliance

    We estimate that this proposed AD affects 543 airplanes of U.S.
registry.
    We estimate the following costs to comply with this proposed AD:

                                                 Estimated Costs
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                Cost per      Cost on U.S.
               Action                         Labor cost            Parts cost        product        operators
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Spray tests and inspections........  2 work-hours x $85 per hour              $0            $170         $92,310
                                      = $170.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    We estimate the following costs to do any necessary water removal
and sealant application that would be required based on the results of
the proposed inspection. We have no way of determining the number of
airplanes that might need this water removal and sealant application:

                                               On-Condition Costs
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                Cost per
                   Action                                 Labor cost                Parts cost        product
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Water removal and sealant application......  4 work-hours x $85 per hour = $340.            $308            $648
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Authority for This Rulemaking

    Title 49 of the United States Code specifies the FAA's authority to
issue rules on aviation safety. Subtitle I, section 106, describes the
authority of the FAA Administrator. ``Subtitle VII: Aviation
Programs,'' describes in more detail the scope of the Agency's
authority.
    We are issuing this rulemaking under the authority described in
``Subtitle VII, Part A, Subpart III, Section 44701: General
requirements.'' Under that section, Congress charges the FAA with
promoting safe flight of civil aircraft in air commerce by prescribing
regulations for practices, methods, and procedures the Administrator
finds necessary for safety in air commerce. This regulation is within
the scope of that authority because it addresses an unsafe condition
that is likely to exist or develop on products identified in this
rulemaking action.
    This proposed AD is issued in accordance with authority delegated
by the Executive Director, Aircraft Certification Service, as
authorized by FAA Order 8000.51C. In accordance with that order,
issuance of ADs is normally a function of the Compliance and
Airworthiness Division, but during this transition period, the
Executive Director has delegated the authority to issue ADs applicable
to transport category airplanes to the Director of the System Oversight
Division.

Regulatory Findings

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

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39

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

The Proposed Amendment

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

PART 39--AIRWORTHINESS DIRECTIVES

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

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

Sec.  39.13  [Amended]

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

Bombardier, Inc.: Docket No. FAA-2017-1025; Product Identifier 2017-
NM-137-AD.

(a) Comments Due Date

    We must receive comments by January 2, 2018.

(b) Affected ADs

    None.

(c) Applicability

    This AD applies to the airplanes identified in paragraphs
(c)(1), (c)(2), and (c)(3) of this AD, certificated in any category.
    (1) Bombardier, Inc., Model CL-600-2C10 (Regional Jet Series
700, 701, & 702) airplanes, serial numbers 10003 through 10342
inclusive.
    (2) Bombardier, Inc., Model CL-600-2D15 (Regional Jet Series
705) and Model CL-600-2D24 (Regional Jet Series 900) airplanes,
serial numbers 15001 through 15367 inclusive.
    (3) Bombardier, Inc., Model CL-600-2E25 (Regional Jet Series
1000) airplanes, serial numbers 19001 through 19041 inclusive.

(d) Subject

    Air Transport Association (ATA) of America Code 56, Windows.

(e) Reason

    This AD was prompted by several incidents of electrical shorting
and sparks caused by de-icing fluid leaks between flight deck
windshields and side windows. We are issuing this AD to detect and
correct de-icing fluid entering the flight deck, which could damage
the flight deck floodlight wires and electrical connections, and
ultimately could lead to a fire in the flight compartment.

(f) Compliance

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

(g) Left Flight Deck Windshield and Side Window Spray Test, Inspection,
Water Removal and Sealant Application

    For airplanes on which a left flight deck windshield or a left
flight deck side window was replaced as specified in Bombardier
Aircraft Maintenance Manual (AMM) task 56-11-01-400-801, Revision
48, dated March 25, 2015, or any previous revision of that task; or
Bombardier AMM task 56-12-01-400-801, Revision 48, dated March 25,
2015, or any previous revision of that task: At the applicable time
specified in paragraph (g)(1) or (g)(2) of this AD, perform a water
spray test and do a general visual inspection of the left flight
deck windshield and left flight deck side window for evidence of
water ingress into the flight deck, in accordance with Part A of the
Accomplishment Instructions of Bombardier Service Bulletin 670BA-56-
003, Revision A, dated April 13, 2016. If water is found in the
flight compartment: Before further flight, remove the water, and
apply sealant on the left flight deck windows in accordance with
Part C of the Accomplishment Instructions of Bombardier Service
Bulletin 670BA-56-003, Revision A, dated April 13, 2016.
    (1) For airplanes on which Bombardier in-service ModSum
IS67033110181 has not been incorporated: Within 2,500 flight hours
after the effective date of this AD.
    (2) For airplanes on which Bombardier in-service ModSum
IS67033110181 has been incorporated: Within 6,600 flight hours after
the effective date of this AD.

(h) Right Flight Deck Windshield and Side Window Spray Test,
Inspection, Water Removal and Sealant Application

    For airplanes on which a right flight deck windshield or a right
flight deck side window was replaced as specified in Bombardier AMM
task 56-11-01-400-801, Revision 48, dated March 25, 2015, or any
previous revision of that task; or Bombardier AMM task 56-12-01-400-
801, Revision 48, dated March 25, 2015, or any previous revision of
that task: At the applicable time specified in paragraph (h)(1) or
(h)(2) of this AD, perform a water spray test and do a general
visual inspection of the right flight deck windshield and right
flight deck side window for evidence of water ingress into the
flight deck, in accordance with Part B of the Accomplishment
Instructions of Bombardier Service Bulletin 670BA-56-003, Revision
A, dated April 13, 2016. If water is found in the flight
compartment: Before further flight, remove the water, and apply
sealant on the right flight deck windows in accordance with Part D
of the Accomplishment Instructions of Bombardier Service Bulletin
670BA-56-003, Revision A, dated April 13, 2016.
    (1) For airplanes on which Bombardier in-service ModSum
IS67033110181 has not been incorporated: Within 2,500 flight hours
after the effective date of this AD.
    (2) For airplanes on which Bombardier in-service ModSum
IS67033110181 has been incorporated: Within 6,600 flight hours after
the effective date of this AD.

(i) Credit for Previous Actions

    (1) This paragraph provides credit for actions required by
paragraph (g) of this AD, if those actions were performed before the
effective date of this AD using the service information specified in
paragraphs (i)(1)(i), (i)(1)(ii), or (i)(1)(iii) of this AD;
provided that the left flight deck side window or left flight deck
windshield have not been subsequently replaced as specified in
Bombardier AMM task 56-11-01-400-801, Revision 48, dated March 25,
2015, or any previous revision of that task; or Bombardier AMM task
56-12-01-400-801, Revision 48, dated March 25, 2015, or any previous
revision of that task.
    (i) Bombardier Alert Service Bulletin A670BA-56-002, dated
January 7, 2008.
    (ii) Bombardier Alert Service Bulletin A670BA-56-002, Revision
A, dated February 26, 2008.
    (iii) Part A and Part C, as applicable, of the Accomplishment
Instructions of Bombardier Service Bulletin 670BA-56-003, dated May
28, 2015.
    (2) This paragraph provides credit for actions required by
paragraph (h) of this AD, if those actions were performed before the
effective date of this AD using the service information specified in
paragraphs (i)(2)(i), (i)(2)(ii), or (i)(2)(iii) of this AD;
provided that the right flight deck side window or right flight deck
windshield have not been subsequently replaced as specified in
Bombardier AMM task 56-11-01-400-801, Revision 48, dated March 25,
2015, or any previous revision of that task; or Bombardier AMM task
56-12-01-400-801, Revision 48, dated March 25, 2015, or any previous
revision of that task.
    (i) Bombardier Alert Service Bulletin A670BA-56-002, dated
January 7, 2008.
    (ii) Bombardier Alert Service Bulletin A670BA-56-002, Revision
A, dated February 26, 2008.
    (iii) Part B and Part D, as applicable, of the Accomplishment
Instructions of Bombardier Service Bulletin 670BA-56-003, dated May
28, 2015.

(j) Parts Installation Limitations

    (1) As of the effective date of this AD, no person may install
on any airplane a left or right flight deck windshield as specified
in Bombardier AMM task 56-11-01-400-801, Revision 48, dated March
25, 2015, or any previous revision of that task.
    (2) As of the effective date of this AD, no person may install
on any airplane a left or right flight deck side window as specified
in Bombardier AMM task 56-12-01-400-801, Revision 48, dated March
25, 2015, or any previous revision of that task.

(k) Other FAA AD Provisions

    The following provisions also apply to this AD:
    (1) Alternative Methods of Compliance (AMOCs): The Manager, New
York ACO Branch, FAA, has the authority to approve AMOCs for this
AD, if requested using the procedures found in 14 CFR 39.19. In
accordance with 14 CFR 39.19, send your request to your principal
inspector or local Flight Standards District Office, as appropriate.
If sending information directly to the manager of the certification
office, send it to ATTN: Program Manager, Continuing Operational
Safety, FAA, New York ACO Branch, 1600 Stewart Avenue, Suite 410,
Westbury, NY 11590; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax<PHONE_NUMBER>. Before
using any approved AMOC, notify your appropriate principal
inspector, or lacking a principal inspector, the manager of the
local flight standards district office/certificate holding district
office.
    (2) Contacting the Manufacturer: For any requirement in this AD
to obtain corrective actions from a manufacturer, the action must be
accomplished using a method approved by the Manager, New York ACO
Branch, FAA; or Transport Canada Civil Aviation (TCCA); or
Bombardier, Inc.'s TCCA Design Approval Organization (DAO). If
approved by the DAO, the approval must include the DAO-authorized
signature.

(l) Related Information

    (1) Refer to Mandatory Continuing Airworthiness Information
(MCAI) Canadian Airworthiness Directive CF-2017-28, dated August 23,
2017, for related information. This MCAI may be found in the AD
docket on the Internet at http://www.regulations.gov by searching
for and locating Docket No. FAA-2017-1025.
    (2) For more information about this AD, contact Steven
Dzierzynski, Aerospace Engineer, Avionics and Administrative
Services Section, FAA, New York ACO Branch, 1600 Stewart Avenue,
Suite 410, Westbury, NY 11590; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax 516-794-
5531.
    (3) For service information identified in this AD, contact
Bombardier, Inc., 400 C[ocirc]te Vertu Road West, Dorval,
Qu[eacute]bec H4S 1Y9, Canada; Widebody Customer Response Center
North America toll-free telephone 1-866-538-1247 or direct-dial
telephone 1-514-855-2999; fax<PHONE_NUMBER>; email
[email protected]; Internet http://www.bombardier.com. You
may view this service information at the FAA, Transport Standards
Branch, 1601 Lind Avenue SW., Renton, WA. For information on the
availability of this material at the FAA, call<PHONE_NUMBER>.

    Issued in Renton, Washington, on November 8, 2017.
Dionne Palermo,
Acting Director, System Oversight Division, Aircraft Certification
Service.
[FR Doc. 2017-24814 Filed 11-16-17; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


[Federal Register Volume 86, Number 49 (Tuesday, March 16, 2021)]
[Notices]
[Page 14423]
[FR Doc No: 2021-05386]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

Combined Notice of Filings #2

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

    Docket Numbers: EG21-104-000.
    Applicants: Crystal Lake Wind Energy III, LLC.
    Description: Notice of Self-Certification of Exempt Wholesale
Generator Status of Crystal Lake Wind Energy III, LLC.
    Filed Date: 3/8/21.
    Accession Number: 20210308-5276.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 3/29/21.

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

    Docket Numbers: ER19-465-000; ER19-465-001; ER19-465-003; ER19-465-
004.
    Applicants: Midcontinent Independent System Operator, Inc.
    Description: Midcontinent Independent System Operator, Inc. submits
Request to Defer Effective Date of Compliance with Order No. 841.
    Filed Date: 3/4/21.
    Accession Number: 20210304-5215.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 3/19/21.

    Docket Numbers: ER19-2858-001.
    Applicants: East Coast Power Linden Holding, L.L.C.
    Description: Report Filing: Refund Report to be effective N/A.
    Filed Date: 3/10/21.
    Accession Number: 20210310-5077.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 3/31/21.

    Docket Numbers: ER21-1320-000.
    Applicants: Crystal Lake Wind Energy III, LLC.
    Description: Baseline eTariff Filing: Crystal Lake Wind Energy III,
LLC Application for MBR Authority to be effective 5/10/2021.
    Filed Date: 3/10/21.
    Accession Number: 20210310-5210.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 3/31/21.

    The filings are accessible in the Commission's eLibrary system
(https://elibrary.ferc.gov/idmws/search/fercgensearch.asp) by querying
the docket number.
    Any person desiring to intervene or protest in any of the above
proceedings must file in accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of the
Commission's Regulations (18 CFR 385.211 and 385.214) on or before 5:00
p.m. Eastern time on the specified comment date. Protests may be
considered, but intervention is necessary to become a party to the
proceeding.
    eFiling is encouraged. More detailed information relating to filing
requirements, interventions, protests, service, and qualifying
facilities filings can be found at: http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/efiling/filing-req.pdf. For other information, call<PHONE_NUMBER>
(toll free). For TTY, call<PHONE_NUMBER>.

    Dated: March 10, 2021.
Kimberly D. Bose,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2021-05386 Filed 3-15-21; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


			  UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

		        DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

			  OFFICE OF THE SECRETARY

			          WASHINGTON, D.C.

Issued by the Department of Transportation on July 14, 2003

NOTICE OF ACTION TAKEN -- DOCKETS OST-2001-11231

________________________________________________________________________
__________________________________________

This serves as notice to the public of the action described below, taken
by the Department official indicated (no additional confirming order
will be issued in this matter).

Applicant:  Transcarga Intl. Airways, C.A.		Date Filed:  February 21,
2003, as supplemented

Relief requested:  Renew exemption from 49 U.S.C. § 41301 to engage in
charter foreign air transportation of property and mail between
Venezuela and the United States; and other all-cargo charters in
accordance with 14 CFR Part 212 of the Department’s rules.  The
applicant would conduct these services only by wet leasing aircraft from
a duly authorized and properly supervised U.S. or foreign air carrier.

If renewal, date and citation of last action:  February 22, 2002, in
this docket

Applicant representative:  John J. Spittler, Jr.<PHONE_NUMBER>

DOT Analyst:  Gordon H. Bingham<PHONE_NUMBER>

DISPOSITION

Action:  Approved							Action date:  July 14, 2003

Effective dates of authority granted:  July 14, 2003-July 14, 2004

Basis for approval (bilateral agreement/reciprocity):  Reciprocity with
Venezuela

Except to the extent exempted/waived, this authority is subject to the
terms, conditions, and limitations indicated:  X  Standard exemption
conditions (attached)

Special conditions/Partial grant/Denial basis/Remarks:  The authority
granted above is subject to the wet lease condition  and prior approval
requirement for cargo charter operations set forth in the Notice of
Action Taken, dated February 22, 2002, in this docket.

Action taken by:   Paul L. Gretch, Director

		      Office of International Aviation

________________________________________________________________________
_________

Under authority assigned by the Department in its regulations, 14 CFR
Part 385, we found that (1) the applicant was qualified to perform the
proposed operations; (2) our action was consistent with Department
policy; (3) grant of the authority was consistent with the public
interest; and (4) grant of the authority would not constitute a major
regulatory action under the Energy Policy and Conservation Act of 1975.
To the

extent not granted/deferred/dismissed, we denied all requests in the
referenced Docket.  We may amend, modify, or revoke the authority
granted in this Notice at any time without hearing at our discretion.

Persons entitled to petition the Department for review of the action set
forth in this Notice under the Department’s regulations, 14 CFR §
385.30, may file their petitions within seven (7) days after the date of
issuance of this Notice.  This action was effective when taken, and the
filing of a petition for review will not alter such effectiveness.

An electronic version of this document is available on the World Wide
Web at:

http://dms.dot.gov//reports/reports_aviation.asp

					Attachment

Foreign Carrier Exemption Conditions

In the conduct of the operations authorized, the foreign carrier
applicant(s) shall:

(1)  Not conduct any operations unless it holds a currently effective
authorization from its homeland for such operations, and it has filed a
copy of such authorization with the Department;

(2)  Comply with all applicable requirements of the Federal Aviation
Administration, including, but not limited to, 14 CFR Parts 129, 91, and
36, and with all applicable U.S. Government requirements concerning
security;1

(3)  Comply with the requirements for minimum insurance coverage
contained in 14 CFR Part 205, and, prior to the commencement of any
operations under this authority, file evidence of such coverage, in the
form of a completed OST Form 6411, with the Federal Aviation
Administration’s Program Management Branch (AFS-260), Flight Standards
Service (any changes to, or termination of, insurance also shall be
filed with that office);

(4)  Not operate aircraft under this authority unless it complies with
operational safety requirements at least equivalent to Annex 6 of the
Chicago Convention;

(5)  Conform to the airworthiness and airman competency requirements of
its Government for international air services;

(6)  Except as specifically exempted or otherwise provided for in a
Department Order, comply with the requirements of 14 CFR Part 203,
concerning waiver of Warsaw Convention liability limits and defenses;

(7)  Agree that operations under this authority constitute a waiver of
sovereign immunity, for the purposes of 28 U.S.C. 1605(a), but only with
respect to those actions or proceedings instituted against it in any
court or other tribunal in the United States that are: (a)  based on its
operations in international air transportation that, according to the
contract of carriage, include a point in the United States as a point of
origin, point of destination, or agreed stopping place, or for which the
contract of carriage was purchased in the United States; or (b)  based
on a claim under any international agreement or treaty cognizable in any
court or other tribunal of the United States.  In this condition, the
term "international air transportation" means "international
transportation" as defined by the Warsaw Convention, except that all
States shall be considered to be High Contracting Parties for the
purpose of this definition;

(8)  Except as specifically authorized by the Department, originate or
terminate all flights to/from the United States in its homeland;

(9)  Comply with the requirements of 14 CFR Part 217, concerning the
reporting of scheduled, nonscheduled, and charter data;

(10) If charter operations are authorized, except as otherwise provided
in the applicable aviation agreement, comply with the Department's rules
governing charters (including 14 CFR Parts 212 and 380); and

(11) Comply with such other reasonable terms, conditions, and
limitations required by the public interest as may be prescribed by the
Department, with all applicable orders or regulations of other U.S.
agencies and courts, and with all applicable laws of the United States.

This authority shall not be effective during any period when the holder
is not in compliance with the conditions imposed above.  Moreover, this
authority cannot be sold or otherwise transferred without explicit
Department approval under Title 49 of the U.S. Code.

____________________________

1 To assure compliance with all applicable U.S. Government requirements
concerning security, the holder should, before commencing any new
service (including charter flights) from a foreign airport that would be
the holder’s last point of departure for the United States, contact
its Principal Security Inspector (PSI) to advise the PSI of its plans
and to find out whether the Transportation Security Administration has
determined that security is adequate to allow such airport(s) to be
served.

  Venezuela is a Category 2 country under the FAA’s IASA program.

06/2003


[Federal Register: March 22, 2010 (Volume 75, Number 54)]
[Notices]
[Page 13556]
[DOCID:fr22mr10-67]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES

Food and Drug Administration

[Docket No. FDA-2010-C-0077]

Biocompatibles UK Ltd.; Filing of Color Additive Petition

AGENCY:  Food and Drug Administration, HHS.

ACTION:  Notice.

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

SUMMARY:  The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) is announcing that
Biocompatibles UK Ltd., has filed a petition proposing that the color
additive regulations be amended to provide for the safe use of C.I.
Reactive Blue No. 4 [2-anthracenesulfonic acid, 1-amino-4-(3-((4,6-
dichloro-s-triazin-2-yl)amino)-4-sulfoanilino)-9,10-dihydro-9,10-dioxo,
disodium salt] (CAS Reg. No. 4499-01-8) reacted with polyvinyl alcohol
as a color additive in vascular embolization devices.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Judith Kidwell, Center for Food Safety
and Applied Nutrition (HFS-265), Food and Drug Administration, 5100
Paint Branch Pkwy., College Park, MD 20740-3835,<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Under the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic
Act (sec. 721(d)(1) (21 U.S.C. 379e(d)(1))), notice is given that a
color additive petition (CAP 0C0288) has been filed by Biocompatibles
UK Ltd., c/o John Greenbaum, Generic Devices Consulting, Inc., 20310
SW. 48th St, Southwest Ranches, FL 33332. The petition proposes to
amend the color additive regulations in 21 CFR part 73, subpart D,
Medical Devices, to provide for the safe use of C.I. Reactive Blue No.
4 [2-anthracenesulfonic acid, 1-amino-4-(3-((4,6-dichloro-s-triazin-2-
yl)amino)-4-sulfoanilino)-9,10-dihydro-9,10-dioxo, disodium salt] (CAS
Reg. No. 4499-01-8) reacted with polyvinyl alcohol as a color additive
in vascular embolization devices.
    The agency has determined under 21 CFR 25.32(l) that this action is
of a type that does not individually or cumulatively have a significant
effect on the human environment. Therefore, neither an environmental
assessment nor an environmental impact statement is required.

    Dated: March 5, 2010.
Mitchell A. Cheeseman,
Acting Director, Office of Food Additive Safety, Center for Food Safety
and Applied Nutrition.
[FR Doc. 2010-6177 Filed 3-19-10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4160-01-S


[Federal Register Volume 76, Number 131 (Friday, July 8, 2011)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 40234-40237]
[FR Doc No: 2011-17115]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Coast Guard

33 CFR Part 117

[Docket No. USCG-2011-0509]
RIN 1625-AA09

Drawbridge Operation Regulations; Harlem River, New York City, NY

AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS.

ACTION: Temporary interim rule with request for comments.

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

SUMMARY: The Coast Guard is temporarily changing the drawbridge
operating regulations governing the operation of the 103rd Street
(Wards Island) Pedestrian Bridge at mile 0.0, across the Harlem River
at New York City, New York. This interim rule is necessary to
facilitate the completion of a major bridge rehabilitation project at
the 103rd Street (Wards Island) Pedestrian Bridge while soliciting
comments from the public.

DATES: This rule is effective in the CFR from July 8, 2011 through
September 30, 2011. This rule is effective with actual notice for
purposes of enforcement on July 9, 2011 and is effective through
September 30, 2011. Comments and related material must reach the Coast
Guard on or before August 8, 2011.

ADDRESSES: You may submit comments identified by Coast Guard docket
number USCG-2011-0509 using any one of the following methods:
    (1) Federal eRulemaking Portal: http:[sol][sol]www.regulations.gov.
    (2) Fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    (3) Mail: Docket Management Facility (M-30), U.S. Department of
Transportation, West Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140, 1200 New
Jersey Avenue, SE., Washington, DC 20590-0001.
    (4) Hand delivery: Same as mail address above, between 9 a.m. and 5
p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays. The telephone
number is<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    To avoid duplication, please use only one of these four methods.
See the ``Public Participation and Request for Comments'' portion of
the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section below for instructions on
submitting comments.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: If you have questions on this proposed
rule, call or e-mail Mr. Gary Kassof, Project Officer, First Coast
Guard District,<PHONE_NUMBER><EMAIL_ADDRESS>If you have
questions on viewing or submitting material to the docket, call Renee
V. Wright, Program Manager, Docket Operations, telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Public Participation and Request for Comments

    We encourage you to participate in this rulemaking by submitting
comments and related material. All comments received will be posted,
without change, to http:[sol][sol]www.regulations.gov and will include
any personal information you have provided.

Submitting Comments

    If you submit a comment, please include the docket number for this
rulemaking (USCG-2011-0509), indicate the specific section of this
document to which each comment applies, and give the reason for each
suggestion or recommendation. You may submit your comments and material
online, or by fax, mail or hand delivery, but please use only one of
these means. If you submit a comment online via
http:[sol][sol]www.regulations.gov, it will be considered received by
the Coast Guard when you successfully transmit the comment. If you fax,
hand delivery, or mail your comment, it will be considered as having
been received by the Coast Guard when it is received at the Docket
Management Facility. We recommend that you include your name and a
mailing address, an e-mail address, or a phone number in the body of
your document so that we can contact you if we have questions regarding
your submission.
    To submit your comment online, go to
http:[sol][sol]www.regulations.gov, click on the ``submit a comment''
box, which will then become highlighted in blue. In the ``Document
Type'' drop down menu select ``Proposed Rules'' and insert ``USCG-2011-
0509'' in the ``Keyword'' box. Click ``Search'' then click on the
balloon shape in the ``Actions'' column. 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 them by mail and would like to know that they reached the
Facility, please enclose a stamped, self-addressed postcard or
envelope. We will consider all comments and material received during
the comment period and may change this rule based on your comments.

Viewing Comments and Documents

    To view comments, as well as documents mentioned in this preamble
as being available in the docket, go to
http:[sol][sol]www.regulations.gov, click on the ``read comments'' box,
which will then become highlighted in blue. In the ``Keyword'' box
insert ``USCG-2011-0509'' and click ``Search.'' Click the ``Open Docket
Folder'' in the ``Actions'' column. You may also visit the Docket
Management Facility in Room W12-140 on the ground floor of the
Department of Transportation West Building, 1200

New Jersey Avenue, SE., Washington, DC 20590, between 9 a.m. and 5
p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays. We have an
agreement with the Department of Transportation to use the Docket
Management Facility.

Privacy Act

    Anyone can 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, system of
records notice regarding our public dockets in the January 17, 2008
issue of the Federal Register (73 FR 3316).

Public Meeting

    We do not now plan to hold a public meeting. But you may submit a
request for one on or before August 8, 2011 using one of the four
methods specified under ADDRESSES. Please explain why one would be
beneficial. If we determine that one would aid this rulemaking, we will
hold one at a time and place announced by a later notice in the Federal
Register.

Regulatory Information

    The Coast Guard is issuing this temporary interim 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.
    The Coast Guard previously issued two temporary deviations from the
regulation governing the operation of the 103rd Street (Wards Island)
Pedestrian Bridge to facilitate completion of a major rehabilitation
project. The first temporary deviation was effective from January 10,
2011 through April 29, 2011. The second temporary deviation became
effective on April 30, 2011 and will end on July 8, 2011.
    The bridge owner, New York City Department of Transportation,
advised the Coast Guard on May 27, 2011, that they recently discovered
additional areas of the bridge that are in need of repair, and that the
rehabilitation project will not be completed by July 8, 2011. The
rehabilitation repairs must be completed before the bridge will be able
to open again for the passage of vessel traffic.
    It is impractical to issue a NPRM and take public comment before
the current temporary deviation expires on July 8, 2011.
    We are requesting public comment on the temporary change to the
regulation governing the operation of the 103rd Street (Wards Island)
Pedestrian Bridge. If we receive public input that indicates a need to
revise the temporary change to the drawbridge's operating regulation,
or the conditions it imposes, or raises any other significant public
concerns, we will address those concerns prior to issuing any final
rule.
    Under 5 U.S.C. 553(d)(3), the Coast Guard also finds good cause
exists, for the same reasons discussed above, for making this rule
effective less than 30 days after publication in the Federal Register.

Basis and Purpose

    The 103rd Street (Wards Island) Pedestrian Bridge, across the
Harlem River, mile 0.0, at New York City, New York, has a vertical
clearance in the closed position of 55 feet at mean high water and 60
feet at mean low water. Most vessel traffic that uses this waterway can
fit under the draw without requiring bridge openings. The drawbridge
operation regulations are listed at 33 CFR 117.789(b)(1).
    The bridge has remained in the closed position since January 10,
2011, in order to complete its rehabilitation. The owner of the bridge,
New York City Department of Transportation, has requested an extension
of the bridge closure to complete unforeseen additional repairs.
    The Coast Guard published a temporary deviation from the regulation
governing the operation of the 103rd Street (Wards Island) Pedestrian
Bridge on January 20, 2011, (76 FR 3516), authorizing the bridge to
remain in the closed position effective from January 10, 2011 through
April 29, 2011. The bridge owner requested a second temporary deviation
on March 21, 2011, to complete the rehabilitation repairs at the
bridge. As a result, the Coast Guard published a second temporary
deviation on April 11, 2011, (76 FR 19910), effective from April 30,
2011 through July 8, 2011.
    On May 27, 2011, the bridge owner requested an extension of the
bridge closure through September 30, 2011. They advised the Coast Guard
that work would not be completed before the second temporary deviation
ended on July 8, 2011, because the bridge owner recently discovered
additional areas of the bridge that are in need of repair.
    Because the requested extension of the bridge closure would exceed
180 days, we are issuing a temporary interim rule requesting public
comment in order to both facilitate completion of the bridge
rehabilitation and to have the public participate in the rulemaking
process.
    Under this temporary interim rule, the 103rd Street (Wards Island)
Pedestrian Bridge may remain in the closed position from July 9, 2011
through September 30, 2011.

Discussion of Rule

    The Coast Guard is temporarily changing the drawbridge operation
regulations listed at 33 CFR 117.789(b)(1).
    This temporary interim rule for the 103rd Street (Wards Island)
Pedestrian Bridge will allow the bridge to remain in the closed
position from July 9, 2011 through September 30, 2011, to facilitate
completion of bridge rehabilitation repairs.

Regulatory Analysis

    We developed this interim rule after considering numerous statutes
and executive orders related to rulemaking. Below we summarize our
analysis based on 13 of these statutes or executive orders.

Regulatory Planning and Review

    This rule is not a ``significant regulatory action'' under section
3(f) of Executive Order 12866, Regulatory Planning and Review, as
supplemented by Executive Order 13563, Improving Regulation and
Regulatory Review, and does not require an assessment of potential
costs and benefits under section 6(a)(3) of Executive Order 12866 or
under section 1 of Executive Order 13563. The Office of Management and
Budget has not reviewed it under those Orders.
    The Coast Guard determined that this rule is not a significant
regulatory action for the following reasons. The bridge presently can't
open for vessel traffic due to the fact that rehabilitation repairs
have not been completed. This action will facilitate completion of the
bridge repairs. Most vessel traffic that uses this waterway can fit
under the draw without requiring bridge openings. Vessels that cannot
pass under the closed draw may take an alternate route on the Hudson
River.

Small Entities

    Under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601-612), we have
considered whether this rule will have a significant

economic impact on a substantial number of small entities. The term
``small entities'' comprises small businesses, not-for-profit
organizations that are independently owned and operated and are not
dominant in their fields, and governmental jurisdictions with
populations of less than 50,000.
    The Coast Guard certifies under section 5 U.S.C. 605(b) that this
rule will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial
number of small entities. This rule will affect the following entities,
some of which may be small entities: The owners or operators of vessels
intending to transit the bridge.
    This action will not have a significant economic impact on a
substantial number of small entities for the following reasons. The
bridge presently cannot open for the passage of vessel traffic because
the rehabilitation repairs are not completed. This action will
facilitate completion of the bridge repairs. Most vessel traffic that
uses this waterway can fit under the draw without requiring bridge
openings. Vessels that cannot pass under the closed draw may take an
alternate route using the Hudson River.
    If you think that your business, organization, or governmental
jurisdiction qualifies as a small entity and that this rule would have
a significant economic impact on it, please submit a comment (see
ADDRESSES) explaining why you think it qualifies and how and to what
degree this rule would economically affect it.

Assistance for Small Entities

    Under section 213(a) of the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement
Fairness Act of 1996 (Public Law 104-121), we offer to assist small
entities in understanding the temporary interim rule so that they can
better evaluate its effects on them and participate in the rulemaking.
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 proposed rule or any
policy or action of the Coast Guard.

Collection of Information

    This rule calls for no new collection of information under the
Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501-3520.).

Federalism

    A rule has implications for federalism under Executive Order 13132,
Federalism, if it has a substantial direct effect on State or local
governments and would either preempt State law or impose a substantial
direct cost of compliance on them. We have analyzed this rule under
that Order and have determined that it does not have implications for
federalism.

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.

Taking of Private Property

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

Civil Justice Reform

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

Protection of Children

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

Indian Tribal Governments

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

Energy Effects

    We have analyzed this rule under Executive Order 13211, Actions
Concerning Regulations That Significantly Affect Energy Supply,
Distribution, or Use. We have determined that it is not a ``significant
energy action'' under that order because it is not a ``significant
regulatory action'' under Executive Order 12866 and is not likely to
have a significant adverse effect on the supply, distribution, or use
of energy. The Administrator of the Office of Information and
Regulatory Affairs has not designated it as a significant energy
action. Therefore, it does not require a Statement of Energy Effects
under Executive Order 13211.

Technical Standards

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

Environment

    We have analyzed this rule under Department of Homeland Security
Management Directive 5100.1, and Commandant Instruction M16475.1D,
which guides the Coast Guard in complying with the National
Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (NEPA) (42 U.S.C. 4321-4370f), and
have made a preliminary determination that this action is not likely to
have a significant effect on the human environment because it simply
promulgates the operating regulations or procedures for drawbridges. We
seek any comments or information that may lead to the discovery of a
significant environmental impact from this rule.
    Under figure 2-1, paragraph (32)(e), of the Instruction, an
environmental analysis checklist and a categorical exclusion
determination are not required for this rule.

List of Subjects in 33 CFR Part 117

    Bridges.

    For the reasons discussed in the preamble, the Coast Guard is
amending 33 CFR part 117 as follows:

PART 117--DRAWBRIDGE OPERATION REGULATIONS

0
1. The authority citation for part 117 continues to read as follows:

    Authority:  33 U.S.C. 499; 33 CFR 1.05-1(g); Department of
Homeland Security Delegation No. 0170.1.

0
2. In Sec.  117.789, paragraph (b)(1) is temporarily suspended from
July 9, 2011 through September 30, 2011, and paragraph (b)(3) is
temporarily added from July 9, 2011 through September 30, 2011, to read
as follows:

Sec.  117.789  Harlem River.

* * * * *
    (b)(3) The draws of the bridges at 103 Street, mile 0.0, need not
open for the passage of vessel traffic from July 9, 2011, through
September 30, 2011. The draws of the 125 Street (Triborough) bridge,
mile 1.3, the Willis Avenue Bridge, mile 1.9, the Madison Avenue
Bridge, mile 2.3, the 145 Street Bridge, mile 2.8, the Macombs Dam
Bridge, mile 3.2, the 207 Street Bridge, mile 6.0, and the Broadway
Bridge, mile 6.8, shall open on signal if at least a four hour advance
notice is given to the New York City Highway Radio (Hotline) Room and
the Triborough Bridge and Tunnel Authority (TBTA) for the 125 Street
(Triborough) Bridge at mile 1.3. The draws of the above bridges, except
the Broadway Bridge, need not open for the passage of vessel traffic
from 6 a.m. to 9 a.m., and 5 p.m. to 7 p.m., Monday through Friday,
except Federal holidays. The draw of the Broadway Bridge need not open
for the passage of vessel traffic from 7 a.m. to 10 a.m. and 4 p.m. to
7 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays.
* * * * *

    Dated: June 22, 2011.
Daniel A. Neptun,
Rear Admiral, U.S. Coast Guard, Commander, First Coast Guard District.
[FR Doc. 2011-17115 Filed 7-7-11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 9110-04-P