[Federal Register: January 10, 2006 (Volume 71, Number 6)]
[Notices]
[Page 1564-1569]
[DOCID:fr10ja06-61]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Investment Company Act Release No. 27201; 812-13050]

Thrivent Mutual Funds, et al.; Notice of Application

January 3, 2006.
AGENCY: Securities and Exchange Commission (``Commission'').

ACTION: Notice of an application for an order under (a) section 6(c) of
the Investment Company Act of 1940 (``Act'') granting an exemption from
sections 18(f) and 21(b) of the Act; (b) section 12(d)(1)(J) of the Act
granting an exemption from section 12(d)(1) of the Act; (c) sections
6(c) and 17(b) of the Act granting an exemption from sections 17(a)(1)
and 17(a)(3) of the Act; and (d) section 17(d) of the Act and rule 17d-
1 under the Act to permit certain joint transactions.

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

Summary of the Application: Applicants request an order that would
permit certain registered open-end management investment companies to
participate in a joint lending and borrowing facility.

Applicants: Thrivent Mutual Funds (formerly known as The AAL Mutual
Funds), Thrivent Series Fund, Inc. (formerly known as LB Series Fund,
Inc.), Thrivent Financial Securities Lending Trust (collectively, the
``Thrivent Investment Companies''), Thrivent Financial for Lutherans
(``Thrivent Financial''), Thrivent Investment Management, Inc.
(``Thrivent Investment Management''), any other person controlling,
controlled by or under common control (within the meaning of section
2(a)(9) of the Act) with Thrivent Financial (together with Thrivent
Financial and Thrivent Investment Management, a ``Thrivent Adviser''),
and any other open-end management investment company registered under
the Act that in the future is advised by a Thrivent Adviser (``Future
Investment Companies'', and together with the Thrivent Investment
Companies, the ``Investment Companies'').

Filing Dates: The application was filed on December 11, 2003, and
amended on December 23, 2005.

Hearing or Notification of Hearing: An order granting the application
will be issued unless the Commission orders a hearing. Interested
persons may request a hearing by writing to the Commission's Secretary
and serving applicants with a copy of the request, personally or by
mail. Hearing requests should be received by the Commission by 5:30
p.m. on January 30, 2006, and should be accompanied by proof of service
on applicants, in the form of an affidavit or, for lawyers, a
certificate of service. Hearing requests should state the nature of the
writer's interest, the reason for the request, and the issues
contested. Persons who wish to be notified of a hearing may request
notification by writing to the Commission's Secretary.

ADDRESSES: Secretary, U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission, 100 F
Street, NE., Washington, DC 20549-9303. Applicants, James M. Odland,
Esq., Thrivent Financial for Lutherans, 625 Fourth Avenue South,
Minneapolis, Minnesota 55415.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Shannon Conaty, Senior Counsel, at
(202) 551-6827 or Mary Kay Frech, Branch Chief, at<PHONE_NUMBER>
(Division of Investment Management, Office of Investment Company
Regulation).

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The following is a summary of the
application. The complete application may be obtained for a fee at the
Commission's Public Reference Desk, 100 F Street, NE., Washington, DC
20549-0102 (tel.<PHONE_NUMBER>).

Applicants' Representations

    1. Each Thrivent Investment Company is registered under the Act as
an open-end management investment company. Each of Thrivent Mutual
Funds and Thrivent Financial Securities Lending Trust is organized as a
Massachusetts business trust. Thrivent Series Fund, Inc. is organized
as a Minnesota corporation. The Thrivent Investment Companies are
comprised of multiple series; each series has separate investment
objectives, policies and assets.\1\ Thrivent Financial, a fraternal
benefit society organized under the laws of Wisconsin, Thrivent
Investment Management, a corporation organized under the laws of
Delaware, and any other Thrivent Adviser are each registered as an
investment adviser under the Investment Advisers Act of 1940. Each Fund
has entered into an investment advisory agreement with a Thrivent
Adviser.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ All Investment Companies that currently intend to rely on
the order have been named as applicants. Any other existing or
Future Investment Company that subsequently relies on the order will
comply with the terms and conditions of the application. (An
Investment Company, if it has no series, and each series of an
Investment Company are referred to as a ``Fund''.)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    2. Existing Commission orders permit the Funds that are not money
market Funds to invest uninvested cash balances in one or more series
that are money market Funds that comply with rule 2a-7 under the Act
(``Money Market Funds'').\2\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \2\ The AAL Mutual Funds, et al., Investment Company Act Release
Nos. 25254 (Nov. 6, 2001) (notice) and 25309 (Dec. 4, 2001) (order);
AAL Variable Product Series Fund, Inc. et al., Investment Company
Act Release Nos. 25253 (Nov. 6, 2001) (notice) and 25307 (Dec. 4,
2001) (order); The AAL Mutual Funds, SEC Staff No-Action Letter
(Dec. 12, 2002).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    3. Some Funds may lend money to banks or other entities by entering
into repurchase agreements or purchasing other short-term investments.
Other Funds may borrow money from the same or similar banks for
temporary purposes to satisfy redemption requests or to cover
unanticipated cash shortfalls such as a trade ``fail'' in which cash
payment for a security sold by a Fund has been delayed. Currently, the
Funds have credit arrangements with their custodian banks (i.e.,
overdraft protection) under which the custodians may, but are not
obligated to, lend money to the Funds to meet the Funds' temporary cash
needs.
    4. If the Funds were to borrow money from their custodians under
their current arrangements or under other credit facility arrangements
with a bank, the Funds would pay interest on the borrowed cash at a
rate which would be higher than the rate that would be earned by other
(non-borrowing) Funds on investments in repurchase agreements and other
short-term instruments of the same maturity as the bank loan.
Applicants state that this differential represents the profit the bank
would earn for serving as a middleman between a borrower and lender.
Other bank loan arrangements, such as committed lines of credit,
require the Funds to pay commitment fees in addition to the interest
rate to be paid by the borrowing Fund.
    5. Applicants request an order that would permit the Funds to enter
into interfund lending agreements (``Interfund Lending Agreements'')
under which the Funds would lend and borrow money for temporary
purposes directly to and from each other through a credit facility
(``Interfund Loan''). Applicants believe that the proposed credit
facility would reduce the Funds' borrowing costs and enhance their
ability to earn higher interest rates on short-term investments.
Although the proposed credit facility would reduce the Funds' need to
borrow from banks, the Funds would be free to establish committed lines
of credit or other borrowing arrangements with banks. The Funds also
would continue to maintain the overdraft protection currently provided
by their custodians.
    6. Applicants anticipate that the credit facility would provide a
borrowing Fund with significant savings when the cash position of the
Fund is insufficient to meet temporary cash requirements. This
situation could arise when redemptions exceed anticipated volumes and
certain Funds have insufficient cash on hand to satisfy such
redemptions. When a Fund liquidates portfolio securities to meet
redemption requests which normally are effected immediately, it often
does not receive payment in settlement for up to three days (or longer
for certain foreign transactions). The credit facility would provide a
source of immediate, short-term liquidity pending settlement of the
sale of portfolio securities.
    7. Applicants also propose using the credit facility when a sale of
securities ``fails'' due to circumstances such as a delay in the
delivery of cash to a Fund's custodian or improper delivery
instructions by the broker effecting the transaction. Sales fails may
present a cash shortfall if a Fund has undertaken to purchase
securities using the proceeds from the securities sold. When a Fund
experiences a cash shortfall due to a sales fail, the custodian
typically extends temporary credit to cover the shortfall and the Fund
incurs overdraft charges. Alternatively, the Fund could fail on its
intended purchase due to lack of funds from the previous sale,
resulting in additional cost to the Fund, or sell a security on a same
day settlement basis, earning a lower return on the investment. Use of
the credit facility under these circumstances would enable the Fund to
have access to immediate short-term liquidity without incurring
custodian overdraft or other charges.
    8. While borrowing arrangements with banks will continue to be
available to cover unanticipated redemptions and sales fails, under the
proposed credit facility a borrowing Fund would pay lower interest
rates than those offered by banks on short-term loans. In addition,
Funds making short-term cash loans directly to other Funds would earn
interest at a rate higher than they otherwise could obtain from
investing their cash in repurchase agreements. Thus, applicants believe
that the proposed credit facility would benefit both borrowing and
lending Funds.
    9. The interest rate charged to a Fund on any Interfund Loan
(``Interfund Loan Rate'') would be the average of the ``Repo Rate'' and
the ``Bank Loan Rate,'' both as defined below. The Repo Rate on any day
would be the highest rate available to the Funds from investing in
overnight repurchase agreements. The Bank Loan Rate on any day would be
calculated by the Cash Management Team, defined below, each day an
Interfund Loan is made according to a formula established by a Fund's
board of trustees or directors (each, a ``Board'') intended to
approximate the lowest interest rate at which bank short-term loans
would be available to the Funds. The formula would be based upon a
publicly available rate (e.g., Federal funds plus 25 basis points) and
would

vary with this rate so as to reflect changing bank loan rates. The
Board of each Fund would periodically review the continuing
appropriateness of using the publicly available rate to determine the
Bank Loan Rate, as well as the relationship between the Bank Loan Rate
and current bank loan rates that would be available to the Funds. The
initial formula and any subsequent modifications to the formula would
be subject to the approval of each Fund's Board.
    10. The credit facility would be administered by Thrivent
Financial's and Thrivent Investment Management's money market portfolio
managers and members of investment operations together with staff of
Thrivent Financial's mutual fund accounting department (collectively,
the ``Cash Management Team'').\3\ Under the proposed credit facility,
the portfolio managers for each participating Fund could provide
standing instructions to participate daily as a borrower or lender. The
Cash Management Team on each business day would collect data on the
uninvested cash and borrowing requirements of all participating Funds
from the Funds' custodians. Once it determined the aggregate amount of
cash available for loans and borrowing demand, the Cash Management Team
would allocate loans among borrowing Funds without any further
communication from portfolio managers other than the Money Market Fund
portfolio managers on the Cash Management Team. Applicants expect far
more available uninvested cash each day than borrowing demand. All
allocations will require the approval of at least one member of the
Cash Management Team who is not a Money Market Fund portfolio manager.
After the Cash Management Team has allocated cash for Interfund Loans,
the Cash Management Team would invest any remaining cash in accordance
with the standing instructions of portfolio managers or return
remaining amounts to the Funds. The Money Market Funds typically would
not participate as borrowers because they rarely need to borrow cash to
meet redemptions.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ All Funds currently are advised by either Thrivent Financial
or Thrivent Investment Management. In the event that any other
Thrivent Adviser serves as investment adviser to any Fund in the
future, appropriate contractual arrangements will be made to assure
that members of the Cash Management Team will have the authority to
administer the credit facility on behalf of such Fund.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    11. The Cash Management Team would allocate borrowing demand and
cash available for lending among the Funds on what the Cash Management
Team believes to be an equitable basis, subject to certain
administrative procedures applicable to all Funds, such as the time of
filing requests to participate, minimum loan lot sizes, and the need to
minimize the number of transactions and associated administrative
costs. To reduce transaction costs, each Interfund Loan normally would
be allocated in a manner intended to minimize the number of
participants necessary to complete the loan transaction. The method of
allocation and related administrative procedures would be approved by
each Fund's Board, including a majority of Board members who are not
``interested persons'' of the Fund, as defined in section 2(a)(19) of
the Act (``Independent Trustees/Directors''), to ensure both borrowing
and lending Funds participate on an equitable basis.
    12. The Cash Management Team and the Thrivent Adviser would (a)
Monitor the Interfund Loan Rates and the other terms and conditions of
the loans; (b) limit the borrowings and loans entered into by each Fund
to ensure that they comply with the Fund's investment policies and
limitations; (c) ensure equitable treatment of each Fund; and (d) make
quarterly reports to the Board of each Fund concerning any transactions
by the Fund under the credit facility and the Interfund Loan Rate
charged.
    13. The Thrivent Adviser, through the Cash Management Team, would
administer the credit facility under its existing management or
advisory agreement with each Fund and would receive no additional
compensation for its services. Thrivent Financial or companies
affiliated with it may collect fees in connection with repurchase and
lending transactions generally, including transactions through the
credit facility, for pricing and record keeping, bookkeeping and
accounting services. These fees would be no higher than those
applicable for comparable loan transactions.
    14. No Fund may participate in the credit facility unless: (a) The
Fund has obtained shareholder approval for its participation, if such
approval is required by law; (b) the Fund has fully disclosed all
material facts concerning the credit facility in its statement of
additional information (``SAI''); and (c) the Fund's participation in
the credit facility is consistent with its investment objectives,
limitations and organizational documents.
    15. In connection with the credit facility, applicants request an
order under (a) section 6(c) of the Act granting relief from sections
18(f) and 21(b) of the Act; (b) section 12(d)(1)(J) of the Act granting
relief from section 12(d)(1) of the Act; (c) sections 6(c) and 17(b) of
the Act granting relief from sections 17(a)(1) and 17(a)(3) of the Act;
and (d) under section 17(d) and rule 17d-1 under the Act to permit
certain joint arrangements.

Applicants' Legal Analysis

    1. Section 17(a)(3) generally prohibits any affiliated person, or
affiliated person of an affiliated person, from borrowing money or
other property from a registered investment company. Section 21(b)
generally prohibits any registered management company from lending
money or other property to any person if that person controls or is
under common control with the company. Section 2(a)(3)(C) of the Act
defines an ``affiliated person'' of another person, in part, to be any
person directly or indirectly controlling, controlled by, or under
common control with, the other person. Applicants state that the Funds
may be under common control by virtue of having a Thrivent Adviser as
their common investment adviser and having a common Board and officers.
    2. Section 6(c) provides that an exemptive order may be granted
where an exemption is necessary or appropriate in the public interest
and consistent with the protection of investors and the purposes fairly
intended by the policy and provisions of the Act. Section 17(b)
authorizes the Commission to exempt a proposed transaction from section
17(a) provided that the terms of the transaction, including the
consideration to be paid or received, are fair and reasonable and do
not involve overreaching on the part of any person concerned, and the
transaction is consistent with the policy of the investment company as
recited in its registration statement and with the general purposes of
the Act. Applicants believe that the proposed arrangements satisfy
these standards for the reasons discussed below.
    3. Applicants submit that sections 17(a)(3) and 21(b) of the Act
were intended to prevent a party with strong potential adverse
interests to, and some influence over the investment decisions of, a
registered investment company from causing or inducing the investment
company to engage in lending transactions that unfairly inure to the
benefit of such party and that are detrimental to the best interests of
the investment company and its shareholders. Applicants assert that the
proposed credit facility transactions do not raise these concerns
because: (a) The Thrivent Adviser, through the Cash Management Team,
would administer the program as a disinterested fiduciary;

(b) all Interfund Loans would consist only of uninvested cash reserves
that the Funds otherwise would invest in short-term repurchase
agreements or other short-term instruments either directly or through a
Money Market Fund; (c) the Interfund Loans would not involve a greater
risk than such other investments; (d) the lending Fund would receive
interest at a rate higher than it could obtain through such other
investments; and (e) the borrowing Fund would pay interest at a rate
lower than otherwise available to it under its bank loan agreements and
avoid the up-front commitment fees associated with committed lines of
credit. Moreover, applicants believe that the other conditions in the
application would effectively preclude the possibility of any Fund
obtaining an undue advantage over any other Fund.
    4. Section 17(a)(1) generally prohibits an affiliated person of a
registered investment company, or an affiliated person of an affiliated
person, from selling any securities or other property to the company.
Section 12(d)(1) generally makes it unlawful for a registered
investment company to purchase or otherwise acquire any security issued
by any other investment company except in accordance with the
limitations set forth in that section. Applicants state that the
obligation of a borrowing Fund to repay an Interfund Loan may
constitute a security under sections 17(a)(1) and 12(d)(1). Section
12(d)(1)(J) provides that the Commission may exempt persons or
transactions from any provision of section 12(d)(1) if and to the
extent such exemption is consistent with the public interest and the
protection of investors. Applicants contend that the standards under
sections 6(c), 17(b), and 12(d)(1)(J) are satisfied for all the reasons
set forth above in support of their request for relief from sections
17(a)(3) and 21(b) and for the reasons discussed below.
    5. Applicants state that section 12(d)(1) was intended to prevent
the pyramiding of investment companies in order to avoid imposing on
investors additional and duplicative costs and fees attendant upon
multiple layers of investment companies. Applicants submit that the
proposed credit facility does not involve these abuses. Applicants note
that there will be no duplicative costs or fees to the Funds or
shareholders, and that the Thrivent Adviser will receive no additional
compensation for its services in administering the credit facility.
Applicants also note that the purpose of the proposed credit facility
is to provide economic benefits for all of the participating Funds and
their shareholders.
    6. Section 18(f)(1) prohibits open-end investment companies from
issuing any senior security except that a company is permitted to
borrow from any bank; provided, that immediately after the borrowing,
there is asset coverage of at least 300 per centum for all borrowings
of the company. Under section 18(g) of the Act, the term ``senior
security'' includes any bond, debenture, note or similar obligation or
instrument constituting a security and evidencing indebtedness.
Applicants request relief from section 18(f)(1) to the limited extent
necessary to implement the credit facility (because the lending Funds
are not banks).
    7. Applicants believe that granting relief under section 6(c) is
appropriate because the Funds would remain subject to the requirement
of section 18(f)(1) that all borrowings of a Fund, including combined
interfund and bank borrowings, have at least 300% asset coverage. Based
on the conditions and safeguards described in the application,
applicants also submit that to allow the Funds to borrow from other
Funds pursuant to the proposed credit facility is consistent with the
purposes and policies of section 18(f)(1).
    8. Section 17(d) and rule 17d-1 generally prohibit any affiliated
person of a registered investment company, or affiliated persons of an
affiliated person, when acting as principal, from effecting any joint
transactions in which the company participates unless the transaction
is approved by the Commission. Rule 17d-1(b) provides that in passing
upon applications filed under the rule, the Commission will consider
whether the participation of a registered investment company in a joint
enterprise on the basis proposed is consistent with the provisions,
policies, and purposes of the Act and the extent to which the company's
participation is on a basis different from or less advantageous than
that of other participants.
    9. Applicants submit that the purpose of section 17(d) is to avoid
overreaching by and unfair advantage to investment company insiders.
Applicants believe that the credit facility is consistent with the
provisions, policies, and purposes of the Act in that it offers both
reduced borrowing costs and enhanced returns on loaned funds to all
participating Funds and their shareholders. Applicants note that each
Fund would have an equal opportunity to borrow and lend on equal terms
consistent with its investment policies and fundamental investment
limitations. Applicants therefore believe that each Fund's
participation in the credit facility will be on terms that are no
different from or less advantageous than that of other participating
Funds.

Applicants' Conditions

    Applicants agree that any order granting the requested relief will
be subject to the following conditions:
    1. The Interfund Loan Rate to be charged to the Funds under the
credit facility will be the average of the Repo Rate and the Bank Loan
Rate.
    2. On each business day, the Cash Management Team will compare the
Bank Loan Rate with the Repo Rate and will make cash available for
Interfund Loans only if the Interfund Loan Rate is (a) more favorable
to the lending Fund than the Repo Rate, and, if applicable, the yield
of any Money Market Funds in which the lending Fund could otherwise
invest, and (b) more favorable to the borrowing Fund than the Bank Loan
Rate.
    3. If a Fund has outstanding borrowings, any Interfund Loans to the
Fund (a) will be made at an interest rate equal to or lower than any
outstanding bank loan, (b) will be secured at least on an equal
priority basis with at least an equivalent percentage of collateral to
loan value as any outstanding bank loan that requires collateral, (c)
will have a maturity no longer than any outstanding bank loan (and in
any event not over seven days), and (d) will provide that, if an event
of default occurs under any agreement evidencing an outstanding bank
loan to the Fund, that event of default will automatically (without
need for action or notice by the lending Fund) constitute an immediate
event of default under the Interfund Lending Agreement entitling the
lending Fund to call the Interfund Loan (and exercise all rights with
respect to any collateral) and that such call will be made if the
lending bank exercises its right to call its loan under its agreement
with the borrowing Fund.
    4. A Fund may make an unsecured borrowing through the credit
facility if its outstanding borrowings from all sources immediately
after the interfund borrowing total 10% or less of its total assets,
provided that if the Fund has a secured loan outstanding from any other
lender, including but not limited to another Fund, the Fund's interfund
borrowing will be secured on at least an equal priority basis with at
least an equivalent percentage of collateral to loan value as any
outstanding loan that requires collateral. If a Fund's total
outstanding borrowings immediately after an interfund borrowing would
be greater than 10% of its total assets, the Fund may borrow through
the credit

facility on a secured basis only. A Fund may not borrow through the
credit facility or from any other source if its total outstanding
borrowings immediately after the interfund borrowing would exceed the
limits imposed by section 18 of the Act.
    5. Before any Fund that has outstanding interfund borrowings may,
through additional borrowings, cause its outstanding borrowings from
all sources to exceed 10% of its total assets, the Fund must first
secure each outstanding Interfund Loan by the pledge of segregated
collateral with a market value at least equal to 102% of the
outstanding principal value of the loan. If the total outstanding
borrowings of a Fund with outstanding Interfund Loans exceed 10% of its
total assets for any other reason (such as a decline in net asset value
or because of shareholder redemptions), the Fund will within one
business day thereafter (a) repay all its outstanding Interfund Loans,
(b) reduce its outstanding indebtedness to 10% or less of its total
assets, or (c) secure each outstanding Interfund Loan by the pledge of
segregated collateral with a market value at least equal to 102% of the
outstanding principal value of the loan until the Fund's total
outstanding borrowings cease to exceed 10% of its total assets, at
which time the collateral called for by this condition (5) shall no
longer be required. Until each Interfund Loan that is outstanding at
any time that a Fund's total outstanding borrowings exceed 10% is
repaid or the Fund's total outstanding borrowings cease to exceed 10%
of its total assets, the Fund will mark the value of the collateral to
market each day and will pledge such additional collateral as is
necessary to maintain the market value of the collateral that secures
each outstanding Interfund Loan at least equal to 102% of the
outstanding principal value of the loan.
    6. No Fund may lend to another Fund through the credit facility if
the loan would cause the lending Fund's aggregate outstanding loans
through the credit facility to exceed 15% of its net assets at the time
of the loan.
    7. A Fund's Interfund Loans to any one Fund shall not exceed 5% of
the lending Fund's net assets.
    8. The duration of Interfund Loans will be limited to the time
required to receive payment for securities sold, but in no event more
than seven days. Loans effected within seven days of each other will be
treated as separate loan transactions for purposes of this condition.
    9. A Fund's borrowings through the credit facility, as measured on
the day when the most recent loan was made, will not exceed the greater
of 125% of the Fund's total net cash redemptions and 102% of sales
fails for the preceding seven calendar days.
    10. Each Interfund Loan may be called on one business day's notice
by a lending Fund and may be repaid on any day by a borrowing Fund.
    11. A Fund's participation in the credit facility must be
consistent with its investment policies and limitations and
organizational documents.
    12. The Cash Management Team will calculate total Fund borrowing
and lending demand through the credit facility, and allocate loans on
an equitable basis among the Funds without the intervention of any
portfolio manager of the Funds (except any portfolio manager of the
Money Market Funds acting in her or his capacity as a member of the
Cash Management Team). All allocations will require the approval of at
least one member of the Cash Management Team who is not a Money Market
Fund portfolio manager. The Cash Management Team will not solicit cash
for the credit facility from any Fund or prospectively publish or
disseminate loan demand data to portfolio managers (except to the
extent that the portfolio managers of the Money Market Funds on the
Cash Management Team have access to loan demand data). The Cash
Management Team will invest any amounts remaining after satisfaction of
borrowing demand in accordance with the standing instructions from
portfolio managers or return remaining amounts to the Funds.
    13. The Cash Management Team and the Thrivent Adviser will monitor
the interest rates charged and the other terms and conditions of the
Interfund Loans and will make a quarterly report to the Board(s)
concerning the participation of the Funds in the credit facility and
the terms and other conditions of any extensions of credit under the
credit facility.
    14. The Board of each Fund, including a majority of the Independent
Trustees/Directors: (a) Will review no less frequently than quarterly
the Fund's participation in the credit facility during the preceding
quarter for compliance with the conditions of any order permitting the
transactions; (b) will establish the Bank Loan Rate formula used to
determine the interest rate on Interfund Loans and review no less
frequently than annually the continuing appropriateness of the Bank
Loan Rate formula; and (c) will review no less frequently than annually
the continuing appropriateness of the Fund's participation in the
credit facility.
    15. In the event an Interfund Loan is not paid according to its
terms and the default is not cured within two business days from its
maturity or from the time the lending Fund makes a demand for payment
under the provisions of the Interfund Lending Agreement, the Cash
Management Team will promptly refer the loan for arbitration to an
independent arbitrator selected by the Board(s) of any Funds involved
in the loan who will serve as arbitrator of disputes concerning
Interfund Loans.\4\ The arbitrator will resolve any problem promptly,
and the arbitrator's decision will be binding on both Funds. The
arbitrator will submit at least annually a written report to the Board
of each Fund setting forth a description of the nature of any dispute
and the actions taken by the Funds to resolve the dispute.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ If the dispute involves Funds with separate Boards, the
Board of each Fund will select an independent arbitrator that is
satisfactory to each Fund.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    16. Each Fund will maintain and preserve for a period of not less
than six years from the end of the fiscal year in which any transaction
under the credit facility occurred, the first two years in an easily
accessible place, written records of all such transactions setting
forth a description of the terms of the transaction, including the
amount, the maturity and rate of interest on the loan, the rate of
interest available at the time on short-term repurchase agreements and
bank borrowings, the yield on any Money Market Fund in which the
lending Fund could invest, and such other information presented to the
Board in connection with the review required by conditions (13) and
(14).
    17. The Cash Management Team and the Thrivent Adviser will prepare
and submit to the Board of each Fund for review an initial report
describing the operations of the credit facility and the procedures to
be implemented to ensure that all Funds are treated fairly. After the
commencement of operations of the credit facility, the Cash Management
Team and the Thrivent Adviser will report on the operations of the
credit facility at each Board's quarterly meetings. In addition, for
two years following the commencement of the credit facility, the
independent public accountant for each Fund shall prepare an annual
report that evaluates the respective Thrivent Adviser's assertion that
it has established procedures reasonably designed to achieve compliance
with the conditions of the order. The report shall be prepared in
accordance with the Statements on Standards for Attestation Engagements

No. 10 and it shall be filed pursuant to Item 77Q3 of Form N-SAR, as
such Statements or Form may be revised, amended, or superseded from
time to time. In particular, the report shall address procedures
designed to achieve the following objectives: (a) That the Interfund
Loan Rate will be higher than the Repo Rate and, if applicable, the
yield of the Money Market Funds, but lower than the Bank Loan Rate; (b)
compliance with the collateral requirements as set forth in the
application; (c) compliance with the percentage limitations on
interfund borrowing and lending; (d) allocation of interfund borrowing
and lending demand in an equitable manner and in accordance with
procedures established by the Board(s); and (e) that the interest rate
on any Interfund Loan does not exceed the interest rate on any third
party borrowings of a borrowing Fund at the time of the Interfund Loan.
    After the final report is filed, the Fund's external auditors, in
connection with their Fund audit examinations, will continue to review
the operation of the credit facility for compliance with the conditions
of the application and their review will form the basis, in part, of
the auditor's report on internal accounting controls in Form N-SAR.
    18. No Fund will participate in the credit facility upon receipt of
requisite regulatory approval unless it has fully disclosed in its SAI
all material facts about its intended participation.
    19. The Board of any Fund will satisfy the fund governance
standards as defined in rule 0-1(a)(7) under the Act by the compliance
date for the rule.

    For the Commission, by the Division of Investment Management,
under delegated authority.
Nancy M. Morris,
Secretary.
 [FR Doc. E6-83 Filed 1-9-06; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 8010-01-P


MEMORANDUM

To:	File

From:	Michael Galbraith, USEPA/OSWER/OSW/HWMMD

Date:	8/19/08

Re:	Meeting with Council of Industrial Boiler Owners (CIBO)

On August 19, 2008 EPA (Michael Galbraith and Robert Kayser) met with
Robert Bessette of CIBO.  Attendees are listed in the attached sign-in
sheet.

The main purpose of the meeting was for “meet and greet” purposes
because EPA was adding some additional new staff to work on this
project.  Mr. Bessette described his organization and briefly summarized
previous interactions between CIBO and EPA with respect to the issue of
which materials are fuels, and not solid wastes under RCRA, for purposes
of determining applicability of relevant CAA 112 and 129 standards.

As a follow-up to this meeting, Mr. Bessette forwarded a copy of a
report titled “Characterization of the U.S. Industrial Commercial
Boiler Population”, which is provided as an attachment.

Attachment


[Federal Register Volume 85, Number 66 (Monday, April 6, 2020)]
[Notices]
[Page 19218]
[FR Doc No: 2020-07121]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration

[Docket No. FMCSA-2013-0107; FMCSA-2013-0109; FMCSA-2017-0253]

Qualification of Drivers; Exemption Applications; Epilepsy and
Seizure Disorders

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

ACTION: Notice of final disposition.

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

SUMMARY: FMCSA announces its decision to renew exemptions for four
individuals from the requirement in the Federal Motor Carrier Safety
Regulations (FMCSRs) that interstate commercial motor vehicle (CMV)
drivers have ``no established medical history or clinical diagnosis of
epilepsy or any other condition which is likely to cause loss of
consciousness or any loss of ability to control a CMV.'' The exemptions
enable these individuals who have had one or more seizures and are
taking anti-seizure medication to continue to operate CMVs in
interstate commerce.

DATES: Each group of renewed exemptions were applicable on the dates
stated in the discussions below and will expire on the dates provided
below.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ms. Christine A. Hydock, Chief,
Medical Programs Division,<PHONE_NUMBER><EMAIL_ADDRESS>FMCSA,
Department of Transportation, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE, Room W64-224,
Washington, DC 20590-0001. Office hours are from 8:30 a.m. to 5 p.m.,
ET, Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays. If you have
questions regarding viewing or submitting material to the docket,
contact Docket Operations,<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Public Participation

A. Viewing Documents and Comments

    To view comments, as well as any documents mentioned in this notice
as being available in the docket, go to http://www.regulations.gov/docket?D=FMCSA-2013-0107 or http://www.regulations.gov/docket?D=FMCSA-2013-0109 or http://www.regulations.gov/docket?D=FMCSA-2017-0253 and
choose the document to review. If you do not have access to the
internet, you may view the docket online by visiting Docket Operations
in Room W12-140 on the ground floor of the DOT West Building, 1200 New
Jersey Avenue SE, Washington, DC 20590, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., ET,
Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays.

B. Privacy Act

    In accordance with 5 U.S.C. 553(c), DOT solicits comments from the
public to better inform its rulemaking process. DOT posts these
comments, without edit, including any personal information the
commenter provides, to www.regulations.gov, as described in the system
of records notice (DOT/ALL-14 FDMS), which can be reviewed at
www.transportation.gov/privacy.

II. Background

    On February 20, 2020, FMCSA published a notice announcing its
decision to renew exemptions for four individuals from the epilepsy and
seizure disorders prohibition in 49 CFR 391.41(b)(8) to operate a CMV
in interstate commerce and requested comments from the public (85 FR
9928). The public comment period ended on March 23, 2020, and no
comments were received.
    FMCSA has evaluated the eligibility of these applicants and
determined that renewing these exemptions would achieve a level of
safety equivalent to, or greater than, the level that would be achieved
by complying with Sec.  391.41(b)(8).
    The physical qualification standard for drivers regarding epilepsy
found in Sec.  391.41(b)(8) states that a person is physically
qualified to drive a CMV if that person has no established medical
history or clinical diagnosis of epilepsy or any other condition which
is likely to cause the loss of consciousness or any loss of ability to
control a CMV.
    In addition to the regulations, FMCSA has published advisory
criteria \1\ to assist medical examiners in determining whether drivers
with certain medical conditions are qualified to operate a CMV in
interstate commerce.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ These criteria may be found in APPENDIX A TO PART 391--
MEDICAL ADVISORY CRITERIA, section H. Epilepsy: Sec.  391.41(b)(8),
paragraphs 3, 4, and 5, which is available on the internet at
https://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/CFR-2015-title49-vol5/pdf/CFR-2015-title49-vol5-part391-appA.pdf.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

III. Discussion of Comments

    FMCSA received no comments in this proceeding.

IV. Conclusion

    Based on its evaluation of the four renewal exemption applications
and comments received, FMCSA announces its decision to exempt the
following drivers from the epilepsy and seizure disorders prohibition
in Sec.  391.41(b)(8).
    In accordance with 49 U.S.C. 31136(e) and 31315(b), the following
groups of drivers received renewed exemptions in the month of February
and are discussed below.
    As of February 14, 2020, and in accordance with 49 U.S.C. 31136(e)
and 31315(b), the following two individuals have satisfied the renewal
conditions for obtaining an exemption from the epilepsy and seizure
disorders prohibition in the FMCSRs for interstate CMV drivers (85 FR
9928): John Johnson (WI) and George Webb (MA).
    The drivers were included in docket number FMCSA-2013-0107 and
FMCSA-2013-0109. Their exemptions are applicable as of February 14,
2020, and will expire on February 14, 2022.
    As of February 19, 2020, and in accordance with 49 U.S.C. 31136(e)
and 31315(b), the following two individuals have satisfied the renewal
conditions for obtaining an exemption from the epilepsy and seizure
disorders prohibition in the FMCSRs for interstate CMV drivers (85 FR
9928): Anthony Kornuszko (PA) and Jeffrey Mills (NC).
    The drivers were included in docket number FMCSA-2017-0253. Their
exemptions are applicable as of February 19, 2020, and will expire on
February 19, 2022.
    In accordance with 49 U.S.C. 31315(b), each exemption will be valid
for 2 years from the effective date unless revoked earlier by FMCSA.
The exemption will be revoked if the following occurs: (1) The person
fails to comply with the terms and conditions of the exemption; (2) the
exemption has resulted in a lower level of safety than was maintained
prior to being granted; or (3) continuation of the exemption would not
be consistent with the goals and objectives of 49 U.S.C. 31136(e) and
31315(b).

Larry W. Minor,
Associate Administrator for Policy.
[FR Doc. 2020-07121 Filed 4-3-20; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 4910-EX-P


[Federal Register: January 21, 2009 (Volume 74, Number 12)]
[Notices]
[Page 3617-3619]
[DOCID:fr21ja09-89]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES

Food and Drug Administration

[Docket No. FDA-2008-N-0658]

Risk Assessment of the Public Health Impact From Foodborne
Listeria monocytogenes in Some Ready-to-Eat Foods Sliced, Prepared,
and/or Packaged in Retail Facilities; Request for Comments and for
Scientific Data and Information

AGENCY: Food and Drug Administration, HHS.

ACTION:  Notice; request for comments and for scientific data and
information.

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

SUMMARY: The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) is requesting

comments and scientific data and information that would assist the
agency in its plans to conduct a risk assessment of the public health
impact of foodborne Listeria monocytogenes in some ready-to-eat foods
sliced, prepared, and/or packaged in retail facilities. The purpose of
the risk assessment is to ascertain the impact on public health of
current practices and potential interventions that reduce or prevent L.
monocytogenes contamination in ready-to-eat food.

DATES: Submit comments and scientific data and information by April 21,
2009.

ADDRESSES:  Submit written comments and scientific data and information
to the Division of Dockets Management (HFA-305), Food and Drug
Administration, 5630 Fishers Lane, rm. 1061, Rockville, MD 20852.
Submit electronic comments, scientific data, and information to http://
www.regulations.gov.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Sherri Dennis, Center for Food Safety
and Applied Nutrition (HFS-005), Food and Drug Administration, 5100
Paint Branch Pkwy, College Park, MD 20740,<PHONE_NUMBER>, e-mail:
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Background

    The Department of Health and Human Services' Healthy People 2010 is
a comprehensive set of disease prevention and health promotion
objectives for the Nation to achieve over the first decade of the new
century. Created by scientists both inside and outside of government,
it identifies a wide range of public health priorities and specific,
measurable objectives. One of these objectives calls on Federal food
safety agencies to reduce foodborne listeriosis (Ref. 1). In support of
this goal, in 2003, FDA and the Food Safety and Inspection Service
(FSIS) of the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) issued an
assessment of the relative risk to public health from foodborne
Listeria monocytogenes among selected categories of ready-to-eat (RTE)
foods (Listeria risk assessment, Ref. 2). The Listeria risk assessment
formed the basis of the 2003 FDA and Centers for Disease Control and
Prevention (CDC) Listeria Action Plan (Ref. 3), which identifies
prevention and control activities that FDA and CDC will take to reduce
the incidence of foodborne listeriosis in the United States.
    The 2003 Listeria risk assessment provided the first quantitative
estimate of the relative risk of listeriosis from consumption of a
variety of RTE foods. Among the RTE foods evaluated in the 2003 risk
assessment, deli meats (e.g., luncheon meats) were considered to
present the highest risk per serving and the highest risk per annum.
This rank was the result of a moderate contamination frequency, a high
number of servings consumed and high growth rates of L. monocytogenes.
Additional data obtained in California and Maryland showed that L.
monocytogenes prevalence and levels in luncheon meats, deli-style
salads, and seafood salads were higher for in-store-packaged than for
manufacturer-packaged foods (Ref. 4). This observation was confirmed
for meat and poultry products in a study by the National Alliance for
Food Safety and Security performed in northern California, Georgia,
Minnesota, and Tennessee in 2008 (Ref. 5). Using these latter results,
it was estimated that most of the listeriosis cases attributed to
ready-to-eat meat and poultry deli meats are from products sliced and
packaged at retail (FSIS/USDA, unpublished results).
    Little is known about how Listeria contamination occurs in retail
facilities. Retail practices may result in either cross-contamination
from one product to another or through contamination from the retail
environment. There is thus a need to identify potential sources and
practices that may increase L. monocytogenes contamination in retail
settings and practices or interventions that could reduce or eliminate
L. monocytogenes contamination of food products (sold to consumers at
the retail level) and resulting human illness.
    FDA is engaged in a risk assessment that will evaluate the dynamics
of L. monocytogenes contamination in retail facilities contributing to
listeriosis. It will evaluate how specific practices could affect the
overall level and frequency of contamination, and the relative
effectiveness of various process changes and intervention strategies
intended to reduce human illness. The project will address FDA and USDA
regulated RTE foods. It will focus on RTE foods that are sliced,
prepared, and/or packaged for the consumer in the retail environment
and consumed in the home. Cheeses, deli meats, and deli-type salads (as
defined in Ref. 2) will be studied as representative examples.
    This risk assessment of the public health impact of L.
monocytogenes in RTE foods sliced, prepared, and/or packaged in retail
facilities supports the agency's commitment to fulfilling the Listeria
Action Plan (Ref. 3).

II. Request for Comments and for Scientific Data and Information

    FDA requests comments on the risk assessment goals outlined in this
document and the submission of scientific data and information relevant
to the risk assessment. Specifically, we request data and information
about the following:
    1. Characteristics of ready-to-eat food markets in the United
States, including:
    a. Volumes of cheeses and deli meats sliced by manufacturers and
the volumes sliced in retail facilities,
    b. Volumes of deli-type salads prepared by manufacturers and the
volumes prepared in retail facilities, and
    c. Volumes of ready-to-eat food sold in delicatessen departments of
major grocery chains (i.e., large supermarket facilities) and the
volumes sold in other groceries (i.e., multipurpose independent small
or local facilities).
    2. Characteristics of deli departments in groceries, including the
proportion of separated seafood/meat/dairy deli departments in
groceries.
    3. Product contamination data, including:
    a. L. monocytogenes levels and/or frequencies in wholesale products
(deli meats (chubs), cheeses, fresh produce, seafood) arriving at
retail facilities; and
    b. L. monocytogenes levels and/or frequencies in cheeses, deli
meats, and deli-type salads sold by retail facilities.
    4. Factors that influence the growth of L. monocytogenes in
cheeses, deli meats, and deli-type salads, including:
    a. Growth rates of L. monocytogenes in cheeses, deli meats, and
deli-type salads and the effects of different ingredients in and
compositions of those products;
    b. Chemical characteristics of cheeses, deli meats, and deli-type
salads that could influence L. monocytogenes, including pH and water
activity;
    c. Proportions of deli meats treated with growth inhibitors, the
inhibitors used, the level of growth inhibitors, and their efficiency;
    d. Data on the temperatures to which cheeses, deli meats, and deli-
type salads are exposed at retail, including time and temperature for
walk-in coolers or refrigerators, display cabinets, and ambient
displays; and
    e. Data on the use of advisory ``use-by'' or ``best by'' labels for
ready-to-eat food sold by retail facilities.
    5. Environmental contamination data, including:
    a. Data and information on the prevalence and levels of L.
monocytogenes in the retail environment including, e.g., drains,
countertops, walls, and equipment; and

    b. Data on the growth of L. monocytogenes on non-food surfaces
including environmental biofilm growth.
    6. Factors that influence the environmental contamination and the
cross-contamination of food by L. monocytogenes in retail facilities,
including:
    a. Data and information on the potential transfer of L.
monocytogenes to food from the retail environment, e.g., experimental
studies on the transfer to food from drains, slicers, food contact
surfaces, and non-food contact surfaces; and
    b. Data and information on food handlers' activities, e.g.,
observations of food handlers' practices and monitoring of specific
food safety actions in retail facilities (e.g., glove usage, hand
hygiene practices, and cleaning practices).
    7. Identity and effectiveness of control measures or interventions
intended to reduce levels and frequency of L. monocytogenes in the
retail environment, including:
    a. Environmental sanitation procedures including the sanitizers and
protocols used, frequency of application, and efficiency; and
    b. Worker sanitation procedures including frequencies, protocols,
and efficiency.
    8. Any other data related to the occurrence, growth, and control of
L. monocytogenes in retail facilities.
    As the project progresses, additional data needs may be identified.
    Interested persons may submit to the Division of Dockets Management
(see ADDRESSES) written or electronic comments regarding this document.
Submit a single copy of electronic comments or two paper copies of any
mailed comments, except that individuals may submit one paper copy.
Comments are to be identified with the docket number found in brackets
in the heading of this document. Received comments may be seen in the
Division of Dockets Management between 9 a.m. and 4 p.m., Monday
through Friday.
    Please note that on January 15, 2008, the FDA Division of Dockets
Management Web site transitioned to the Federal Dockets Management
System (FDMS). FDMS is a Government-wide, electronic docket management
system. Electronic comments or submissions will be accepted by FDA only
through FDMS at http://www.regulations.gov.

III. References

    The following references are on display in the Division of Dockets
Management (see ADDRESSES) and may be seen by interested persons
between 9 a.m. and 4 p.m., Monday through Friday. (FDA has verified the
Web site addresses, but FDA is not responsible for any subsequent
changes to the Web sites after this document publishes in the Federal
Register.)
    1. U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Healthy People
2010, v. 1. Washington, DC, 2000, http://healthypeople.gov.
    2. U.S. Department of Health and Human Services and U.S.
Department of Agriculture/ Food Safety and Inspection Service,
``Quantitative Assessment of Relative Risk to Public Health from
Foodborne Listeria monocytogenes Among Selected Categories of Ready-
to-Eat Foods,'' September 2003, http://www.foodsafety.gov/~dms/lmr2-
toc.html.
    3. U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Food and Drug
Administration/Centers for Disease Control and Prevention,
``Reducing the Risk of Listeria monocytogenes FDA/CDC 2003 Update of
the Listeria Action Plan,'' November 2003, http://www.cfsan.fda.gov/
~dms/lmr2plan.html.
    4. Gombas, D.E., Chen, Y., Clavero, R.S., and Scott, V.N.
(2003). Survey of Listeria monocytogenes in ready-to-eat foods.
Journal of Food Protection, 66(4), 559-569.
    5. Draughon, A.F. (2006). A collaborative analysis/risk
assessment of Listeria monocytogenes in ready-to-eat processed meat
and poultry collected in four FoodNet states. Symposium S-16:
Contamination of ready-to-eat foods: transfer and risk: Listeria
monocytogenes and other microorganisms. International Association
for Food Protection 93rd Annual Meeting, Calgary, Alberta. August
13-16.

    Dated: January 12, 2009.
Jeffrey Shuren,
Associate Commissioner for Policy and Planning.
[FR Doc. E9-938 Filed 1-16-09; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4160-01-S


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

General Comment:hi, my name is Steven whalan,i was a smoker for 30 years, until 2 years ago when sores on my legs would not heal,woried also with razor blades shooting down my legs over a few years which would happen when wakeing at nite to go to the toilet.Doctor sent me for scans and told me that if I didn't give up smokes I would loose my legs,adicted to a pack and a half  a day I was worried  how I was going to kick a habit that was in my nature,i looked at alternatives and found Ecig.It took 3 months on Ecigs and sores were gone, its taken 14 months and razor blades in legs have gone, my finger nails, toe nails grow, which  never did before when I was smoking.I can walk up a hill without getting out of breath,i can taste food again, and I don't have problems breathing.I buy my suplies from USA and am very happy with the quality of the product. I rely on the product that I buy and the freedom on which I have to choose, my hope for the future is that every Tabaco company closes there doors, in which they have never offered an alternative, its been the public that's researched and the private sector that's looked for a safer way.I know that theres cases like mine all around the world please allow time for our industry voice,i ask for 180 days extension.

Thankyou kindly Steven whalan


[Federal Register: December 13, 2006 (Volume 71, Number 239)]
[Notices]
[Page 74974-74975]
[DOCID:fr13de06-83]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-54880; File No. SR-OCC-2006-12]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; The Options Clearing Corporation;
Order Approving a Proposed Rule Change Relating to an Escrow Program
Fee To Be Charged to Escrow Banks

December 6, 2006.
    On July 12, 2006, The Options Clearing Corporation (``OCC'') filed
with the Securities and Exchange Commission the proposed rule change
pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934
(``Act'').\1\ Notice of the proposal was published in the Federal
Register on October 13, 2006.\2\ No comment letters were received. For
the reasons discussed below, the Commission is approving the proposed
rule change.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1).
    \2\ Securities Exchange Act Release No. 54572 (Oct. 4, 2006), 71
FR 50599.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

I. Description

    The proposed rule change will amend OCC's Schedule of Fees by
adding a $200 escrow fee to be charged to OCC-approved banks.
    As background, OCC's escrow deposit program allows a custodian bank
that has entered into an escrow agreement with OCC (``escrow bank'') to
make deposits of eligible collateral on behalf of its customers with
respect to stock option contracts and index option contracts carried in
short positions and to rollover and withdraw such deposits by
submitting electronic instructions to OCC through OCC's escrow deposit
system.\3\ Escrow deposits are pledged to the customer's clearing
member in order to satisfy the customer's obligation to deposit
customer level margin at the clearing member and are pledged to OCC in
order to satisfy the clearing member's obligation to deposit clearing
level margin at OCC with respect to a specified short position in stock
or index options.\4\ Under OCC's form of escrow agreement, an escrow
bank is obligated to hold the deposited collateral subject to the lien
of OCC and the clearing member until such liens are released.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ Escrow banks also use the escrow deposit system to receive
and review OCC and relevant clearing member responses and to access
reports.
    \4\ Escrow deposits may include: (i) The underlying securities
for any stock option contract; (ii) cash, short-term U.S. Government
securities, and/or common stocks for any index call option contract;
and (iii) cash and/or short-term U.S Government securities for stock
or index put options.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In 2005, the escrow deposit system was integrated into OCC's
clearing

system, which enabled escrow banks to access the escrow system through
the Internet. Before the integration, escrow banks were required to
lease or buy a personal computer that was configured by OCC to provide
secure access to the escrow deposit system. Banks that elected the
lease alternative are currently charged a $200 monthly fee of which
$150 is an equipment leasing fee and $50 is an access fee.\5\ Banks
that (i) Elected the purchase alternative or (ii) became escrow banks
after the systems integration are currently charged only the $50 access
fee, which is intended to cover the costs associated with administering
the escrow deposit program. Costs to administer the program include:
(1) Legal costs related to addressing the contractual aspects of the
program; (2) audit costs related to ensuring compliance with the
external audit reporting requirements of the program; and (3) staff
costs related to servicing program users (i.e., escrow banks and
clearing members).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ OCC has continued to charge current escrow banks with leased
equipment the $200 per month total fee as they have retained such
equipment as a back-up to Internet access to the escrow system.
However, a different back-up solution is being implemented for all
escrow banks, which is rendering the leased equipment obsolete for
purposes of accessing the escrow system.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In connection with reviewing different back-up solutions to
internet access, OCC also examined its costs to administer the escrow
program and concluded that the costs greatly exceed the $50 per month
access fee. Accordingly, OCC has determined to charge all escrow banks
a $200 per month escrow program fee, which will be reflected in OCC's
Schedule of Fees. The escrow program fee will allow OCC to partially
offset its escrow program administration costs but will not affect the
overwhelming majority of escrow banks because the majority of escrow
banks already pay $200 per month in aggregate escrow deposit program
fees.

II. Discussion

    Section 17A(b)(3)(D) of the Act \6\ requires the rules of a
registered clearing agency to provide for the equitable allocation of
reasonable dues, fees, and other charges among its participants. The
Commission finds that OCC's proposed amendment to its Schedule of Fees
is consistent with this requirement because the $200 per month program
fee reflects OCC's cost to administer the escrow program with respect
to escrow banks accessing the program.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ 15 U.S.C. 78q-1(b)(3)(D).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

III. Conclusion

    On the basis of the foregoing, the Commission finds that the
proposal is consistent with the requirements of the Act and in
particular with the requirements of Section 17A of the Act \7\ and the
rules and regulations thereunder.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ 15 U.S.C. 78q-1.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    It is therefore ordered, pursuant to Section 19(b)(2) of the Act,
that the proposed rule change (File No. SR-OCC-2006-12) be, and hereby
is, approved.\8\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \8\ In approving the proposed rule change, the Commission
considered the proposal's impact on efficiency, competition and
capital formation. 15 U.S.C. 78c(f).

    For the Commission by the Division of Market Regulation,
pursuant to delegated authority.\9\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \9\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Florence E. Harmon,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. E6-21163 Filed 12-12-06; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 83, Number 33 (Friday, February 16, 2018)]
[Notices]
[Pages 7060-7061]
[FR Doc No: 2018-03226]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES

Food and Drug Administration

[Docket No. FDA-2013-D-0077]

Early Alzheimer's Disease: Developing Drugs for Treatment; Draft
Guidance for Industry; Availability

AGENCY: Food and Drug Administration, HHS.

ACTION: Notice of availability.

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

SUMMARY: The Food and Drug Administration (FDA or Agency) is announcing
the availability of a draft guidance for industry entitled ``Early
Alzheimer's Disease: Developing Drugs for Treatment.'' This guidance is
intended to assist sponsors in the clinical development of drugs for
the treatment of the stages of sporadic Alzheimer's disease (AD) that
occur before the onset of overt dementia. This guidance revises the
draft guidance for industry entitled ``Alzheimer's Disease: Developing
Drugs for the Treatment of Early Stage Disease'' issued February 8,
2013.

DATES: Submit either electronic or written comments on the draft
guidance by May 17, 2018 to ensure that the Agency considers your
comment on this draft guidance before it begins work on the final
version of the guidance.

ADDRESSES: You may submit comments on any guidance at any time as
follows:

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-2013-D-0077 for ``Early Alzheimer's Disease: Developing Drugs for
Treatment; Draft Guidance for Industry; Availability.'' Received
comments 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.
    You may submit comments on any guidance at any time (see 21 CFR
10.115(g)(5)).
    Submit written requests for single copies of the draft guidance to
the Division of Drug Information, Center for Drug Evaluation and
Research, Food and Drug Administration, 10001 New Hampshire Ave.,
Hillandale Building, 4th Floor, Silver Spring, MD 20993-0002, or Office
of Communication, Outreach, and Development, Center for Biologics
Evaluation and Research, Food and Drug Administration, 10903 New
Hampshire Ave., Bldg. 71, Rm. 3128, Silver Spring, MD 20993-0002. Send
one self-addressed adhesive label to assist that office in processing
your requests. See the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section for electronic
access to the draft guidance document.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Billy Dunn, Center for Drug Evaluation
and Research, Food and Drug Administration, 10903 New Hampshire Ave.,
Bldg. 22, Rm. 4339, Silver Spring, MD 20993-0002,<PHONE_NUMBER>; or
Stephen Ripley, Center for Biologics Evaluation and Research, Food and
Drug Administration, 10903 New Hampshire Ave., Bldg. 71, Rm. 7301,
Silver Spring, MD 20993-0002,<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Background

    FDA is announcing the availability of a draft guidance for industry
entitled ``Early Alzheimer's Disease: Developing Drugs for Treatment.''
This draft guidance is intended to assist sponsors in the clinical
development of drugs for the treatment of the stages of sporadic AD
that occur before the onset of overt dementia. This draft guidance
revises the draft guidance for industry entitled ``Alzheimer's Disease:
Developing Drugs for the Treatment of Early Stage Disease'' issued
February 8, 2013 (78 FR 9396), and reflects FDA's consideration of
public comments on the draft guidance. This revision addresses FDA's
current thinking regarding the selection of patients with early AD for
enrollment into clinical trials and the selection of endpoints for
clinical trials in these populations.
    This draft guidance is being issued consistent with FDA's good
guidance practices regulation (21 CFR 10.115). The draft guidance, when
finalized, will represent the current thinking of FDA on developing
drugs for the treatment of early Alzheimer's disease. It does not
establish any rights for any person and is not binding on FDA or the
public. You can use an alternative approach if it satisfies the
requirements of the applicable statutes and regulations. This draft
guidance is not subject to Executive Order 12866.

II. Electronic Access

    Persons with access to the internet may obtain the draft guidance
at https://www.fda.gov/Drugs/GuidanceComplianceRegulatoryInformation/Guidances/default.htm, https://www.fda.gov/BiologicsBloodVaccines/GuidanceComplianceRegulatoryInformation/default.htm, or https://www.regulations.gov.

    Dated: February 12, 2018.
Leslie Kux,
Associate Commissioner for Policy.
[FR Doc. 2018-03226 Filed 2-15-18; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4164-01-P


MEMORANDUM

SUBJECT: 	Technical Support Document (TSD) for Approval of a Missouri State Implementation Plan Revision relating to Construction Permits By Rule

FROM: 		Steven Brown
                  ARD/APPB/APS

TO: 			EPA-R07-OAR-2023-0214; MO-466

THROUGH:  	Amy Algoe-Eakin, Branch Supervisor
                  ARD/APPB

SUMMARY:
The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is proposing to approve revisions to the Missouri State Implementation Plan (SIP) received from the Missouri Department of Natural Resources (MoDNR) as a SIP revision submission on September 20, 2022.

The proposed revisions are to the existing rule, Title 10, Division 10 of the Code of State Regulations, (10 CSR) 10-6.210 Confidential Information. The purpose of this state regulation is to provide procedures and conditions for handling confidential Information.

The rule was originally SIP approved in 40 CFR § 52.1320(c) on February 29, 1996 (61 FR 7714). On November 29, 2016, Missouri submitted a revision to this rule followed by a withdrawal on April 28, 2020, because the EPA was not able to approve a portion of the rule language allowing regulated entities to identify specific emissions data as confidential business information. MoDNR revised 10 CSR 10-6.210 to remove the provision in the rule that allowed certain types of emissions data to be claimed as confidential business information. The revisions to 10 CSR 10-6.210 that MoDNR has requested the EPA to approve into the SIP consist of structural, formatting and minor administrative changes. As such, in accordance with Section 110(l) of the Clean Air Act, this proposed revision does not interfere with any applicable requirement concerning attainment and reasonable further progress or any other applicable requirement of the CAA.

RULE REVISIONS:
Below is EPA's description of the changes made to each rule section and the text of the revised rule.
Revisions that are additions to MoDNR's existing approved SIP rule text are bold. Revisions that are deletions to the existing approved SIP rule text are stricken through. The rule text with changes is listed first and is followed by a summary of the EPA's review of the changes.

10 CSR 10-6.210 Confidential Information

(1) Application Applicability. This rule shall apply to all
business information requested to be designated confidential by the
Missouri Air Conservation Commission. This rule shall not apply to
emission data included in the information that shall not be entitled to confidential treatment, as provided by section 643.050.4., RSMo. under Chapter 643, RSMo.

EPA Analysis:  The revisions to section (1) are administrative in nature and do not affect the stringency of the SIP. A description of each revision in this section is as follows:

Section (1) : The revision to section (1) removes the section title "Application" and replaces it with the title, "Applicability".  The revision also removes the language giving the Missouri Air Commission the authority to designate business information as confidential, and specifically retains the reference to Chapter 643, RSMO.

Rule continues-

(2) General. Any information submitted pursuant to this rule or
other rules of the Missouri Air Conservation Commission that contains or from which could be derived, confidential business information, shall be kept confidential by the commission and employees and agents of the Department of Natural Resources if a timely request for confidentiality is made by the person submitting the information.

EPA Analysis:  The revisions to section (2) are administrative in nature and do not affect the stringency of the SIP. A description of each revision in this section is as follows:

Section (2) : The revision to section (2) Removes the "General" section altogether and replaces it with the Definitions Section.  See the revisions below as section (3) now becomes section (2).

Rule continues-

(3)(2) Definitions.

(A) Definitions for key words used in this rule may be found in 10
CSR 10-6.020(2).

(B) Additional definitions specific to this rule are as follows:

1.(A) Confidential business information: Secret processes, secret methods of manufacture or production, trade secrets and other information possessed by a business that, under existing legal concepts, the business has a right to preserve as confidential, and to limit its use by not disclosing it to others in order that the business may obtain or retain business advantages it derives from its rights in the information; and

2.(B) Emission data --

A.1. The identity, amount, frequency, concentration or other
characteristics (related to air quality) of any air contaminant
which --

      (I)A. Has been emitted from an emission unit;

     (II)B. Results from any emission by the emissions unit;

   (III)C. Under an applicable standard or limitation, the emissions unit was authorized to emit; or

(IV)D. Is a combination of any of the parts (3)(B)2.A.(I),(II) or (III) (2)(B)1.A., B., or C. of this rule;

B. 2. The name, address (or description of the location) and the nature of the emissions unit necessary to identify the emission units including, a description of the device, equipment, or operation constituting the emissions unit; and

C. 3. The results of any emission testing or monitoring required to be reported under this rule or other rules of the commission.

(C) Definitions of certain terms specified in this rule, other than
those defined in this rule section, may be found in 10 CSR 10-
6.020.

EPA Analysis:  The revisions to section (3) are administrative in nature and do not affect the stringency of the SIP. A description of each revision in this section is as follows:

Section (3): The revision to section (3) changes to become section (2), "Definitions".

Section (3)(A): The language in Section (3)(A) and (3)(B) are removed.

Section (3)(B)1.: Section (3)(B)1. now becomes (2)(A) with no language changes.

Section (3)(B)2.: Section (3)(B)2. now becomes (2)(B) with no language changes.

Section (3)(B)2.A.: Section (3)(B)2.A. now becomes (2)(B)1 with no language changes.

Section (3)(B)2.A.I.: Section (3)(B)2.A. now becomes (2)(B)1.A. with no language changes.

Section (3)(B)2.A.II.: Section (3)(B)2.A. now becomes (2)(B)1.B. with no language changes.

Section (3)(B)2.A.III.: Section (3)(B)2.A. now becomes (2)(B)1.C. with no language changes.

Section (3)(B)2.A.IV.: Section (3)(B)2.A. now becomes section (2)(B)1.D. This revision also removes the reference to (3)(B)2.A.(I), (II) or (III) and replaces it with, (2)(B)1.A, B., or C.

Section (3)(B)2.B.: Section (3)(B)2.B now becomes (2)(B)2. with no language changes.

Section (3)(B)2.C.: Section (3)(B)2.C now becomes (2)(B)3.

Section (2)(C) is a newly created subsection with added language referencing additional definitions.

Rule continues-

(4)(3) 	Procedures. General Provisions. Any information or records
submitted or obtained pursuant to Chapter 643, RSMo, is subject to
public disclosure unless a request for confidentiality is made by the person submitting the information or records and the request has been approved pursuant to the following procedures:

(A) Procedures.

(A)1.An owner or operator who wishes to claim confidentiality for any information submitted pursuant to this rule or other rules of the commission shall submit a claim of confidentiality within ten (10) working days following the time the information is submitted when the information is initially submitted. Failure to submit a claim of confidentiality within the required time shall result in a waiver of any claim to confidentiality when the information is initially submitted may result in public disclosure.

2. The claim of confidentiality shall be accompanied by a
  justification that the information is entitled to confidential
  treatment.

(B)3. When information claimed to be confidential is being
  submitted with a permit application, emissions report, or any
  other documentation containing information subject to public
  disclosure, a separate version that may be viewed by the
  public shall be provided by the owner or operator.

(C)4. Upon receipt of a timely claim of confidentiality, the director shall evaluate the claim and inform the owner or operator that the claim has been granted approved, or that a preliminary decision has been made to deny the claim in whole or in part. Until that time in which the claim is reviewed it shall be held in confidence.

(D) 5.The owner or operator shall have fifteen (15) working days from the receipt of the preliminary decision to deny the claim in which to submit further justification or comments to the director. The director shall inform the owner or operator of his/her final decision on whether the claim will be denied in whole or in part within ten (10) working days. If a claim of confidentiality is denied in the preliminary review, the owner or operator will have fifteen (15) days from the date of the denial letter to submit further justification or comments to the director for consideration in the final decision on confidentiality. The director shall inform the owner or operator of his/her final decision on whether the claim will be denied in whole or in part within ten (10) working days of receiving the owner or operator's further justification or comments.

(E)6.The owner or operator may appeal the director's final decision to deny a claim of confidentiality, in whole or part, to the administrative hearing commission pursuant to section 621.250, RSMo, and 10 CSR 10-1.030. to the commission from the director's final decision to deny a claim of confidentiality in whole or part by filing a notice of appeal with the staff director within twenty (20) working days after receipt of the director's final decision. Upon the timely filing of a notice of appeal, the confidentiality of the information shall be preserved until the entry of a final order by the commission.

(F)7.If the commission's final decision is to deny the claim of
  confidentiality, in whole or in part, the director shall treat
  the information as subject to public disclosure unless the owner
  or operator files a timely action for judicial review pursuant
  to section 536.110, RSMo. If a timely action for judicial review
  is filed, the confidentiality of the information shall be
  preserved until adjudication of the matter upon judicial review.

(G)8. A claim of confidentiality under this rule shall be granted if -- :

1. 		A. The owner or operator has asserted a business confidentiality claim that has not expired by its terms, been waived or been withdrawn;

2. 		B. The owner or operator has satisfactorily shown that it has taken reasonable measures to protect the confidentiality of the information and that it intends to continue to take those measures;

3. 		C. The information is not, and has not been, reasonably
obtained without the owner's or operator's consent by other persons
(other than governmental bodies) by use of legitimate means (other than
discovery based on a showing of special needs in a judicial or quasi-judicial proceeding);

4. 		D. No statute specifically requires public disclosure of
the information;

5. 		E. The information is not emission data; and

6. 		F. The owner or operator has satisfactorily shown that
public disclosure of the information --

      A.(I) Is Public disclosure of the information is likely to cause substantial harm to the business' competitive position; or

      B.(II) The information was voluntarily submitted and if disclosed, the submitter would be reluctant to provide additional information to the director in the future. Information is voluntarily submitted if the facility has no statutory, regulatory, or contractual obligation to provide the information; or the director has no statutory, regulatory, or contractual authority to obtain the information under federal or state law; and Was voluntarily submitted and its disclosure would be likely to impair the director's ability to obtain necessary information in the future. Information is voluntarily submitted if the director has not statutory, regulatory or contractual authority to obtain some benefit or avoid some disadvantage under the Missouri Air Conservation Law and implementing rules (for example, information required to obtain a permit or other approval is submitted to obtain a benefit from the Missouri Air Conservation Commission).

EPA Analysis:  The revisions to section (4) are administrative in nature and do not affect the stringency of the SIP.  A description of each revision in this section is as follows:

Section (4) : The revision to section (4) changes the title name, "Procedures" to "General Provisions" and the section number changes to (3). Thus, section (4) "Procedures" now becomes section (3) "General Provisions". This revision also adds language after the title describing that any information or records submitted to the state is subject to public disclosure unless a request for confidentiality is submitted and approved pursuant to the procedures of the rule. It then lists those procedures (see the following revisions below in this subsection.

Section (4)(A): The revision to section (4)(A) adds the title called, "Procedures" and becomes section (3)(A) "Procedures" as the header for this section. Additionally, section (4)(A) is changed to (3)(A)1. and changes the language to remove a ten (10) day timeframe of submitting the claim of confidential information and adds an immediate timeframe of claiming confidentiality upon the initial submittal of information. This revision also separates the last paragraph and creates a numbered section "2." Which now becomes (3)(A)2.

Section (4)(B): Section (4)(B) now becomes (3)(A)2. with unchanged language. There is also new language added as section (3)(A)3. describing when information claimed to be confidential is being submitted with a permit application, emissions report, or any other documentation containing information subject to public disclosure, a separate version that may be viewed by the public shall be provided by the owner or operator.

Section (4)(C): Section (4)(C) now becomes (3)(A)4. In the first sentence, the word "timely" is removed and the word "granted" is replaced with the word "approved".

Section (4)(D): Section (4)(D) now becomes (3)(A)5. The revision also removes the language in this section and rewrites the paragraph explaining that if a claim of confidentiality is denied in the preliminary review, the owner or operator will have fifteen (15) days from the date of the denial letter to submit further justification or comments to the director for consideration in the final decision on confidentiality. The director shall inform the owner or operator of his/her final decision on whether the claim will be denied in whole or in part within ten (10) working days of receiving the owner or
operator's further justification or comments.

Section (4)(E): Section (4)(E) now becomes (3)(A)6. The revision also removes language describing a (20) working day timeline for submitting an appeal and adds language stating that an owner or operator may appeal the director's final decision to deny a claim of confidentiality, in whole or part, to the administrative hearing commission pursuant to section 621.250, RSMo, and 10 CSR 10-1.030.

Section (4)(F): Section (4)(F) now becomes (3)(A)7. with no changes to language.

Section (4)(G): Section (4)(G) now becomes (3)(A)8. with no changes to language.

Section (4)(G)1.: Section (4)(G)1. now becomes (3)(A)8.A. with text changes to remove the words, "been waived" and add the word "been" directly before the word, "withdrawn".

Section (4)(G)2.: Section (4)(G)2. now becomes (3)(A)8.B. with no changes to language.

Section (4)(G)3.: Section (4)(G)3. now becomes (3)(A)8.C. with no changes to language.

Section (4)(G)4.: Section (4)(G)4. now becomes (3)(A)8.D. with no changes to language.

Section (4)(G)5.: Section (4)(G)6. now becomes (3)(A)8.E. with no changes to language.

Section (4)(G)6.: Section (4)(G)6. now becomes (3)(A)8.F. with text changes to remove the words, "public disclosure of the information". The language, "public disclosure of the information" is moved to section (3)(A)8.F(I).

Section (4)(G)6A.: Section (4)(G)6A. now becomes (3)(A)8.F(I) with text changes to remove the word, "Is" and adds the language, "Public disclosure of the information is...".

Section (4)(G)6B.: Section (4)(G)6B. now becomes (3)(A)8.F(II) with changes to the language explaining that information is voluntarily submitted if the facility has no statutory, regulatory, or contractual obligation to provide the information, or the director has no statutory, regulatory, or contractual authority to obtain the information under federal or state law.

Rule continues-

(5) (B) Conditions for Any Disclosure.

(A)1.Public Request request. Upon receipt of a request from a member of the public for release of any information submitted under a claim of confidentiality, and for which the claim has not been finally denied, the director shall inform both the person making the request and the owner or operator that the request for the information is denied or that a tentative decision has been made to release the information. A preliminary decision to release the information shall be treated in the same manner as a preliminary decision to deny a claim of confidentiality under subsections(4)(C)-(G) paragraphs (3)(A)4.-8. Of this rule.

(B)2.Confidential and Public Information public information. If the information submitted under a claim of confidentiality contains both information which is entitled to confidential treatment and emission data or other information not entitled to confidential treatment, the director may take reasonable steps to segregate that
 information entitled to confidential treatment from that subject to
 public disclosure. These steps may include, without limitation,
 photocopying for the public file only portions of the submitted
 information or applying techniques that would result in confidential information bring blacked out in the photocopying process. If information entitled to confidentiality cannot reasonably be separated from emission data information not entitled to confidentiality, all the information must be treated as subject to public disclosure.

(C)3.Public Release release. The director and his/her designees shall not release to the public, or place in the public file, any information for which a timely claim of confidentiality has been made until the procedures under subsections (4)(C)-(G) and (5)(A) paragraphs(3)(A)4.-8. of this rule have been observed.

(D)4.Disclosure to Local Agencies local agencies. Information submitted under a claim of confidentiality, and where the claim has not been finally denied, may be disclosed to local air pollution control agencies if --

1.A. The owner or operator is given prior notice fifteen (15) working days in which to obtain an order from a court of competent
jurisdiction restraining or enjoining the disclosure to the local
agency, and if no such order is obtained, or obtained and later
dissolved; or

2.B. The local agency has ordinances or regulations respecting the
treatment of confidential business information that is equivalent to this rule, the director provides notice to the owner or operator that the information is being disclosed to the local agency, and the director informs the local agency that the information is subject to a claim of confidentiality.

(E)5.Disclosure to Administrator administrator. Information submitted under a claim of confidentiality, and where the claim has not been finally denied, may be disclosed to the administrator provided the administrator agrees, pursuant to 40 CFR 2.215, that the information will be kept confidential.

(F)6.Subpoenas for Confidential Information confidential information. The director shall respond to subpoenas and discovery requests for information submitted under a claim of confidentiality, if the claim has not been finally denied, in a manner that is designed to preserve the claim of confidentiality until a confidentiality determination is made by a court or other tribunal of competent jurisdiction.

EPA Analysis:  The revisions to section (5) are administrative in nature and do not affect the stringency of the SIP.  A description of each revision in this section is as follows:

Section (5): Section (5) "Condition for Any Disclosure" now becomes section (3)(B) Conditions for Any Disclosure.
Section (5)(A): Section (5)(A) now becomes (3)(B)1. with text changes that remove the capitalization of the word "Request" to make the word lower case, "request". This revision also removes the reference from subsection (4)(C) through (G), and the reference to paragraph (3)(A)4. through 8.

Section (5)(B): Section (5)(B) now becomes (3)(B)2. with text changes to make the words "Public Information" lower case. Thus, changing it to, "public information". In the last sentence of the paragraph, the words, "emission data" are removed and the words, "information not entitled to confidentiality" are added.

Section (5)(C): Section (5)(C) now becomes (3)(B)3. with text changes that remove the capitalization of the word "Release" to make the word lower case, "release". This revision also removes the word, "timely" and removes the reference to "subsection (4)(C)  -  (G)" and replaces it with references to "paragraphs (3)(A) 4. - 8".

Section (5)(D): Section (5)(D) now becomes (3)(B)4. with text changes that remove the words "Local Agencies" and replaces them with the lower case, "local agencies".

Section (5)(D)1.: Section (5)(D)1. now becomes (3)(B)4.A. with no changes to language.

Section (5)(D)2.: Section (5)(D)2. now becomes (3)(B)4.B. with no changes to language.

Section (5)(E): Section (5)(E) now becomes (3)(B)5. with text changes that removes the word, "Administrator" and replaces it with the lower case "administrator".  This revision also removes the word "and" in the second sentence and adds the word "where".

Section (5)(F): Section (5)(F) now becomes (3)(B)6. with text changes in the first sentence that remove the words "Confidential Information" and replaces it with the lower case "confidential information.

Rule continues-

(4) Reporting and Record Keeping. (Not Applicable)

(5) Test Methods. (Not Applicable)


[Federal Register Volume 78, Number 83 (Tuesday, April 30, 2013)]
[Notices]
[Pages 25338-25339]
[FR Doc No: 2013-10158]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

Membership in the National Parks Overflights Advisory Group
Aviation Rulemaking Committee

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration, Transportation.

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: By Federal Register notice (See 77 FR 27835-27836, May 11,
2012, 77 FR 48201-48202, August 13, 2012, and 78 FR 5242-5243, January
24, 2013) the National Park Service (NPS) and the Federal Aviation
Administration (FAA) invited interested persons to apply to fill one
opening on the National Parks Overflights Advisory Group (NPOAG)
Aviation Rulemaking Committee (ARC) to fill a vacancy representing
environmental concerns due to the incumbent member's completion of a
three-year term appointment on October 9, 2012. By Federal Register
notice (See 78 FR 5242-5243, January 24, 2013) NPS and FAA also invited
interested persons to apply to fill one opening on the NPOAG ARC to
fill a vacancy representing commercial air tour operator interests due
to the incumbent member's completion of a three-year term on May 19,
2013. This notice informs the public of the persons selected to fill
these two vacancies on the NPOAG ARC.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Keith Lusk, Special Programs Staff,
Federal Aviation Administration, Western-Pacific Region Headquarters,
P.O. Box 92007, Los Angeles, CA 90009-2007, telephone:<PHONE_NUMBER>,
email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Background

    The National Parks Air Tour Management Act of 2000 (the Act) was
enacted on April 5, 2000, as Public Law 106-181. The Act required the
establishment of the advisory group within 1 year after its enactment.
The NPOAG was established in March 2001. The advisory group is
comprised of a balanced group of representatives of general aviation,
commercial air tour operations, environmental concerns, and Native
American tribes. The Administrator of the FAA and the Director of NPS
(or their designees) serve as ex officio members of the group.
Representatives of the Administrator and Director serve alternating 1-
year terms as chairman of the advisory group.
    In accordance with the Act, the advisory group provides ``advice,
information, and recommendations to the Administrator and the Director-
    (1) On the implementation of this title [the Act] and the
amendments made by this title;
    (2) On commonly accepted quiet aircraft technology for use in
commercial air tour operations over a national park or tribal lands,
which will receive preferential treatment in a given air tour
management plan;
    (3) On other measures that might be taken to accommodate the
interests of visitors to national parks; and
    (4) At the request of the Administrator and the Director, safety,
environmental, and other issues related to commercial air tour
operations over a national park or tribal lands.''

Membership

    The current NPOAG ARC is made up of one member representing general
aviation, three members representing the commercial air tour industry,
four members representing environmental concerns, and two members
representing Native American interests. Current members of the NPOAG
ARC are as follows:
    Heidi Williams representing general aviation; Alan Stephen, Elling
Halvorson, and Matthew Zuccaro representing commercial air tour
operators; Greg Miller, Kristen Brengel, and Dick Hingson representing
environmental interests with one open seat; and Rory Majenty and Martin
Begaye representing Native American tribes.

Selection

    Selected to fill the seat representing environmental concerns is
Michael Sutton who will be filling a currently open seat. Selected to
represent commercial air tour operator interests is Mark Francis who
will be filling incumbent Elling Halvorson's seat which expires on May
19, 2013. The term of service for NPOAG ARC

members is 3 years. Both of these terms will start on May 20, 2013.

    Issued in Hawthorne, CA, on April 23, 2013.
Keith Lusk,
Special Programs Staff, Western-Pacific Region.
[FR Doc. 2013-10158 Filed 4-29-13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P