[Federal Register Volume 77, Number 209 (Monday, October 29, 2012)]
[Notices]
[Pages 65596-65600]
[FR Doc No: 2012-26469]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-68085; File No. SR-NASDAQ-2012-119]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; The NASDAQ Stock Market LLC;
Notice of Filing of Proposed Rule Change To Establish Fees for New
Optional Wireless Connectivity for Co-located Clients

October 23, 2012.
    Pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934
(``Act''),\1\ and Rule 19b-4 thereunder,\2\ notice is hereby given that
on October 10, 2012, The NASDAQ Stock Market LLC (``NASDAQ'' or
``Exchange'') filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission
(``Commission'') the proposed rule change as described in Items I, II
and III below, which Items have been prepared by the Exchange. The
Commission is publishing this notice to solicit comments on the

proposed rule change from interested persons.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

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

    The Exchange proposes a rule change to establish fees for new
optional means for clients to receive third party market data and
NASDAQ TotalView ITCH market data. NASDAQ proposes to offer wireless
connectivity for co-located clients in NASDAQ's Carteret data center to
receive Direct Edge, BATS, NYSE, and NYSE ARCA multi-cast market data
feeds. It also proposes to offer remote multi-cast ITCH Wave Ports for
clients co-located at other third party data centers, through which
NASDAQ TotalView ITCH market data will be distributed after delivery to
those data centers via wireless network. The text of the proposed rule
change is available at http://nasdaq.cchwallstreet.com, at the
Exchange's principal office, and at the Commission's Public Reference
Room.

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

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

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

1. Purpose
    NASDAQ is proposing to amend NASDAQ Rule 7034 to establish fees for
the delivery of third party market data to market center clients via a
wireless network using millimeter wave or microwave technology. It also
proposes to amend NASDAQ Rule 7015 to establish fees for remote Multi-
cast ITCH Wave Ports for clients co-located at other third-party data
centers, through which NASDAQ TotalView ITCH market data will be
distributed after delivery to those data centers via wireless network.
    Wireless technology has been in existence for many years, used
primarily by the defense, retail and telecommunications industries.
Wireless connectivity involves the beaming of signals through the air
between towers that are within sight of one another. Because the
signals travel a straight, unimpeded line, and because light waves
travel faster through air than through glass (fiber optics), message
latency is reduced. The continued use of this technology by the defense
industry and regulation of the spectrum by the FCC demonstrates the
secure nature of wireless networks.
    Over the last year, wireless technology has been introduced in the
financial services industry. In offering optional wireless
connectivity, NASDAQ is responding to requests from clients that wish
to utilize the technology. Clients have sought to buy roof rights so
that they can install their own microwave dishes on the roof at the
NASDAQ data center in Carteret, New Jersey. Some have already installed
microwave dishes on nearby towers with fiber connectivity to the data
center, or have reserved space to do so. Rather than sell roof rights
to individual clients, which would quickly result in the lack of
physical space on the data center roof to accommodate all clients
fairly and equally, NASDAQ proposes to supply market data, via a
vendor-supplied wireless network, for all data center clients that wish
to avail themselves of it.
    Wireless Connectivity in Carteret. NASDAQ will utilize a network
vendor to supply wireless connectivity from the Carteret data center to
the Secaucus Equinix data center (NY4) used by Direct Edge and other
exchanges; the Newark data center used by NYSE as a SFTI Network Point
of Presence; and the Weehawken Savvis data center (NJ2) used by BATS.
The vendor will install, test and maintain the necessary communication
equipment for this wireless network between the data centers.
    Clients who choose this optional service will have their NASDAQ
cross connect handoffs (1G, 10G, or 40G) enabled to receive the chosen
raw, multicast market data for Direct Edge, BATS, and/or NYSE. NASDAQ
OMX will continue to act as re-distributor of these third party market
data feeds, capturing the data at the originating data centers and
transporting the data to the Carteret data center. NASDAQ is offering
these particular equity feeds because they are the feeds requested by
clients. There is limited bandwidth available on the wireless
connection, and the Exchange has opted to offer those that are in most
demand to start. Additional feeds may be added based on overall client
demand and bandwidth availability.
    The wireless connectivity will be an optional offering, an
alternative to fiber optic network connectivity, and will provide lower
latency. It will not provide a new market data product, but merely an
alternative means of connectivity. NASDAQ's wireless connectivity
offering, in conjunction with NASDAQ's equidistant cross connect
handoffs (1G, 10G, or 40G), will ensure that all clients co-located
within Carteret and electing to use this wireless connectivity offering
will receive the chosen market data at the same low latency, equalizing
any variances that might otherwise result from differences in the
location of client cabinets within the facility or different wireless
networks utilized by clients independently of this offering.
    To obtain wireless connectivity, clients will be charged a $2,500
installation fee (a non-recurring charge) and a monthly recurring
charge (MRC) that will vary depending upon the feed. The MRC for the
NYSE multi-cast equities data feed, which includes NYSE ArcaBook
Highspeed and NYSE OpenBook (Aggregated or Ultra), will be $10,000; the
MRC for BATS Multicast PITCH, which includes BZX and BYX, will be
$7,500; and the MRC for Direct Edge Depth of Book multi-cast feed,
which includes EDGA and EDGX, will be $7,500. The rates are higher for
the NYSE feeds because the two feeds are larger, and take up more
bandwidth than the BATS and Direct Edge feeds.
    Clients will place orders for the wireless connectivity via the
CoLo Console \3\ and would be subject to a one-year minimum lock-in
period. The lock-in feature, which is common practice for collocation
offerings, will ensure that the Exchange can recoup the substantial
investment required to establish the wireless system. As an incentive
to clients, NASDAQ will waive the first month's MRC. Clients will
continue to be charged by NYSE, BATS and Direct Edge for the market
data received, and NASDAQ will continue to be charged the
redistribution fees by the other exchanges, as occurs today. No changes
in these charges will occur as a result of this proposed offering.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ The ``CoLo Console'' is a web-based ordering tool NASDAQ
offers to enable members to place co-location orders.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    NASDAQ OMX will perform substantial network testing prior to
offering the service for a fee to members. After this ``beta'' testing
period, upon initial roll-out of the service, clients will be offered
the service for a fee, and on a rolling basis, the Exchange will enable
new clients to receive the feed(s) for a minimum of 30 days before
incurring

any monthly recurring fees. The wireless network will continue to be
closely monitored and the client informed of any issues. Similar to
receiving market data over fiber optic networks, the wireless network
can encounter delays or outages due to equipment issues. As wireless
networks may be affected by severe weather events, clients will be
expected to have redundant methods to receive this market data and will
be asked to attest to having alternate methods or establishing an
alternate method in the near future when they order this service from
the Exchange.
    This new data feed delivery option will be available to all clients
of the data center, and is in response to industry demand, as well as
to changes in the technology for distributing market data. Clients
opting not to pay for the wireless connectivity will still be able to
receive market data via fiber optics and standard telecommunications
connections, as they do currently, and under the same fees. Receipt of
trade data via wireless technology is completely optional. In addition,
clients can choose to receive market data via other third-party vendors
(Extranets or Telecommunication vendors) via fiber optic networks or
wireless networks.
    Remote Multi-cast ITCH (MITCH) Wave Ports. NASDAQ also proposes to
offer remote multi-cast ITCH Wave Ports for clients co-located at other
third-party data centers. NASDAQ TotalView ITCH market data will be
delivered to NASDAQ-owned cabinets at those data centers via a wireless
network. Clients will have the option of cross-connecting to the MITCH
Wave Ports in those data centers to receive the raw NASDAQ multi-cast
data feed, TotalView ITCH. An installation charge for the remote port
would be, at each of the locations, $2,500 for installation, and $7,500
as a monthly recurring fee. This offering, which is entirely optional,
will enable delivery of NASDAQ TotalView ITCH to the third-party data
centers at the same low latency.\4\ Clients opting to pay for the
remote MITCH Wave Ports will continue to be fee liable for the
applicable market data fees as described in NASDAQ Rule 7026, NASDAQ
Rule 7019 and NASDAQ Rule 7023.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ NASDAQ cannot preclude minor latency variances in delivery
of NASDAQ TotalView in the third-party data centers to individual
clients because it does not control the cross-connects in those
centers; however, the microwave connectivity will provide the same
latency to all clients' MITCH Wave Ports and offers an improvement
in latency over fiber optic network connectivity.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Competition for market data distribution is considerable and the
Exchange believes that this proposal clearly evidences such
competition. The Exchange is offering a new wireless connectivity
option and remote wave ports to keep pace with changes in the industry
and evolving customer needs as new technologies emerge and products
continue to develop and change. They are incremental to existing
offerings, entirely optional, and are geared towards attracting new
customers, as well as retaining existing customers.
    The proposed fees are based on the cost to NASDAQ of installing and
maintaining the wireless connectivity and on the value provided to the
customer, which receives low latency delivery of data feeds. The costs
associated with the wireless connectivity system are incrementally
higher than fiber optics-based solutions due to the expense of the
wireless equipment, cost of installation, and testing. The fees also
allow NASDAQ to make a profit, and reflect the premium received by the
clients in terms of lower latency over the fiber optics option. Clients
can choose to build and maintain their own wireless networks or choose
their own third party network vendors but the upfront and ongoing costs
will be much more substantial than this Exchange wireless offering.
2. Statutory Basis
    The Exchange believes that its proposal is consistent with Section
6(b) of the Act \5\ in general, and with Sections 6(b)(4) and (b)(5) of
the Act,\6\ in particular, in that it provides for the equitable
allocation of reasonable dues, fees and other charges among members and
issuers and other persons using any facility or system which the
Exchange operates or controls, and is designed to promote just and
equitable principles of trade, to remove impediments to and perfect the
mechanism of a free and open market and a national market system, and,
in general to protect investors and the public interest.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b).
    \6\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(4) and (5).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange operates in a highly competitive market in which
exchanges offer co-location services as a means to facilitate the
trading activities of those members who believe that co-location
enhances the efficiency of their trading. Accordingly, fees charged for
co-location services are constrained by the active competition for the
order flow of such members. If a particular exchange charges excessive
fees for co-location services, affected members will opt to terminate
their co-location arrangements with that exchange, and adopt a possible
range of alternative strategies, including co-locating with a different
exchange, placing their servers in a physically proximate location
outside the exchange's data center, or pursuing trading strategies not
dependent upon co-location. Accordingly, the exchange charging
excessive fees would stand to lose not only co-location revenues but
also revenues associated with the execution of orders routed to it by
affected members. Although currently no other exchange offers wireless
connectivity, there are no constraints on their ability to do so, and
it is probable that other exchanges will make a similar offering in the
near future. The Exchange believes that this competitive dynamic
imposes powerful restraints on the ability of any exchange to charge
unreasonable fees for co-location services, including fees for wireless
connectivity.
    A co-location customer may obtain a similar service by contracting
with a wireless service provider to install the required dishes on
towers near the data centers and paying the service provider to
maintain the service. However, the cost involved in establishing
service in this manner is substantial and could result in uneven access
to wireless connectivity. The Exchange's proposed fees will allow these
clients to utilize wireless connectivity and obtain the lower latency
transmission of data from third parties and NASDAQ that is available to
others, at a reasonable cost.\7\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ The wireless network offered by the Exchange via the
provider, although constrained by bandwidth with respect to the
number of feeds it can carry, can be made available to an unlimited
number of customers. The factors that differentiate this proposal
from the Exchange's offerings of and initial fees for low latency
network telecommunication connections approved by the Commission in
Securities Exchange Act Release No. 66013 (December 20, 2011) 76 FR
80992 (December 27, 2011) (SR-NASDAQ-2011-146) are a function of
technology and program concept, but neither approach implicates a
burden on competition, for similar reasons: each offers, at a
competitive price, a service that customers may obtain by dealing
directly with the provider rather than the Exchange; and each is
expected to result in a reduction in fees charged to market
participants, the very essence of competition. Pursuant to the SEC's
prior approval, the Exchange offers customers the opportunity to
obtain low latency telecommunications connectivity by establishing a
low-latency minimum standard and negotiating with multiple
telecommunication providers to obtain discounted rates. It then
passes these wholesale rates along to participating customers, with
a markup to compensate for the Exchange's role in negotiating and
establishing the arrangement, and integrating and maintaining each
new connection. Co-located customers are free to choose the provider
they wish to use from those participating in the program; or they
may choose not to avail themselves of the service and obtain
comparable services directly from the provider. The Exchange does
not discriminate among telecommunications providers in its program,
so long as they meet the required latency, destination, and fee
standards. Wireless technology, in contrast, does not require
separate avenues of connectivity for each customer, and thus the
Exchange is not obtaining a wholesale price by negotiating with
service providers. Rather, it is selecting, on a competitive basis,
the service provider(s) to install and maintain the system, and
charging customers for access to that particular system, offering
lower prices because it is spreading the substantial cost among
multiple clients. The program, far from burdening competition among
connectivity service providers, promotes it. A wireless provider
that can offer to the Exchange--or to a competitor exchange--a lower
price for installation and maintenance will no doubt get the
exchanges' business, with the end result that prices for the end
users will go down.

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

    Moreover, the Exchange believes the proposed fees for wireless
connectivity to NASDAQ are reasonable because they are based on the
Exchange's costs to cover hardware, installation, testing and
connection, as well expenses involved in maintaining and managing the
enhanced connection. The proposed fees allow the Exchange to recoup
these costs and make a profit, while providing customers the ability to
reduce latency in the transmission of data from third parties and
NASDAQ, and reducing the cost to them that would be involved if they
build or buy their own wireless networks. The Exchange believes that
the proposed fees are reasonable in that they reflect the costs of the
connection and the benefit of the lower latency to clients.
    The Exchange believes the proposed wireless connectivity fee is
equitably allocated and non-discriminatory in that all Exchange members
that voluntarily select this service option will be charged the same
amount for the same services. As is true of all co-location services,
all co-located clients have the option to select this voluntary
connectivity option, and there is no differentiation among customers
with regard to the fees charged for the service. Further, the latency
reduction offered will be the same for all co-located clients,
irrespective of the locations of their cabinets within the data center.
The same cannot be said of the alternative where entities with
substantial resources invest in private services and thereby obtain
lower latency transmission, while those without resources are unable to
invest in the necessary infrastructure.
    The Exchange's proposal is also consistent with the requirement of
Section 6(b)(5) of the Act that Exchange rules be designed to promote
just and equitable principles of trade to prevent fraudulent and
manipulative acts and practices, to promote just and equitable
principles of trade, to foster cooperation and coordination with
persons engaged in regulating, clearing, settling, processing
information with respect to, and facilitating transactions in
securities, to remove impediments to and perfect the mechanism of a
free and open market and a national market system, and, in general, to
protect investors and the public interest; and are not designed to
permit unfair discrimination between customers, issuers, brokers, or
dealers.
    The proposal is consistent with these requirements insomuch as it
makes available to market participants, at a reasonable fee and on a
non-discriminatory basis, access to low latency means of receiving
market data feeds. Some market participants have already adopted
wireless technology, using towers near the data centers, and others
have approached the Exchange seeking to rent roof rights to mount their
towers. Rather than lease out roof space to the highest bidders, a
process that would stratify and limit access to the low latency
delivery, this approach allows unlimited numbers of users to utilize
the equipment that the Exchange will mount and accommodates all clients
fairly and equally. It will allow the same low latency delivery to
those unable to invest in the more expensive option of building or
acquiring their own wireless network, as it does for those whose
pockets are deeper.
    Initially, NASDAQ will perform substantial network testing prior to
making the service available to members. After this testing period, the
wireless network will continue to be closely monitored and maintained
by the vendor and the client will be informed of any issues.
Additionally, during the initial roll-out of the service and on a
rolling basis for future clients, the Exchange will enable clients to
test the receipt of the feed(s) for a minimum of 30 days before
incurring any monthly recurring fees. Similar to receiving market data
over fiber optic networks, the wireless network can encounter delays or
outages due to equipment issues. As wireless networks may be affected
by severe weather events, clients will be expected to have redundant
methods to receive this market data and will be asked to attest to
having alternate methods or establishing an alternate method in the
near future when they order this service from the Exchange.

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

    NASDAQ does not believe that the proposed rule change will result
in any burden on competition that is not necessary or appropriate in
furtherance of the purposes of the Act, as amended. To the contrary,
this proposal will promote competition for distribution of market data
by offering an optional and innovative product enhancement. Wireless
technology has been in use for decades, is available from multiple
providers, and may be adopted by other Exchanges that decide to offer
microwave connectivity for delivery of market data. As discussed above,
the Exchange believes that fees for co-location services, including
those proposed for microwave connectivity, are constrained by the
robust competition for order flow among exchanges and non-exchange
markets, because co-location exists to advance that competition.
Further, excessive fees for co-location services, including for
wireless technology, would serve to impair an exchange's ability to
compete for order flow rather than burdening competition.
    Competition between the Exchange and competing trading venues will
be enhanced by allowing the Exchange to offer its market participants a
lower latency connectivity option. Competition among market
participants will also be supported by allowing small and large
participants the same price for this lower latency connectivity.
    The proposed rule change will likewise enhance competition among
service providers offering connections between market participants and
the data centers. The offering will expand the multiple means of
connectivity available, allowing customers to compare the benefits and
costs of lower latency transmission and related costs with reference to
numerous variables. The Exchange, and presumably its competitors,
select their service providers on a competitive basis in order to pass
along price advantages to their customers, and to win and maintain
their business. The offering is consistent with the Exchange's own
economic incentives to facilitate as many market participants as
possible in connecting to its market.

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

    Written comments were neither solicited nor received.

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

    Within 45 days of the date of publication of this notice in the
Federal Register or within such longer period (i) as the Commission may
designate up to 90 days of such date if it finds such longer period to
be appropriate and publishes its reasons for so finding or (ii) as to
which the self-regulatory organization consents, the Commission will:

    A. By order approve or disapprove such proposed rule change, or
    B. Institute proceedings to determine whether the proposed rule
change should be disapproved.

IV. Solicitation of Comments

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

Electronic Comments

     Use the Commission's Internet comment form (http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml); or
     Send an email to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Please
include File Number SR-NASDAQ-2012-119 on the subject line.

Paper Comments

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

All submissions should refer to File Number SR-NASDAQ-2012-119. This
file number should be included on the subject line if email is used. To
help the Commission process and review your comments more efficiently,
please use only one method. The Commission will post all comments on
the Commission's Internet Web site (http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml). Copies of the submission, all subsequent amendments, all
written statements with respect to the proposed rule change that are
filed with the Commission, and all written communications relating to
the proposed rule change between the Commission and any person, other
than those that may be withheld from the public in accordance with the
provisions of 5 U.S.C. 552, will be available for Web site viewing and
printing in the Commission's Public Reference Room, 100 F Street NE.,
Washington, DC 20549, on official business days between the hours of
10:00 a.m. and 3:00 p.m. Copies of the filing also will be available
for inspection and copying at the principal office of the Exchange. All
comments received will be posted without change; the Commission does
not edit personal identifying information from submissions. You should
submit only information that you wish to make available publicly. All
submissions should refer to File Number SR-NASDAQ-2012-119 and should
be submitted on or before November 19, 2012.

    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets,
pursuant to delegated authority.\8\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \8\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Kevin M. O'Neill,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2012-26469 Filed 10-26-12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 83, Number 126 (Friday, June 29, 2018)]
[Notices]
[Pages 30738-30740]
[FR Doc No: 2018-14056]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES

Food and Drug Administration

[Docket No. FDA-2009-D-0268]

Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposed Collection;
Comment Request; Labeling of Certain Beers Subject to the Labeling
Jurisdiction of the Food and Drug Administration

AGENCY: Food and Drug Administration, HHS.

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: The Food and Drug Administration (FDA or Agency) is announcing
an opportunity for public comment on the proposed collection of certain
information by the Agency. Under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995
(PRA), Federal Agencies are required to publish notice in the Federal
Register concerning each proposed collection of information, including
each proposed extension of an existing collection of information, and
to allow 60 days for public comment in response to the notice. This
notice solicits comments on the information collection provisions of
the recommended labeling of certain beers subject to our labeling
jurisdiction.

DATES: Submit either electronic or written comments on the collection
of information by August 28, 2018.

ADDRESSES: You may submit comments as follows. Please note that late,
untimely filed comments will not be considered. Electronic comments
must be submitted on or before August 28, 2018. The https://www.regulations.gov electronic filing system will accept comments until
midnight Eastern Time at the end of August 28, 2018. Comments received
by mail/hand delivery/courier (for written/paper submissions) will be
considered timely if they are postmarked or the delivery service
acceptance receipt is on or before that date.

Electronic Submissions

    Submit electronic comments in the following way:
     Federal eRulemaking Portal: https://www.regulations.gov.
Follow the instructions for submitting comments. Comments submitted
electronically, including attachments, to https://www.regulations.gov
will be posted to the docket unchanged. Because your comment will be
made public, you are solely responsible for ensuring that your comment
does not include any confidential information that you or a third party
may not wish to be posted, such as medical information, your or anyone
else's Social Security number, or confidential business information,
such as a manufacturing process. Please note that if you include your
name, contact information, or other information that identifies you in
the body of your comments, that information will be posted on https://www.regulations.gov.
     If you want to submit a comment with confidential
information that you do not wish to be made available to the public,
submit the comment as a written/paper submission and in the manner
detailed (see ``Written/Paper Submissions'' and ``Instructions'').

Written/Paper Submissions

    Submit written/paper submissions as follows:
     Mail/Hand Delivery/Courier (for written/paper
submissions): Dockets Management Staff (HFA-305), Food and Drug
Administration, 5630 Fishers Lane, Rm. 1061, Rockville, MD 20852.
     For written/paper comments submitted to the Dockets
Management Staff, FDA will post your comment, as well as any
attachments, except for information submitted, marked and identified,
as confidential, if submitted as detailed in ``Instructions.''
    Instructions: All submissions received must include the Docket No.
FDA-2009-D-0268 for ``Agency Information Collection Activities;
Proposed Collection; Comment Request; Labeling of Certain Beers Subject
to the Labeling Jurisdiction of the Food and Drug Administration.''
Received comments, those filed in a timely manner (see ADDRESSES), will
be placed in the docket and, except for those submitted as
``Confidential Submissions,'' publicly viewable at https://www.regulations.gov or at the Dockets Management Staff between 9 a.m.
and 4 p.m., Monday through Friday.
     Confidential Submissions--To submit a comment with
confidential information that you do not wish to be made publicly
available, submit your comments only as a written/paper submission. You
should submit two copies total. One copy will include the information
you claim to be confidential with a heading or cover note that states
``THIS DOCUMENT CONTAINS CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION.'' The Agency will
review this copy, including the claimed confidential information, in
its consideration of comments. The second copy, which will have the
claimed confidential information redacted/blacked out, will be
available for public viewing and posted on https://www.regulations.gov.
Submit both copies to the Dockets Management Staff. If you do not wish
your name and contact information to be made publicly available, you
can provide this information on the cover sheet and not in the body of
your comments and you must identify this information as
``confidential.'' Any information marked as ``confidential'' will not
be disclosed except in accordance with 21 CFR 10.20 and other
applicable disclosure law. For more information about FDA's posting of
comments to public dockets, see 80 FR 56469, September 18, 2015, or
access the information at: https://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/FR-2015-09-18/pdf/2015-23389.pdf.
    Docket: For access to the docket to read background documents or
the electronic and written/paper comments received, go to https://www.regulations.gov and insert the docket number, found in brackets in
the heading of this document, into the ``Search'' box and follow the
prompts and/or go to the Dockets Management Staff, 5630 Fishers Lane,
Rm. 1061, Rockville, MD 20852.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Domini Bean, Office of Operations,
Food and Drug Administration, Three White Flint North, 10A-12M, 11601
Landsdown St., North Bethesda, MD 20852,<PHONE_NUMBER>,
[email protected].

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Under the PRA (44 U.S.C. 3501-3520), Federal
Agencies must obtain approval from the Office of Management and Budget
(OMB) for each collection of information they conduct or sponsor.
``Collection of information'' is defined in 44 U.S.C. 3502(3) and 5 CFR
1320.3(c) and includes Agency requests or requirements that members of
the public submit reports, keep records, or provide information to a
third party. Section 3506(c)(2)(A) of the PRA (44 U.S.C. 3506(c)(2)(A))
requires Federal Agencies to provide a 60-day notice in the Federal
Register concerning each proposed collection of information, including
each proposed extension of an existing collection of information,
before submitting the collection to OMB for approval. To comply with
this requirement, FDA is publishing notice of the proposed collection
of information set forth in this document.
    With respect to the following collection of information, FDA
invites comments on these topics: (1) Whether the proposed collection
of information

is necessary for the proper performance of FDA's functions, including
whether the information will have practical utility; (2) the accuracy
of FDA's estimate of the burden of the proposed collection of
information, including the validity of the methodology and assumptions
used; (3) ways to enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the
information to be collected; and (4) ways to minimize the burden of the
collection of information on respondents, including through the use of
automated collection techniques, when appropriate, and other forms of
information technology.

Labeling of Certain Beers Subject to the Labeling Jurisdiction of the
Food and Drug Administration

OMB Control Number 0910-0728--Extension

    The definition of ``food'' under the Federal Food, Drug, and
Cosmetic Act (the FD&C Act) (see 21 U.S.C. 321(f)), includes ``articles
used for food or drink'' and thus includes alcoholic beverages. As
such, alcoholic beverages are subject to the FD&C Act's adulteration
and misbranding provisions and implementing regulations related to
food. For example, manufacturers of alcoholic beverages are responsible
for adhering to the registration of food facilities requirements in 21
CFR part 1 and to the good manufacturing practice regulations in 21 CFR
part 110. There are also certain requirements for nutrition labeling on
menus, menu boards, and other written materials for alcohol beverages
served in restaurants or similar retail food establishments in 21 CFR
part 101. However, as reflected in a 1987 Memorandum of Understanding
between FDA and the Alcohol and Tobacco Tax and Trade Bureau (TTB), TTB
is responsible for the dissemination and enforcement of regulations
with respect to the labeling of distilled spirits, certain wines, and
malt beverages issued in the Federal Alcohol Administration Act (the
FAA Act). In TTB Ruling 2008-3, dated July 7, 2008, TTB clarified that
certain beers, which are not made from both malted barley and hops but
are instead made from substitutes for malted barley (such as sorghum,
rice, or wheat) or are made without hops, do not meet the definition of
a ``malt beverage'' under the FAA Act. Accordingly, TTB stated in its
ruling that such products (other than sak[eacute], which is classified
as a wine under the FAA Act), are not subject to the labeling,
advertising, or other provisions of TTB regulations issued under the
FAA Act.
    In cases where an alcoholic beverage is not covered by the labeling
provisions of the FAA Act, the product is subject to ingredient and
other labeling requirements under the FD&C Act and the implementing
regulations that we administer. In addition, as provided for under the
Fair Packaging and Labeling Act (FPLA), alcoholic beverages that are
not covered by the labeling provisions of the FAA Act are subject to
the provisions of the FPLA, which we administer.
    Therefore, the beers described in TTB's ruling as not being a
``malt beverage'' are subject to the labeling requirements under the
FD&C Act and FPLA, and our implementing regulations. In general, we
require that food products under our jurisdiction be truthfully and
informatively labeled in accordance with the FD&C Act, the FPLA, and
FDA's regulations. Furthermore, some TTB labeling requirements, such as
the Government Health Warning Statement under the Alcoholic Beverage
Labeling Act and certain marking requirements under the Internal
Revenue Code, continue to apply to these products.
    Persons with access to the internet may obtain the guidance
entitled, ``Labeling of Certain Beers Subject to the Labeling
Jurisdiction of the Food and Drug Administration,'' located at https://www.fda.gov/FoodGuidances. This guidance is intended to assist
manufacturers on how to label bottled or otherwise packaged beers that
are subject to our labeling laws and regulations.
    Our food labeling regulations under parts 101, 102, 104, and 105
(21 CFR parts 101, 102, 104, and 105) were issued under the authority
of sections 4, 5, and 6 of the FPLA (15 U.S.C. 1453, 1454, and 1455)
and under sections 201, 301, 402, 403, 409, 411, 701, and 721 of the
FD&C Act (21 U.S.C. 321, 331, 342, 343, 348, 350, 371, and 379e). Most
of these regulations derive from section 403 of the FD&C Act, which
provides that a food product shall be deemed to be misbranded if, among
other things, its label or labeling fails to bear certain required
information concerning the food product, is false or misleading in any
particular, or bears certain types of unauthorized claims. The
disclosure requirements and other collections of information in the
regulations in parts 101, 102, 104, and 105 are necessary to ensure
that food products produced or sold in the United States are in
compliance with the labeling provisions of the FD&C Act and the FPLA.
    The primary user of the information to be disclosed on the label or
labeling of food products is the consumer that purchases the food
product. Consumers will use the information to assist them in making
choices concerning their purchase of a food product, including choices
related to substances that the consumer must avoid to prevent adverse
reactions. This information also enables the consumer to determine the
role of the food product in a healthful diet. Additionally, FDA intends
to use the information to determine whether a manufacturer or other
supplier of food products is meeting its statutory and regulatory
obligations. Failure of a manufacturer or other supplier of food
products to label its products in compliance with section 403 of the
FD& C Act and parts 101, 102, 104, and 105 of FDA's food labeling
regulations may result in a product being misbranded under the FD&C
Act, subjecting the firm and product to regulatory action.
    Description of Respondents: The respondents to this collection of
information are manufacturers of beers that are subject to our labeling
laws and regulations. FDA estimates the burden of this collection of
information as follows:

                                               Table 1--Estimated Annual Third-Party Disclosure Burden \1\
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                Number of
        21 CFR section; activity              Number of      disclosures per    Total annual         Average burden per disclosure         Total hours
                                             respondents       respondent        disclosures
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Sec.  Sec.   101.3 and 101.22...........                12                 2                24  0.5 (30 minutes)......................                12
Sec.   101.4............................                12                 2                24  1.....................................                24
Sec.   101.5............................                12                 2                24  0.25 (15 minutes).....................                 6
Sec.   101.9............................                12                 2                24  4.....................................                96
Sec.   101.105..........................                12                 2                24  0.5 (30 minutes)......................                12
Section 403(w)(1) of the FD&C Act.......                12                 2                24  1.....................................                24

Guidance document entitled ``Labeling of                12                 1                12  1.....................................                12
 Certain Beers Subject to the Labeling
 Jurisdiction of the Food and Drug
 Administration''.
                                         ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Total...............................  ................  ................  ................  ......................................               186
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ There are no capital costs or operating and maintenance costs associated with this collection of information.

    Based on a review of the information collection since our last
request for OMB approval, we have made no adjustments to our burden
estimate. Our estimate of the number of respondents is based on the
number of regulatory submissions to TTB for beers that do not meet the
definition of a ``malt beverage'' under the FAA Act. Based on its
records of submissions received from manufacturers of such products,
TTB estimates the annual number of respondents to be 12 and the annual
number of disclosures to be 24. Thus, we adopt TTB's estimate of 12
annual respondents, and an annual number of disclosures per respondent
of 2 in table 1.
    Our estimates of the average burden per disclosure for each
collection provision are based on our experience with food labeling
under the Agency's jurisdiction. The estimated average burden per
disclosure for Sec. Sec.  101.3, 101.4, 101.5, 101.9, 101.22, and
101.105 in table 1 are equal to, and based upon, the estimated average
burden per disclosure approved by OMB in OMB control number 0910-0381.
We further estimate that the labeling burden of section 403(w)(1) of
the FD&C Act, which specifies requirements for the declaration of food
allergens, will be 1 hour based upon the similarity of the requirements
to that of Sec.  101.4. Finally, FDA estimates that a respondent will
spend 1 hour reading the guidance.
    Thus, we estimate that 12 respondents will each label 2 products
annually, for a total of 24 labels. We estimate that the manufacturers
will spend 7.25 hours (0.5 hours + 1 hour + 0.25 hour + 4 hours + 0.5
hour + 1 hour = 7.25 hours) on each label to comply with our labeling
regulations and the requirements of section 403(w)(1) of the FD&C Act,
for a total of 174 hours (24 labels x 7.25 hours = 174 hours). In
addition, 12 respondents will each spend 1 hour reading the guidance
document, for a total of 12 hours. Thus, we estimate the total hour
burden of the proposed collection of information to be 186 hours (174
hours + 12 hours = 186 hours).
    The guidance also refers to previously approved collections of
information found in our regulations. The collections of information in
Sec. Sec.  101.3, 101.4, 101.5, 101.9, 101.22, and 101.105 have been
approved under OMB control number 0910-0381. Allergen labeling of these
beers under section 403(w)(1) of the FD&C Act, which was added by the
Food Allergen Labeling and Consumer Protection Act of 2004, has been
approved under OMB control number 0910-0792.

    Dated: June 22, 2018.
Leslie Kux,
Associate Commissioner for Policy.
[FR Doc. 2018-14056 Filed 6-28-18; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 4164-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 85, Number 179 (Tuesday, September 15, 2020)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 57085-57086]
[FR Doc No: 2020-20229]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 71

[Docket No. FAA-2017-0346; Airspace Docket No. 17-AAL-2]
RIN 2120-AA66

Amendment of Class E Airspace; Cordova, AK

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: This action modifies the Class E surface area airspace and the
Class E airspace extending upward from 700 feet and 1,200 feet above
the surface of the earth at Merle K (Mudhole) Smith Airport, Cordova,
AK, eliminates references to the Glacier River Non-Directional Beacon
(NDB) and updates the Airport's geographic coordinates to match the
FAA's current aeronautical database. This action supports Instrument
Flight Rules (IFR) operations under standard instrument approach and
departure procedures in the National Airspace System.

DATES: Effective 0901 UTC, December 31, 2020. The Director of the
Federal Register approves this incorporation by reference action under
Title 1 Code of Federal Regulations Part 51, subject to the annual
revision of FAA Order 7400.11 and publication of conforming amendments.

ADDRESSES: FAA Order 7400.11E, Airspace Designations and Reporting
Points, and subsequent amendments can be viewed online at https://www.faa.gov/air_traffic/publications/. For further information, you can
contact the Airspace Policy Group, Federal Aviation Administration, 800
Independence Avenue SW, Washington, DC 20591; telephone: (202) 267-
8783. The Order is also available for inspection at the National
Archives and Records Administration (NARA).
    For information on the availability of FAA Order 7400.11E at NARA,
email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or go to https://www.archives.gov/federal-register/cfr/ibr-locations.html.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Richard Roberts, Federal Aviation
Administration, Western Service Center, Operations Support Group, 2200
S. 216th Street, Des Moines, WA 98198; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Authority for This Rulemaking

    The FAA's authority to issue rules regarding aviation safety is
found in Title 49 of the United States Code. 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. This rulemaking is promulgated under the authority described
in Subtitle VII, Part A, Subpart I, Section 40103. Under that section,
the FAA is charged with prescribing regulations to assign the use of
airspace necessary to ensure the safety of aircraft and the efficient
use of airspace. This regulation is within the scope of that authority
as it modifies Class E surface area airspace and Class E airspace
extending upward from 700 feet and 1,200 feet above the surface of the
earth at Merle K (Mudhole) Smith Airport, Cordova, AK, in support of
IFR operations.

History

    The FAA published a notice of proposed rulemaking in the Federal
Register (85 FR 35229; June 9, 2020) for Docket No. FAA-2017-0346 to
modify Class E airspace at Merle K (Mudhole) Smith Airport, Cordova,
AK, in support of IFR operations at the airport. Interested parties
were invited to participate in this rulemaking effort by submitting
written comments on the proposal to the FAA. No comments were received.
    Class E airspace designations are published in paragraph 6005 of
FAA Order 7400.11E, dated July 21, 2020, and effective September 15,
2020, which is incorporated by reference in 14 CFR 71.1. The Class E
airspace designation listed in this document will be published
subsequently in the Order.

Availability and Summary of Documents for Incorporation by Reference

    This document amends FAA Order 7400.11E, Airspace Designations and
Reporting Points, dated July 21, 2020, and effective September 15,
2020. FAA Order 7400.11E is publicly available as listed in the
ADDRESSES section of this document. FAA Order 7400.11E lists Class A,
B, C, D, and E airspace areas,

air traffic service routes, and reporting points.

The Rule

    The FAA is amending 14 CFR part 71 by modifying the Class E surface
area and Class E airspace extending upward from 700 and 1,200 feet AGL
at Merle K (Mudhole) Smith Airport, Cordova, AK. The FAA completed an
airspace review after the airport was identified as having Class E
airspace established, in error, beyond 12 nautical miles from the
shoreline. This action modifies the Class E airspace extending upward
from the surface by removing that airspace 3.2 miles northwest and 2.1
miles southeast of the 222[deg] bearing from the Glacier River NDB
extending 10 miles southwest of the airport. This action also removes
the airspace 2 miles each side of the 124[deg] bearing from the Glacier
River NDB extending 10.4 miles southeast of the airport. This airspace
is no longer needed because of the implementation of Area Navigation
(RNAV) approaches to Runways 27 and 09. In addition, this action
modifies that airspace 2 miles each side of the 115[deg] bearing to 1
mile each side of the 113[deg] bearing from the airport extending 5.5
miles southeast of the airport. This modification provides protection
for aircraft descending to 1,000 feet on the Instrument Landing System
(ILS) approach to Runway 27.
    The Class E airspace extending upward from 700 feet above the
surface is modified to that airspace within 6.6 miles of the airport
from the point that the 82[deg] bearing intersects the 6.6-mile radius
clockwise to the point that the 309[deg] bearing intersects the 6.6-
mile radius, and includes that airspace 2 miles each side of the
113[deg] bearing extending 16 miles southeast of the airport. This area
protects aircraft on departure until reaching 1,200 feet AGL and
aircraft as they descend through 1,500 feet on the ILS approach to
Runway 27.
    The airspace extending upward from 1,200 feet above the surface is
reduced to within 20 miles of the airport to provide protection for
aircraft above 1,500 feet AGL while transitioning to the enroute
environment.
    The reference in the legal description to the Glacier River NDB is
removed as the airspace is being redesigned without the use of this
reference. In addition, this action updates the geographic coordinates
of the airport to match the FAA's current aeronautical database. This
action supports IFR operations under standard instrument approach and
departure procedures in the National Airspace System.
    FAA Order 7400.11, Airspace Designations and Reporting Points, is
published yearly and effective on September 15.

Regulatory Notices and Analyses

    The FAA has determined that this regulation only involves an
established body of technical regulations for which frequent and
routine amendments are necessary to keep them operationally current, is
non-controversial and unlikely to result in adverse or negative
comments. It, therefore: (1) Is not a ``significant regulatory action''
under Executive Order (E.O.) 12866; (2) is not a ``significant rule''
under DOT Regulatory Policies and Procedures (44 FR 11034; February 26,
1979); and (3) does not warrant preparation of a Regulatory Evaluation
as the anticipated impact is so minimal. Since this is a routine matter
that only affects air traffic procedures and air navigation, it is
certified that this rule, when promulgated, will not have a significant
economic impact on a substantial number of small entities under the
criteria of the Regulatory Flexibility Act.

Environmental Review

    The FAA has determined that this action qualifies for categorical
exclusion under the National Environmental Policy Act in accordance
with FAA Order 1050.1F, ``Environmental Impacts: Policies and
Procedures,'' paragraph 5-6.5a. This airspace action is not expected to
cause any potentially significant environmental impacts, and no
extraordinary circumstances exist that warrant preparation of an
environmental assessment.

Lists of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 71

    Airspace, Incorporation by reference, Navigation (air).

Adoption of the Amendment

    In consideration of the foregoing, the Federal Aviation
Administration amends 14 CFR part 71 as follows:

PART 71--DESIGNATION OF CLASS A, B, C, D, AND E AIRSPACE AREAS; AIR
TRAFFIC SERVICE ROUTES; AND REPORTING POINTS

0
1. The authority citation for Part 71 continues to read as follows:

    Authority:  49 U.S.C. 106(f), 106(g); 40103, 40113, 40120; E.O.
10854, 24 FR 9565, 3 CFR, 1959-1963 Comp., p. 389.

Sec.  71.1  [Amended]

0
2. The incorporation by reference in 14 CFR 71.1 of FAA Order 7400.11E,
Airspace Designations and Reporting Points, dated July 21, 2020, and
effective September 15, 2020, is amended as follows:

Paragraph 6002 Class E Airspace Areas Designated as Surface Areas.

* * * * *

AAL AK E2 Cordova, AK [Modified]

Merle K (Mudhole) Smith, AK
    (Lat. 60[deg]29'30'' N, long. 145[deg]28'39'' W)

    That airspace within a 4.1-mile radius of the Merle K (Mudhole)
Smith Airport beginning at a point where the 69[deg] bearing from
the Airport intersects the 4.1-mile radius clockwise to a point
where the 322[deg] bearing from the Airport intersects the 4.1-mile
radius, thence to the point of beginning and within 1 mile each side
of the 113[deg] bearing from the Airport extending from the 4.1-mile
radius to 5.5 miles southeast of the Airport.

Paragraph 6005 Class E Airspace Areas Extending Upward From 700
Feet or More Above the Surface of the Earth.

* * * * *

AAL AK E5 Cordova, AK [Modified]

Merle K (Mudhole) Smith, AK
    (Lat. 60[deg]29'30'' N, long. 145[deg]28'39'' W)

    That airspace within a 6.6-mile radius of the Merle K (Mudhole)
Smith Airport, beginning where the 82[deg] bearing from the Airport
intersects the 6.6-mile radius clockwise to the point where the
309[deg] bearing intersects the 6.6-mile radius, thence to the point
of beginning and that airspace 2 miles each side of the 113[deg]
bearing from the Airport extending from the 6.6-mile radius to 16
miles southeast from the airport, and that airspace extending upward
from 1,200 feet above the surface within a 20-mile radius of the
airport, excluding that airspace more than 12 miles from the
shoreline.

    Issued in Seattle, Washington, on September 8, 2020.
Byron Chew,
Acting Group Manager, Operations Support Group, Western Service Center.
[FR Doc. 2020-20229 Filed 9-14-20; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


[Federal Register: April 21, 2009 (Volume 74, Number 75)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Page 18121-18124]
[DOCID:fr21ap09-6]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. FAA-2009-0361; Directorate Identifier 2009-NM-046-AD;
Amendment 39-15888; AD 2009-09-02]
RIN 2120-AA64

Airworthiness Directives; Bombardier Model DHC-8-400 Series
Airplanes

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), Department of
Transportation (DOT).

ACTION: Final rule; request for comments.

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

SUMMARY: We are adopting a new airworthiness directive (AD) for the
products listed above. This AD results from mandatory continuing
airworthiness information (MCAI) originated by an aviation authority of
another country to identify and correct an unsafe condition on an
aviation product. The MCAI describes the unsafe condition as:

    Several reports have been received on failures of the aft hinge
of the main landing gear (MLG) forward stabilizer brace. Laboratory
examinations have found that the fatigue cracks were initiated from
the dowel pin hole at the aft hinge lug of the MLG forward
stabilizer brace where the stop bracket is attached. Failure of the
stabilizer brace could result in the collapse of the main landing
gear.

This AD requires actions that are intended to address the unsafe
condition described in the MCAI.

DATES: This AD becomes effective May 6, 2009.
    The Director of the Federal Register approved the incorporation by
reference of certain publications listed in the AD as of May 6, 2009.
    We must receive comments on this AD by May 21, 2009.

ADDRESSES: You may send comments by any of the following methods:
     Federal eRulemaking Portal: Go to http://
www.regulations.gov. Follow the instructions for submitting comments.
     Fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>.
     Mail: U.S. Department of Transportation, Docket
Operations, M-30, West Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140, 1200 New
Jersey Avenue, SE., Washington, DC 20590.
     Hand Delivery: U.S. Department of Transportation, Docket
Operations, M-30, West Building Ground Floor, Room W12-40, 1200 New
Jersey Avenue, SE., Washington, DC, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday
through Friday, except Federal holidays.

Examining the AD Docket

    You may examine the AD docket on the Internet at http://
www.regulations.gov; or in person at the Docket Operations office
between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal
holidays. The AD docket contains this AD, 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: Jon Hjelm, Aerospace Engineer,
Airframe and Propulsion Branch, ANE-171, FAA, New York Aircraft
Certification Office, 1600 Stewart Avenue, Suite 410, Westbury, New
York 11590; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Discussion

    Transport Canada Civil Aviation (TCCA), which is the aviation
authority for Canada, has issued Canadian Emergency Airworthiness
Directive CF-2009-11, dated March 13, 2009 (referred to after this as
``the MCAI''), to correct an unsafe condition for the specified
products. The MCAI states:

    Several reports have been received on failures of the aft hinge
of the main landing gear (MLG) forward stabilizer brace. Laboratory
examinations have found that the fatigue cracks were initiated from
the dowel pin hole at the aft hinge lug of the MLG forward
stabilizer brace where the stop bracket is attached. Failure of the
stabilizer brace could result in the collapse of the main landing
gear.

Required actions include inspections for damage (including excessive
wear, corrosion, foreign object damage, and cracking) of the MLG
forward stabilizer brace assemblies and applicable corrective actions.
The inspections include the following inspections:
     A visual inspection for evidence of excessive wear on the
outside diameter of apex pins part number 46418-1.
     A visual inspection for damage (including cracking,
corrosion, and foreign object damage) of the face of the forward
stabilizer brace lugs, stop bracket retention hole apex bushings, and
stop bracket.
     An inspection to detect 0.050-inch-long exposed surface
cracks around the stop bracket mounting face and retention pin hole
areas, using either of the following nondestructive inspection methods:
(1) An eddy current inspection, or (2) a visual inspection using liquid
penetrant under 10X magnification.
    The applicable corrective actions include the following:
     Contacting Goodrich for repair instructions and doing the
repair.
     Replacing the stop bracket.
     Reworking the forward stabilizer brace assembly.
     Replacing the forward stabilizer brace assembly.
    The required actions also include, for certain airplanes,
repetitive detailed visual inspection for cracking of both MLG forward
stabilizer braces, including liquid penetrant inspections for cracking
if necessary, and repair of the cracking if necessary. The required
actions also include, for certain airplanes, a detailed visual
inspection

for cracking of the stabilizer brace apex lugs. The required actions
also include, for certain airplanes, repair in accordance with a method
approved by the FAA or TCCA.
    You may obtain further information by examining the MCAI in the AD
docket.

Relevant Service Information

    Bombardier has issued Repair Drawing 8/4-32-099, Issue 1, dated
March 10, 2009; and Q400 All Operator Message 338, dated February 23,
2009. Goodrich has issued Service Concession Request 026-09, Revision
B, dated March 10, 2009. The actions described in this service
information are intended to correct the unsafe condition identified in
the MCAI.

FAA's Determination and Requirements of This 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 issuing this AD because we
evaluated all pertinent information and determined the unsafe condition
exists and is likely to exist or develop on other products of the same
type design.

Differences Between the AD and the MCAI or Service Information

    We have reviewed the MCAI and related service information and, in
general, agree with their substance. But we might have found it
necessary to use different words from those in the MCAI to ensure the
AD is clear for U.S. operators and is enforceable. In making these
changes, we do not intend to differ substantively from the information
provided in the MCAI and related service information.
    We might also have required different actions in this AD from those
in the MCAI in order to follow FAA policies. Any such differences are
highlighted in a Note within the AD.

FAA's Determination of the Effective Date

    An unsafe condition exists that requires the immediate adoption of
this AD. The FAA has found that the risk to the flying public justifies
waiving notice and comment prior to adoption of this rule because some
affected airplanes are approaching the threshold at which failure of
the aft hinge MLG brace could occur and result in the collapse of the
MLG. Therefore, we determined that notice and opportunity for public
comment before issuing this AD are impracticable and that good cause
exists for making this amendment effective in fewer than 30 days.

Comments Invited

    This AD is a final rule that involves requirements affecting flight
safety, and we did not precede it by notice and opportunity for public
comment. We invite you to send any written relevant data, views, or
arguments about this AD. Send your comments to an address listed under
the ADDRESSES section. Include ``Docket No. FAA-2009-0361; Directorate
Identifier 2009-NM-046-AD'' at the beginning of your comments. We
specifically invite comments on the overall regulatory, economic,
environmental, and energy aspects of this AD. We will consider all
comments received by the closing date and may amend this AD because of
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 AD.

Authority for This Rulemaking

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

Regulatory Findings

    We determined that this AD will not have federalism implications
under Executive Order 13132. This AD will 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 AD:
    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); and
    3. 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.
    We prepared a regulatory evaluation of the estimated costs to
comply with this AD and placed it in the AD docket.

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39

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

Adoption of the Amendment

0
Accordingly, under the authority delegated to me by the Administrator,
the FAA amends 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 AD:

2009-09-02 Bombardier, Inc. (Formerly de Havilland, Inc.): Amendment
39-15888. Docket No. FAA-2009-0361; Directorate Identifier 2009-NM-
046-AD.

Effective Date

    (a) This airworthiness directive (AD) becomes effective May 6,
2009.

Affected ADs

    (b) None.

Applicability

    (c) This AD applies to Bombardier Model DHC-8-400, DHC-8-401,
and DHC-8-402 series airplanes; certificated in any category, serial
numbers 4001, 4003, and subsequent.

Subject

    (d) Air Transport Association (ATA) of America Code 32: Landing
gear.

Reason

    (e) The mandatory continued airworthiness information (MCAI)
states:
    Several reports have been received on failures of the aft hinge
of the main landing gear (MLG) forward stabilizer brace. Laboratory
examinations have found that the fatigue cracks were initiated from
the dowel pin hole at the aft hinge lug of the MLG forward
stabilizer brace where the stop bracket is attached. Failure of the
stabilizer brace could result in the collapse of the main landing
gear.

Actions and Compliance

    (f) Unless already done, do the following actions:
    (1) At the applicable time specified in paragraph (f)(1)(i),
(f)(1)(ii), (f)(1)(iii), or (f)(1)(iv) of this AD: Perform non-
destructive inspections for damage of the MLG forward stabilizer
brace assemblies part number (P/N) 46401-7, in accordance with
Bombardier Repair Drawing 8/4-32-099, Issue 1, dated March 10, 2009;
and Goodrich Service Concession Request 026-09, Revision B, dated
March 10, 2009. Repeat the inspection thereafter at intervals not to
exceed 2,000 flight cycles.
    (i) For airplanes with MLG forward stabilizer braces that have
accumulated 12,000 or more total flight cycles as of the effective
date of this AD: Inspect within 50 flight cycles after the effective
date of this AD.
    (ii) For airplanes with MLG forward stabilizer braces that have
accumulated 9,000 or more total flight cycles but fewer than 12,000
total flight cycles as of the effective date of this AD: Inspect
before the accumulation of 12,050 total flight cycles, or within 500
flight cycles after the effective date of this AD, whichever occurs
earlier.
    (iii) For airplanes with MLG forward stabilizer braces that have
accumulated 4,500 or more total flight cycles but fewer than 9,000
total flight cycles as of the effective date of this AD: Inspect
before the accumulation of 9,500 total flight cycles, or within
1,500 flight cycles after the effective date of this AD, whichever
occurs earlier.
    (iv) For airplanes with MLG forward stabilizer braces that have
accumulated fewer than 4,500 total flight cycles as of the effective
date of this AD: Inspect before the accumulation of 6,000 total
flight cycles.
    (2) If any damage is found during any inspection required by
paragraph (f)(1) of this AD, before further flight, do all
applicable corrective actions in accordance with Goodrich Service
Concession Request 026-09, Revision B, dated March 10, 2009, except
as provided by paragraphs (f)(3), (f)(4), (f)(5), and (f)(6) of this
AD.
    (3) For airplanes on which step 24. of Goodrich Service
Concession Request 026-09, Revision B, dated March 10, 2009, has
been done: Within 1,200 flight cycles after the effective date of
this AD, rework the MLG forward stabilizer brace, and except for
airplanes on which the rework has been done, within 600 flight
cycles after the effective date of this AD do a detailed visual
inspection for damage of the stabilizer brace apex lugs, in
accordance with Goodrich Service Concession Request 026-09, Revision
B, dated March 10, 2009. If any damage is found, repair before
further flight in accordance with Section C of Goodrich Service
Concession Request 026-09, Revision B, dated March 10, 2009.
    (4) At the applicable time specified in paragraph (f)(4)(i),
(f)(4)(ii), or (f)(4)(iii) of this AD, replace the forward
stabilizer brace assembly, in accordance with Goodrich Service
Concession Request 026-09, Revision B, dated March 10, 2009.
    (i) For airplanes on which cracking is found during any
inspection required by this AD, and the cracking exceeds the limit
specified in Section C of Goodrich Service Concession Request 026-
09, Revision B, dated March 10, 2009: Replace the assembly before
further flight.
    (ii) For airplanes on which any cracking is found after the
rework specified in Section C of Goodrich Service Concession Request
026-09, Revision B, dated March 10, 2009: Replace the assembly
before further flight.
    (iii) For airplanes on which no cracking is found after the
rework specified in Section C of Goodrich Service Concession Request
026-09, Revision B, dated March 10, 2009: Replace the assembly
within 2,700 flight cycles after doing the rework.
    (5) If foreign object damage is found during any inspection
required by this AD, or if damage is found to a forward stabilizer
brace lug or stop bracket retention hole apex bushing, before
further flight, repair using a method approved by either the
Manager, New York Aircraft Certification Office, ANE-170, FAA; or
Transport Canada Civil Aviation (TCCA) (or its delegated agent).
    (6) If any crack is found during the visual inspection under 10X
magnification, repair before further flight, in accordance with
Goodrich Service Concession Request 026-09, Revision B, dated March
10, 2009.
    (7) Before the accumulation of 6,000 total flight cycles on the
MLG forward stabilizer braces, or within 600 flight hours after the
effective date of this AD, whichever occurs later: Do a detailed
visual inspection for cracking of both MLG forward stabilizer braces
and do all applicable liquid penetrant inspections for cracking, in
accordance with Bombardier Q400 All Operator Message 338, dated
February 23, 2009. Repeat the inspection thereafter at intervals not
to exceed 600 flight hours. If any cracking is found during any
inspection required by this paragraph, repair before further flight
in accordance with Bombardier Repair Drawing 8/4-32-099, Issue 1,
dated March 10, 2009; and Goodrich Service Concession Request 026-
09, Revision B, dated March 10, 2009.
    (8) Submit a report of all findings of the inspections required
by paragraph (f)(1) of this AD to the Bombardier Technical Help
Desk, e-mail<EMAIL_ADDRESS>fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>;
telephone:<PHONE_NUMBER>; at the applicable time specified in
paragraph (f)(8)(i) or (f)(8)(ii) of this AD. The report must
include the information specified in sheets 3 and 4 of Bombardier
Repair Drawing 8/4-32-099, Issue 1, dated March 10, 2009.
    (i) If the inspection was done on or after the effective date of
this AD: Submit the report within 10 days after the inspection.
    (ii) If the inspection was accomplished prior to the effective
date of this AD: Submit the report within 10 days after the
effective date of this AD.

FAA AD Differences

    Note:  This AD differs from the MCAI and/or service information
as follows: No differences.

Other FAA AD Provisions

    (g) The following provisions also apply to this AD:
    (1) Alternative Methods of Compliance (AMOCs): The Manager, New
York Aircraft Certification Office, FAA, has the authority to
approve AMOCs for this AD, if requested using the procedures found
in 14 CFR 39.19. Send information to ATTN: Jon Hjelm, Aerospace
Engineer, Airframe and Propulsion Branch, ANE-171, FAA, New York
Aircraft Certification Office, 1600 Stewart Avenue, Suite 410,
Westbury, New York 11590; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax (516) 794-
5531. Before using any approved AMOC on any airplane to which the
AMOC applies, notify your principal maintenance inspector (PMI) or
principal avionics inspector (PAI), as appropriate, or lacking a
principal inspector, your local Flight Standards District Office.
The AMOC approval letter must specifically reference this AD.
    (2) Airworthy Product: For any requirement in this AD to obtain
corrective actions from a manufacturer or other source, use these
actions if they are FAA-approved. Corrective actions are considered
FAA-approved if they are approved by the State of Design Authority
(or their delegated agent). You are required to ensure the product
is airworthy before it is returned to service.
    (3) Reporting Requirements: For any reporting requirement in
this AD, under the provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act, the
Office of Management and Budget (OMB) has approved the information
collection requirements and has assigned OMB Control Number 2120-
0056.
    (4) Special Flight Permits: Special flight permits may be issued
in accordance with sections 21.197 and 21.199 of the Federal
Aviation Regulations (14 CFR 21.197 and 21.199) to operate the
airplane to a location where the airplane can be modified (if the
operator elects to do so), provided that, within 10 flight cycles
after detection of the discrepancy that requires repair, operators
perform a detailed visual inspection for cracking of both MLG
forward stabilizer braces and do all applicable non-destructive
inspections (eddy current or visual liquid penetrant inspections)
for cracking, in accordance with Bombardier Q400 All Operator
Message 338, dated February 23, 2009; and repair any cracking before
further flight in accordance with Goodrich Service Concession
Request 026-09, Revision B, dated March 10, 2009.

Related Information

    (h) Refer to MCAI Canadian Emergency Airworthiness Directive CF-
2009-11, dated March 13, 2009; Bombardier Q400 All Operator Message
338, dated February 23, 2009; Bombardier Repair Drawing 8/4-32-099,
Issue 1, dated March 10, 2009; and Goodrich Service Concession
Request 026-09, Revision B, dated March 10, 2009; for related
information.

Material Incorporated by Reference

    (i) You must use Bombardier Q400 All Operator Message 338, dated
February 23, 2009; Bombardier Repair Drawing 8/4-32-099, Issue 1,
dated March 10, 2009; and Goodrich Service Concession Request 026-
09, Revision B, dated March 10, 2009; as applicable; to do the
actions required by this AD, unless the AD specifies otherwise. (The
issue date of Bombardier Q400 All Operator

Message 338, dated February 23, 2009; and Bombardier Repair Drawing
8/4-32-099, Issue 1, dated March 10, 2009; is specified only on the
first page of the documents.) Goodrich Service Concession Request
026-09, Revision B, dated March 10, 2009, contains the following
effective pages:

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                    Revision
                                      level
             Page No.               shown on       Date shown on page
                                      page
------------------------------------------------------------------------
1-8..............................          B   March 5, 2009.
9-22.............................          B   March 10, 2009.
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    (1) The Director of the Federal Register approved the
incorporation by reference of this service information under 5
U.S.C. 552(a) and 1 CFR part 51.
    (2) For Bombardier service information identified in this AD,
contact Bombardier, Inc., 400 C[ocirc]te-Vertu Road West, Dorval,
Qu[eacute]bec H4S 1Y9, Canada; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax 514-855-
7401; e-mail<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Internet http://
www.bombardier.com. For Goodrich service information identified in
this AD, contact Goodrich Corporation, Landing Gear, 1400 South
Service Road, West Oakville L6L 5Y7, Ontario, Canada; telephone 905-
825-1568; e-mail<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Internet http://
www.goodrich.com/TechPubs.
    (3) You may review copies of the service information at the FAA,
Transport Airplane Directorate, 1601 Lind Avenue, SW., Renton,
Washington. For information on the availability of this material at
the FAA, call<PHONE_NUMBER> or<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    (4) You may also review copies of the service information that
is incorporated by reference at the National Archives and Records
Administration (NARA). For information on the availability of this
material at NARA, call<PHONE_NUMBER>, or go to: http://
www.archives.gov/federal_register/code_of_federal_regulations/
ibr_locations.html.

    Issued in Renton, Washington, on April 8, 2009.
Ali Bahrami,
Manager, Transport Airplane Directorate, Aircraft Certification
Service.
[FR Doc. E9-8995 Filed 4-20-09; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


[Federal Register Volume 79, Number 53 (Wednesday, March 19, 2014)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 15219-15220]
[FR Doc No: 2014-06030]

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

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

Bureau of Industry and Security

15 CFR Parts 730 and 744

[Docket No. 140227183-4183-01]
RIN 0694-AG07

Updated Statements of Legal Authority for the Export
Administration Regulations

AGENCY: Bureau of Industry and Security, Commerce.

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: This rule updates the Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) legal
authority paragraphs in the Export Administration Regulations (EAR) to
cite a Presidential notice extending an emergency declared pursuant to
the International Emergency Economic Powers Act. This is a procedural
rule that only updates authority paragraphs of the EAR. It does not
alter any right, obligation or prohibition that applies to any person
under the EAR.

DATES: The rule is effective March 19, 2014.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: William Arvin, Regulatory Policy
Division, Bureau of Industry and Security, Email
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Telephone:<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Background

    The authority for parts 730 and 744 of the EAR (15 CFR parts 730
and 744) rests, in part, on Executive Order 12947 of January 23, 1995--
National Emergency With Respect to Terrorists Who Threaten To Disrupt
the Middle East Peace Process (60 FR 5079, 3 CFR, 1995 Comp., p. 356)
and on annual notices by the President continuing that emergency. This
rule updates the authority paragraphs in 15 CFR parts 730 and 744 to
cite the notice of January 21, 2014, 79 FR 3721 (January 22, 2014),
continuing that emergency.
    This rule is purely procedural and makes no changes other than to
revise CFR authority paragraphs for the purpose of making the authority
citations current. It does not change the text of any section of the
EAR, nor does it alter any right, obligation or prohibition that
applies to any person under the EAR.

Export Administration Act

    Although the Export Administration Act expired on August 20, 2001,
the President, through Executive Order 13222 of August 17, 2001, 3 CFR,
2001 Comp., p. 783 (2002), as amended by Executive Order 13637 of March
8, 2013, 78 FR 16129 (March 13, 2013) and as extended by the Notice of
August 8, 2013, 78 FR 49107 (August 12, 2013), has continued the Export
Administration Regulations in effect under the International Emergency
Economic Powers Act (50 U.S.C. 1701). BIS continues to carry out the
provisions of the Export Administration Act, as appropriate and to the
extent permitted by law, pursuant to Executive Order 13222 as amended
by Executive Order 13637.

Rulemaking Requirements

    1. Executive Orders 13563 and 12866 direct agencies to assess all
costs and benefits of available regulatory alternatives and, if
regulation is necessary, to select regulatory approaches that maximize
net benefits (including potential economic, environmental, public
health and safety effects, distributive impacts, and equity). This rule
does not impose any regulatory burden on the public and is consistent
with the goals of Executive Order 13563. This rule has been determined
to be not significant for purposes of Executive Order 12866.
    2. Notwithstanding any other provision of law, no person is
required to respond to, nor shall any person be subject to a penalty
for failure to comply with, a collection of information subject to the
requirements of the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501 et
seq.) (PRA), unless that collection of information displays a currently
valid Office of Management and Budget (OMB) Control Number. This rule
does not involve any collection of information.
    3. This rule does not contain policies with Federalism implications
as that term is defined under Executive Order 13132.
    4. The Department finds that there is good cause under 5 U.S.C.
553(b)(3)(B) to waive the provisions of the Administrative Procedure
Act requiring prior notice and the opportunity for public comment
because they are unnecessary. This rule only updates legal authority
citations. It clarifies information and is non-discretionary. This rule
does not alter any right, obligation or prohibition that applies to any
person under the EAR. Because these revisions are not substantive
changes, it is unnecessary to provide notice and opportunity for public
comment. In addition, the 30-day delay in effectiveness required by 5
U.S.C. 553(d) is not applicable because this rule is not a substantive
rule. Because neither the Administrative Procedure Act nor any other
law requires that notice of proposed rulemaking and an opportunity for
public comment be given for this rule, the analytical requirements of
the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.) are not
applicable.

List of Subjects

15 CFR Part 730

    Administrative practice and procedure, Advisory committees,
Exports, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Strategic and
critical materials.

15 CFR Part 744

    Exports, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Terrorism.

    Accordingly, parts 730 and 744 of the EAR (15 CFR parts 730-774)
are amended as follows:

PART 730--[AMENDED]

0
1. The authority citation for 15 CFR part 730 is revised to read as
follows:

    Authority:  50 U.S.C. app. 2401 et seq.; 50 U.S.C. 1701 et seq.;
10 U.S.C. 7420; 10 U.S.C. 7430(e); 22 U.S.C. 287c; 22 U.S.C. 2151
note; 22 U.S.C. 3201 et seq.; 22 U.S.C. 6004; 30 U.S.C. 185(s),
185(u); 42 U.S.C. 2139a; 42 U.S.C. 6212; 43 U.S.C. 1354; 15 U.S.C.
1824a; 50 U.S.C. app. 5; 22 U.S.C. 7201 et seq.; 22 U.S.C. 7210;
E.O. 11912, 41 FR 15825, 3 CFR, 1976 Comp., p. 114; E.O. 12002, 42
FR 35623, 3 CFR, 1977 Comp., p. 133; E.O. 12058, 43 FR 20947, 3 CFR,
1978 Comp., p. 179; E.O. 12214, 45 FR 29783, 3 CFR, 1980 Comp., p.
256; E.O. 12851, 58 FR 33181, 3 CFR, 1993 Comp., p. 608; E.O. 12854,
58 FR 36587, 3 CFR, 1993 Comp., p. 179; E.O. 12918, 59 FR 28205, 3
CFR, 1994 Comp., p. 899; E.O. 12938, 59 FR 59099, 3 CFR, 1994 Comp.,
p. 950; E.O. 12947, 60 FR 5079, 3 CFR, 1995 Comp., p. 356; E.O.
12981, 60 FR 62981, 3 CFR, 1995 Comp., p. 419; E.O. 13020, 61 FR
54079, 3 CFR, 1996 Comp., p. 219; E.O. 13026, 61 FR 58767, 3 CFR,
1996 Comp., p. 228; E.O. 13099, 63 FR 45167, 3 CFR, 1998 Comp., p.
208; E.O. 13222, 66 FR 44025, 3 CFR, 2001 Comp., p. 783; E.O. 13224,
66 FR 49079, 3 CFR, 2001 Comp., p. 786; E.O. 13338, 69 FR 26751, 3
CFR, 2004 Comp., p 168; E.O. 13637 of March 8, 2013, 78 FR 16129
(March 13, 2013); Notice of May 7, 2013, 78 FR 27301 (May 9, 2013);
Notice of August 8, 2013, 78 FR 49107 (August 12, 2013); Notice of
September 18, 2013, 78 FR 58151 (September 20, 2013); Notice of
November 7, 2013, 78 FR 67289 (November 12, 2013); Notice of January
21, 2014, 79 FR 3721 (January 22, 2014).

PART 744--[AMENDED]

0
2. The authority citation for 15 CFR part 744 is revised to read as
follows:

    Authority:  50 U.S.C. app. 2401 et seq.; 50 U.S.C. 1701 et seq.;
22 U.S.C. 3201 et seq.; 42 U.S.C. 2139a; 22 U.S.C. 7201 et seq.; 22
U.S.C. 7210; E.O. 12058, 43 FR 20947, 3 CFR, 1978 Comp., p. 179;
E.O. 12851, 58 FR 33181, 3 CFR, 1993 Comp., p. 608; E.O. 12938, 59
FR 59099, 3 CFR, 1994 Comp., p. 950; E.O. 12947, 60 FR 5079, 3 CFR,
1995 Comp., p. 356; E.O. 13026, 61 FR 58767, 3 CFR, 1996 Comp., p.
228; E.O. 13099, 63 FR 45167, 3 CFR, 1998 Comp., p. 208; E.O. 13222,
66 FR 44025, 3 CFR, 2001 Comp., p. 783; E.O. 13224, 66 FR 49079, 3
CFR, 2001 Comp., p. 786; Notice of August 8, 2013, 78 FR 49107
(August 12, 2013); Notice of September 18, 2013, 78 FR 58151
(September 20, 2013); Notice of November 7, 2013, 78 FR 67289
(November 12, 2013); Notice of January 21, 2014, 79 FR 3721 (January
22, 2014).

    Dated: March 13, 2014.
Kevin J. Wolf,
Assistant Secretary for Export Administration.
[FR Doc. 2014-06030 Filed 3-18-14; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-33-P


[Federal Register Volume 86, Number 125 (Friday, July 2, 2021)]
[Notices]
[Pages 35309-35310]
[FR Doc No: 2021-14251]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Federal Emergency Management Agency

[Docket ID FEMA-2020-0016]

Meetings To Implement Pandemic Response Voluntary Agreement Under
Section 708 of the Defense Production Act

AGENCY: Federal Emergency Management Agency, Department of Homeland
Security.

ACTION: Announcement of meetings.

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

SUMMARY: The Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) is holding a
series of meetings to implement the Voluntary Agreement for the
Manufacture and Distribution of Critical Healthcare Resources Necessary
to Respond to a Pandemic.

DATES: The schedule for these meetings is as follows:
     The first meeting took place on Tuesday, June 22, 2021,
from 2 to 4 p.m. Eastern Time (ET).
     The second meeting took place on Wednesday, June 23, 2021,
from 11 a.m. to 1 p.m. ET.
     The third meeting took place on Tuesday, June 29, 2021,
from 2 to 4 p.m. ET.
     The fourth meeting took place on Thursday, July 1, 2021,
from 2 to 4 p.m. ET.
     The fifth meeting will take place on Tuesday, July 20,
2021, from 11 a.m. to 1 p.m. ET.
     The sixth meeting will take place on Thursday, July 22,
2021, from 2 to 4 p.m. ET.
     The seventh meeting will take place on Tuesday, August 3,
2021, from 11 a.m. to 1 p.m. ET.
     The eighth meeting will take place on Thursday, August 5,
2021, from 2 to 4 p.m. ET.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Robert Glenn, Office of Business,
Industry, Infrastructure Integration, via email at<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or
via phone at<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Notice of these meetings is provided as
required by section 708(h)(8) of the Defense Production Act (DPA), 50
U.S.C. 4558(h)(8), and consistent with 44 CFR part 332.
    The DPA authorizes the making of ``voluntary agreements and plans
of action'' with representatives of industry, business, and other
interests to help provide for the national defense.\1\ The President's
authority to facilitate voluntary agreements with respect to responding
to the spread of COVID-19 within the United States was delegated to the
Secretary of Homeland Security in Executive Order 13911.\2\ The
Secretary of Homeland Security further delegated this authority to the
FEMA Administrator.\3\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ 50 U.S.C. 4558(c)(1).
    \2\ 85 FR 18403 (Apr. 1, 2020).
    \3\ DHS Delegation 09052, Rev. 00.1 (Apr. 1, 2020); DHS
Delegation Number 09052 Rev. 00 (Jan. 3, 2017).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    On August 17, 2020, after the appropriate consultations with the
Attorney General and the Chairman of the Federal Trade Commission, FEMA
completed and published in the Federal Register a ``Voluntary
Agreement, Manufacture and Distribution of Critical Healthcare
Resources Necessary to Respond to a Pandemic'' (Voluntary
Agreement).\4\ Unless terminated earlier, the Voluntary Agreement is
effective until August 17, 2025, and may be extended subject to
additional approval by the Attorney General after consultation with the
Chairman of the Federal Trade Commission. The Agreement may be used to
prepare for or respond to any pandemic, including COVID-19, during that
time.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ 85 FR 50035 (Aug. 17, 2020). The Attorney General, in
consultation with the Chairman of the Federal Trade Commission, made
the required finding that the purpose of the voluntary agreement may
not reasonably be achieved through an agreement having less
anticompetitive effects or without any voluntary agreement and
published the finding in the Federal Register on the same day. 85 FR
50049 (Aug. 17, 2020).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    On December 7, 2020, the first plan of action under the Voluntary
Agreement--the Plan of Action to Establish a National Strategy for the
Manufacture, Allocation, and Distribution of Personal Protective
Equipment (PPE) to Respond to COVID-19 (PPE Plan of Action)--was
finalized.\5\ The PPE Plan of Action established several sub-committees
under the Voluntary Agreement, focusing on different aspects of the PPE
Plan of Action.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ See 85 FR 78869 (Dec. 7, 2020). See also 85 FR 79020 (Dec.
8, 2020).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    On May 24, 2021, four additional plans of action under the
Voluntary Agreement--the Plan of Action to Establish a National
Strategy for the Manufacture, Allocation, and Distribution of
Diagnostic Test Kits and other Testing Components to respond to COVID-
19, the Plan of Action to

Establish a National Strategy for the Manufacture, Allocation, and
Distribution of Drug Products, Drug Substances, and Associated Medical
Devices to respond to COVID-19, the Plan of Action to Establish a
National Strategy for the Manufacture, Allocation, and Distribution of
Medical Devices to respond to COVID-19, and the Plan of Action to
Establish a National Strategy for the Manufacture, Allocation, and
Distribution of Medical Gases to respond to COVID-19--were
finalized.\6\ These plans of action established several sub-committees
under the Voluntary Agreement, focusing on different aspects of each
plan of action.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ See 86 FR 27894 (May 24, 2021). See also 86 FR 28851 (May
28, 2021).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The meetings are chaired by the FEMA Administrator or her delegate
and attended by the Attorney General and the Chairman of the Federal
Trade Commission or their delegates. In implementing the Voluntary
Agreement, FEMA adheres to all procedural requirements of 50 U.S.C.
4558 and 44 CFR part 332.
    Meeting Objectives: The objectives of the meetings are as follows:
    1. Gather committee Participants and Attendees to ask targeted
questions for situational awareness about PPE, drug products and drug
substances, diagnostic test kits, medical devices, and medical gases.
    2. Establish priorities for COVID-19 response under the Voluntary
Agreement.
    3. Identify tasks that should be completed under the appropriate
Sub-Committee.
    4. Identify information gaps and areas that merit sharing (both
from FEMA to the private sector and vice versa).
    Meetings Closed to the Public: By default, the DPA requires
meetings held to implement a voluntary agreement or plan of action be
open to the public.\7\ However, attendance may be limited if the
Sponsor \8\ of the voluntary agreement finds that the matter to be
discussed at a meeting falls within the purview of matters described in
5 U.S.C. 552b(c), such as trade secrets and commercial or financial
information. The Sponsor of the Voluntary Agreement, the FEMA
Administrator, found that these meetings to implement the Voluntary
Agreement involve matters which fall within the purview of matters
described in 5 U.S.C. 552b(c) and the meetings are therefore closed to
the public.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ See 50 U.S.C. 4558(h)(7).
    \8\ ``[T]he individual designated by the President in subsection
(c)(2) [of section 708 of the DPA] to administer the voluntary
agreement, or plan of action.'' 50 U.S.C. 4558(h)(7).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Specifically, these meetings to implement the Voluntary Agreement
may require participants to disclose trade secrets or commercial or
financial information that is privileged or confidential. Disclosure of
such information allows for meetings to be closed pursuant to 5 U.S.C.
552b(c)(4). In addition, the success of the Voluntary Agreement depends
wholly on the willing and enthusiastic participation of private sector
participants. Failure to close these meetings could have a strong
chilling effect on private sector participation and cause a substantial
risk that sensitive information will be prematurely released to the
public, leading to participants withdrawing their support from the
Voluntary Agreement. This would significantly frustrate the
implementation of the Voluntary Agreement. Frustration of an agency's
objective due to premature disclosure of information allows for the
closure of a meeting pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 552b(c)(9)(B).

Deanne Criswell,
Administrator, Federal Emergency Management Agency.
[FR Doc. 2021-14251 Filed 7-1-21; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 9111-19-P