[Federal Register Volume 77, Number 191 (Tuesday, October 2, 2012)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 60094-60096]
[FR Doc No: 2012-24242]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 52

[EPA-R03-OAR-2012-0422; FRL-9735-9]

Approval and Promulgation of Air Quality Implementation Plans;
West Virginia; The 2002 Base Year Inventory for the Charleston Area

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Proposed rule.

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

SUMMARY: EPA is proposing to approve the fine particulate matter
(PM2.5) 2002 base year emissions inventory portion of the
West Virginia State Implementation Plan (SIP) revision submitted by the
State of West Virginia (WV), through the West Virginia Department of
Environmental Protection (WVDEP), on November 4, 2009 for the
Charleston, WV nonattainment area (hereafter referred to as the
Charleston Area or Area). The emissions inventory is part of the West
Virginia November 4, 2009 SIP revision that was submitted to meet
nonattainment requirements related to the Charleston Area for the 1997
PM2.5 National Ambient Air Quality Standard (NAAQS) SIP. EPA
is proposing to approve the 2002 base year PM2.5 emissions
inventory for the Charleston Area in accordance with the requirements
of the Clean Air Act (CAA).

DATES: Written comments must be received on or before November 1, 2012.

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID Number EPA-
R03-OAR-2012-0422 by one of the following methods:
    A. www.regulations.gov. Follow the on-line instructions for
submitting comments.
    B. Email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>    C. Mail: EPA-R03-OAR-2010-0140, Donna Mastro, Acting Associate
Director, Office of Air Program Planning, Mailcode 3AP30, U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency, Region III, 1650 Arch Street,
Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19103.
    D. Hand Delivery: At the previously-listed EPA Region III address.
Such deliveries are only accepted during the Docket's normal hours of
operation, and special arrangements should be made for deliveries of
boxed information.
    Instructions: Direct your comments to Docket ID No. EPA-R03-OAR-
2012-0422. EPA's policy is that all comments received will be included
in the public docket without change, and may be made available online
at www.regulations.gov, including any

personal information provided, unless the comment includes information
claimed to be Confidential Business Information (CBI) or other
information whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Do not submit
information that you consider to be CBI or otherwise protected through
www.regulations.gov or email. The www.regulations.gov Web site is an
``anonymous access'' system, which means EPA will not know your
identity or contact information unless you provide it in the body of
your comment. If you send an email comment directly to EPA without
going through www.regulations.gov, your email address will be
automatically captured and included as part of the comment that is
placed in the public docket and made available on the Internet. If you
submit an electronic comment, EPA recommends that you include your name
and other contact information in the body of your comment and with any
disk or CD-ROM you submit. If EPA cannot read your comment due to
technical difficulties and cannot contact you for clarification, EPA
may not be able to consider your comment. Electronic files should avoid
the use of special characters, any form of encryption, and be free of
any defects or viruses.
    Docket: All documents in the electronic docket are listed in the
www.regulations.gov index. Although listed in the index, some
information is not publicly available, i.e., CBI or other information
whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Certain other material, such
as copyrighted material, is not placed on the Internet and will be
publicly available only in hard copy form. Publicly available docket
materials are available either electronically in www.regulations.gov or
in hard copy during normal business hours at the Air Protection
Division, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region III, 1650 Arch
Street, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19103. Copies of the State submittal
are available at the West Virginia Department of Environmental
Protection, Division of Air Quality, 601 57th Street SE., Charleston,
West Virginia 25304.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Irene Shandruk,<PHONE_NUMBER>, or by
email at<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Background
II. Summary of SIP Revision
III. Proposed Action
IV. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

I. Background

    Throughout this document, whenever ``we,'' ``us,'' or ``our'' is
used, we mean EPA. On July 18, 1997 (62 FR 38652), EPA promulgated the
1997 PM2.5 NAAQS, including an annual standard of 15.0
micrograms per cubic meter ([micro]g/m\3\) based on a 3-year average of
annual mean PM2.5 concentrations, and a 24-hour (or daily)
standard of 65 [micro]g/m\3\ based on a 3-year average of the 98th
percentile of 24-hour concentrations. EPA established the standards
based on significant evidence and numerous health studies demonstrating
that serious health effects are associated with exposures to
PM2.5.
    Following promulgation of a new or revised NAAQS, EPA is required
by the CAA to designate areas throughout the United States as attaining
or not attaining the NAAQS; this designation process is described in
section 107(d)(1) of the CAA. In 1999, EPA and state air quality
agencies initiated the monitoring process for the 1997 PM2.5
NAAQS and, by January 2001, established a complete set of air quality
monitors. On January 5, 2005, EPA promulgated initial air quality
designations for the 1997 PM2.5 NAAQS (70 FR 944), which
became effective on April 5, 2005, based on air quality monitoring data
for calendar years 2001-03.
    On April 14, 2005, EPA promulgated a supplemental rule amending the
agency's initial designations (70 FR 19844), with the same effective
date (April 5, 2005) at 70 FR 944. As a result of this supplemental
rule, PM2.5 nonattainment designations are in effect for 39
areas, comprising 208 counties within 20 states (and the District of
Columbia) nationwide, with a combined population of approximately 88
million. The Charleston Area, which is the subject of this rulemaking,
was included in the list of areas not attaining the 1997
PM2.5 NAAQS. The Charleston Area consists of Kanawha and
Putnam Counties in West Virginia.
    On October 11, 2011 (76 FR 62640), EPA determined that West
Virginia had attained the 1997 PM2.5 NAAQS in the Charleston
Area. That determination was based on complete, quality-assured,
quality-controlled, and certified ambient air monitoring data for the
2007-2009 three-year period that showed the area attained the 1997
PM2.5 NAAQS and continues to attain the standard. The
October 11, 2011 determination suspended the requirements for West
Virginia to submit an attainment demonstration, associated reasonably
available control measures, a reasonable further progress plan,
contingency measures, and other planning SIP revisions related to
attainment of the standard for so long as the nonattainment area
continues to meet the 1997 PM2.5 NAAQS. Section 172(c)(3) of
the CAA requires submission and approval of a comprehensive, accurate,
and current inventory of actual emissions. This proposed approval is
limited to the emissions inventory for the Charleston Area. Separate
action will be taken on the remainder of West Virginia's SIP submittal.

II. Summary of SIP Revision

    The 2002 base year emission inventory submitted by WVDEP on
November 4, 2009 for the Charleston Area includes emissions estimates
that cover the general source categories of point sources, non-road
mobile sources, area sources, on-road mobile sources, and biogenic
sources. The pollutants that comprise the inventory are nitrogen oxides
(NOX), volatile organic compounds (VOCs), PM2.5,
coarse particles (PM10), ammonia (NH3) and sulfur
dioxide (SO2). EPA has reviewed the results, procedures and
methodologies for the base year emissions inventory submitted by WVDEP.
The year 2002 was selected by WVDEP as the base year for the emissions
inventory per 40 CFR 51.1008(b). A discussion of the emissions
inventory development as well as the emissions inventory for the
Charleston Area can be found in Appendices C and D of the November 4,
2009 SIP submittal.
    Table 1, below, provides a summary of the annual 2002 emissions of
NOX, VOCs, PM2.5, PM10, NH3
and SO2 for the Charleston Area submittal.

                          Table 1--Summary of 2002 Baseline Emissions Inventory for the Charleston Area in Tons per Year (tpy)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                      Source sector                             NH3             NOX            PM10            PM2.5            SO2             VOC
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Point...................................................              25          60,138           1,134             632         130,109           3,292
Area....................................................              70           1,614          10,039           2,396           2,486           9,209
Nonroad.................................................               1           3,957             229             213             239           2,828
Onroad..................................................             312          10,213             233             632             411           7,073

Biogenic................................................             N/A             N/A             N/A             N/A             N/A             N/A
                                                         -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Total...............................................             407          76,016          11,635           3,410         133,245          40,702
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The CAA section 172(c)(3) emissions inventory is developed by the
incorporation of data from multiple sources. States were required to
develop and submit to EPA a triennial emissions inventory according to
the Consolidated Emissions Reporting Rule (CERR) for all source
categories (i.e., point, area, nonroad mobile and on-road mobile). The
review and evaluation of the methods used for the emissions inventory
submitted by West Virginia are found in the Technical Support Document
dated August 12, 2010, available online at www.regulations.gov, Docket
No. EPA-R03-OAR-2012-0422. EPA finds that the process used to develop
this emissions inventory for the Charleston Area is adequate to meet
the requirements of CAA section 172(c)(3), the implementing
regulations, and EPA guidance for emission inventories.

III. Proposed Action

    EPA is proposing to approve the 2002 base year emissions inventory
portion of the SIP revision submitted by the State of West Virginia on
November 4, 2009 for the Charleston Area. We have made the
determination that this action is consistent with section 110 of the
CAA. EPA is soliciting public comments on the issues discussed in this
document. These comments will be considered before taking final action.

IV. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

    Under the CAA, the Administrator is required to approve a SIP
submission that complies with the provisions of the CAA and applicable
Federal regulations. 42 U.S.C. 7410(k); 40 CFR 52.02(a). Thus, in
reviewing SIP submissions, EPA's role is to approve state choices,
provided that they meet the criteria of the CAA. Accordingly, this
action merely proposes to approve state law as meeting Federal
requirements and does not impose additional requirements beyond those
imposed by state law. For that reason, this proposed action:
     Is not a ``significant regulatory action'' subject to
review by the Office of Management and Budget under Executive Order
12866 (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993);
     Does not impose an information collection burden under the
provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.);
     Is certified as not having a significant economic impact
on a substantial number of small entities under the Regulatory
Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.);
     Does not contain any unfunded mandate or significantly or
uniquely affect small governments, as described in the Unfunded
Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (Pub. L. 104-4);
     Does not have Federalism implications as specified in
Executive Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10, 1999);
     Is not an economically significant regulatory action based
on health or safety risks subject to Executive Order 13045 (62 FR
19885, April 23, 1997);
     Is not a significant regulatory action subject to
Executive Order 13211 (66 FR 28355, May 22, 2001);
     Is not subject to requirements of Section 12(d) of the
National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. 272
note) because application of those requirements would be inconsistent
with the CAA; and
     Does not provide EPA with the discretionary authority to
address, as appropriate, disproportionate human health or environmental
effects, using practicable and legally permissible methods, under
Executive Order 12898 (59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994).
    In addition, this proposed rule, pertaining to the PM2.5
2002 base year emissions inventory portion of the West Virginia SIP for
the Charleston Area, does not have tribal implications as specified by
Executive Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, November 9, 2000), because the SIP
is not approved to apply in Indian country located in the state, and
EPA notes that it will not impose substantial direct costs on tribal
governments or preempt tribal law.

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52

    Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Nitrogen dioxide,
Particulate matter, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Sulfur
oxides, Volatile organic compounds.

    Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.

    Dated: September 13, 2012.
 W.C. Early,
Acting Regional Administrator, Region III.
[FR Doc. 2012-24242 Filed 10-1-12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


[Federal Register Volume 87, Number 210 (Tuesday, November 1, 2022)]
[Notices]
[Pages 65843-65844]
[FR Doc No: 2022-23734]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

[Docket No. 2022-0844]

Agency Information Collection Activities: Requests for Comments;
Clearance of a Renewed Approval of Information Collection: Air Carrier
Contract Maintenance Requirements

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Notice and request for comments.

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

SUMMARY: In accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, FAA
invites public comments about our intention to request the Office of
Management and Budget (OMB) approval to renew an information
collection. The Federal Register Notice with a 60-day comment period
soliciting comments on the following collection of information was
published on July 15, 2022. The collection involves information
collected which will be used by air carriers and by the FAA to
adequately target its inspection resources for surveillance, and make
accurate risk assessments.

DATES: Written comments should be submitted by December 1, 2022.

ADDRESSES: Written comments and recommendations for the proposed
information collection should be sent within 30 days of publication of
this notice to www.reginfo.gov/public/do/PRAMain. Find this particular
information collection by selecting ``Currently under 30-day Review--
Open for Public Comments'' or by using the search function.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Jim Anderson by email at:
[email protected]; phone:<PHONE_NUMBER>

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
    Public Comments Invited: You are asked to comment on any aspect of
this information collection, including (a) Whether the proposed
collection of information is necessary for FAA's performance; (b) the
accuracy of the estimated burden; (c) ways for FAA to enhance the
quality, utility and clarity of the information collection; and (d)
ways that the burden could be minimized without reducing the quality of
the collected information.
    OMB Control Number: 2120-0766
    Title: Air Carrier Contract Maintenance Requirements
    Form Numbers: There are no forms associated with this collection.
    Type of Review: This is a renewal of an information collection.
    Background: The Federal Register Notice with a 60-day comment
period

soliciting comments on the following collection of information was
published on July 15, 2022 (87 FR 42538).
    Air carrier maintenance has evolved from mostly an ``in-house''
operation to an extended network of maintenance providers that fulfill
contracts with air carriers to perform their aircraft maintenance. Any
person performing maintenance for an air carrier must follow the air
carrier's maintenance manual.
    The FAA has found that, although an air carrier is required to list
its maintenance providers and a general description of the work to be
done in its maintenance manual, these lists are not always kept up to
date, are not always complete, and are not always in a format that is
readily useful for FAA oversight and analysis purposes. Without
accurate and complete information on the work being performed for air
carriers, the FAA cannot adequately target its inspection resources for
surveillance and make accurate risk assessments.
    This collection of information supports regulatory requirements
necessary under 14 CFR part 121 and part 135 to ensure safety of flight
by requiring air carriers to provide a list that includes the name and
physical (street) address, or addresses, where the work is carried out
for each maintenance provider that performs work for the certificate
holder, and a description of the type of maintenance, preventive
maintenance, or alteration that is to be performed at each location.
The list must be updated with any changes, including additions or
deletions, and the updated list provided to the FAA in a format
acceptable to the FAA by the last day of each calendar month.
    This collection also supports the FAA's strategic goal to provide
to the next level of safety, by achieving the lowest possible accident
rate and always improving safety, so all users of our aviation system
can arrive safely at their destinations.
    Respondents: 303 air carriers (64 Part 121 air carriers and 239
part 135 air carriers).
    Frequency: Monthly.
    Estimated Average Burden per Response: Eight hours.
    Estimated Total Annual Burden: 2,424 hours.

    Issued in Hillsboro, OR on October 27, 2022.
James R. Anderson
Aviation Safety Inspector Flight Standards, Aircraft Maintenance
Division, Commercial Air Carrier Group.
[FR Doc. 2022-23734 Filed 10-31-22; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


[Federal Register Volume 77, Number 54 (Tuesday, March 20, 2012)]
[Notices]
[Pages 16307-16309]
[FR Doc No: 2012-6618]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-66593; File No. SR-Phlx-2012-30]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; NASDAQ OMX PHLX LLC; Notice of
Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of Proposed Rule Change To Eliminate
the 100MB Connectivity Option and Fee

March 14, 2012.
    Pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934
(``Act''),\1\ and Rule 19b-4 thereunder,\2\ notice is hereby given that
on March 6, 2012, NASDAQ OMX PHLX LLC (``Phlx'' or ``Exchange'') filed
with the Securities and Exchange Commission (``Commission'') the
proposed rule change as described in Items I and II below, which Items
have been prepared by the Exchange. The Commission is publishing this
notice to solicit comments on the proposed rule change from interested
persons.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

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

    The Exchange proposes to eliminate 100MB connectivity between the
Exchange and co-located servers, as well as associated fees, as set
forth in the Phlx Fee Schedule, Section X(b). The Exchange will
implement the proposed change on April 1, 2012. The text of the
proposed rule change is available at http://nasdaqtrader.com/micro.aspx?id=PHLXRulefilings at the Exchange's principal office, and
at the Commission's Public Reference Room.

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

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

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

1. Purpose
    The Exchange proposes to modify the Phlx Fee Schedule, Section X(b)
to eliminate 100MB connectivity between the Exchange and co-located
servers, as well as associated fees.\3\ The Exchange currently offers
each co-located customer one 100MB connection to the Exchange at no
charge; additional connections are available for a $50 one-time
installation fee and a monthly fee of $100.\4\ Due to the continuous
growth of the size of consolidated and proprietary market data feeds,
use of 100MB connectivity to the Exchange may result in high data
transmission latencies, a loss of data packets, and a reduction in
client service satisfaction. As a result, the Exchange proposes to
eliminate the 100MB connection option to the Exchange. The proposal to
eliminate the 100MB connection option will eliminate potential
latencies and loss of data that could occur with lower bandwidths,
issues that are potentially damaging to investors.\5\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ All co-location services are provided by NASDAQ Technology
Services LLC and pursuant to agreements with the owner/operator of
its data center.
    \4\ See Exchange Fee Schedule, Section X(b), Connectivity to
Nasdaq.
    \5\ The 100MB option that is being eliminated--which is used to
connect co-located servers to the Exchange--should be contrasted
with a recently introduced option for customers to establish 100MB
connections between their co-located servers and select external
locations. These external connections are generally combined with
other bandwidth options and are not utilized to transmit the same
volume of data as the 100MB connection between co-located services
and the Exchange. For this reason, the Exchange believes that the
same latency and data loss considerations that are prompting it to
eliminate the 100MB connection to the Exchange do not apply to the
100MB connection to external locations.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Currently, there are four co-located customers that utilize 100MB
connectivity to the Exchange. All four customers also have larger
bandwidth connections to the Exchange. While these customers will need
to assess the adequacy of their bandwidth and may need to make
adjustments, the Exchange strongly believes that these changes will be
beneficial to these customers because they will decrease the risk of
latency and data loss. In addition, as the number of customers making
use of 100MB connectivity to the Exchange dwindles, maintaining the
option would require the Exchange to impose associated fixed costs on a
smaller customer base, or upon customers that are not themselves using
this legacy connectivity option. The Exchange

believes that it is reasonable and equitable to avoid this result by
eliminating the option and helping customers migrate to more suitable
connections.
    To provide all affected customers sufficient time to migrate from
their 100MB connections to larger bandwidths, the Exchange has proposed
(in a separate filing) to waive installation fees for 10Gb and 40Gb
connectivity until May 31, 2012.\6\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 66429 (February 21,
2012)(SR-Phlx-2012-20). The Exchange is not proposing to waive fees
for migrating to 1GB connectivity, since the Exchange is concerned
that this bandwidth level will prove inadequate for most members in
the near future. Accordingly, rather than creating a scenario in
which customers face repeated concerns about the adequacy of their
bandwidth, the Exchange believes that it is reasonable to use the
fee waiver to encourage customers to move to connectivity options
that are likely to be adequate for a more extended period.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange also proposes to eliminate the word ``additional''
from the Fee Schedule in several instances to reflect the elimination
of the 100MB connection that was previously offered at no charge.
2. Statutory Basis
    The Exchange believes the proposal is consistent with the
provisions of Section 6 of the Act \7\ in general, and with the
objectives of Section 6(b)(5) of the Act \8\ in particular, in that it
is designed to remove impediments to and perfect the mechanism of a
free and open market and a national market system, and, in general, to
protect investors and the public interest, and is not designed to
permit unfair discrimination between customers, issuers, brokers and
dealers.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ 15 U.S.C. 78f.
    \8\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Removes Impediments and Perfects Mechanism of a Free and Open Market

    The Exchange's proposal is designed to eliminate data transmission
latencies and loss of data risks that are associated with 100MB
connectivity, and thereby provide a more efficient mechanism for
trading. Since the migration to a higher bandwidth option will reduce
the potential disruption and consequently provide greater efficiency of
trading in the marketplace, the effects of this proposal will remove
impediments to and perfect the mechanism of a free and open market and
a national market system, which in turn will protect investors and the
public interest.

Not Unfairly Discriminatory

    The proposal to eliminate the 100MB connectitivity [sic] option
applies to all Exchange members that have voluntarily elected this
service option. Currently, there are four co-located customers that
utilize 100MB connectivity to the Exchange. All four clients also have
larger bandwidth connections to the Exchange. While these customers
will need to assess the adequacy of their bandwidth and may need to
make adjustments, the Exchange strongly believes that these changes
will be beneficial to these customers because they will decrease the
risk of latency and data loss. In addition, as the number of customers
making use of 100MB connectivity to the Exchange dwindles, maintaining
the option would require the Exchange to impose associated fixed costs
on a smaller customer base, or upon customers that are not themselves
using this legacy connectivity option.
    To assist co-located customers with migration to larger bandwidths,
the Exchange has proposed (in a separate filing) to waive installation
fees for 10Gb and 40Gb connectivity until May 31, 2012.\9\ Given the
ever-increasing size of market data, the Exchange decided to apply the
waiver of installation fees only to the 10Gb and 40Gb connection
instead of offering the waiver for the next available bandwidth, the
1Gb connection. This will provide the clients the opportunity to
migrate to a bandwidth that will more efficiently sustain the client's
business needs over a longer period of time. The four co-located
customers that currently have the 100MB connectivity to the Exchange
have until March 31, 2012 to migrate from the 100MB connection to a
larger bandwidth. Furthermore, eliminating the 100MB connectivity to
the Exchange is consistent with the connections offered by other
exchanges,\10\ and the Exchange does not believe that it would be
unfairly discriminatory to eliminate a connectivity option that is not
routinely offered by other exchanges.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \9\ See, supra note 6.
    \10\ See http://www.nyse.com/pdfs/NYSEArca_Equities_Fees.pdf,
page 13, for NYSE Equities, Inc. Fee Schedule where the bandwidth
starts at 1Gb. See also http://www.ise.com/assets/documents/OptionsExchange/legal/fee/fee_schedule.pdf, page 9, for the
International Securities Exchange Fee Schedule where the bandwidth
also starts at 1Gb.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

    The Exchange does not believe that the proposed rule change will
result in any burden on competition that is not necessary or
appropriate in furtherance of the purposes of the Act, as amended.
Specifically, the Exchange believes that eliminating the 100MB
connectivity service option will not burden competition since the 100MB
connectivity option is not routinely offered by other exchanges. In
fact, requiring the Exchange to continue to offer this option would
unfairly burden competition by requiring it to incur costs that are not
typically incurred by any of its competitors.

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

    Written comments were neither solicited nor received.

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

    Because the foregoing proposed rule change does not: (i)
Significantly affect the protection of investors or the public
interest; (ii) impose any significant burden on competition; and (iii)
become operative for 30 days after the date of the filing, or such
shorter time as the Commission may designate, it has become effective
pursuant to Section 19(b)(3)(A) of the Act \11\ and Rule 19b-4(f)(6)
\12\ thereunder.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \11\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A).
    \12\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6). In addition, Rule 19b-4(f)(6)
requires a self-regulatory organization to give the Commission
written notice of its intent to file the proposed rule change at
least five business days prior to the date of filing of the proposed
rule change, or such shorter time as designated by the Commission.
The Exchange has satisfied this requirement.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange has asked that the Commission waive the 30-day pre-
operative waiting period contained in Rule 19b-4(f)(6)(iii).\13\ The
Exchange represents that investors and the public interest are best
served by waiving the pre-operative delay to minimize potential risks
of market disruption associated with the use of lower bandwidth at a
time of increasing data traffic. For these reasons, the Commission
believes it is consistent with the protection of investors and the
public interest to waive the 30-day operative delay, and hereby grants
such waiver.\14\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \13\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6)(iii).
    \14\ For purposes only of waiving the 30-day operative delay,
the Commission has considered the proposed rule change's impact on
efficiency, competition, and capital formation. 15 U.S.C. 78c(f).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    At any time within 60 days of the filing of the proposed rule
change, the Commission summarily may temporarily suspend such rule
change if it appears to the Commission that such action is necessary or
appropriate in the public interest, for the protection of investors, or
otherwise in furtherance of the purposes of the Act. If the Commission
takes such action, the

Commission shall institute proceedings to determine whether the
proposed rule should be approved or disapproved.

IV. Solicitation of Comments

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

Electronic Comments

     Use the Commission's Internet comment form (http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml); or
     Send an email to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Please include
File Number SR-Phlx-2012-30 on the subject line.

Paper Comments

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

All submissions should refer to File Number SR-Phlx-2012-30. This file
number should be included on the subject line if email is used. To help
the Commission process and review your comments more efficiently,
please use only one method. The Commission will post all comments on
the Commission's Internet Web site (http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml). Copies of the submission, all subsequent amendments, all
written statements with respect to the proposed rule change that are
filed with the Commission, and all written communications relating to
the proposed rule change between the Commission and any person, other
than those that may be withheld from the public in accordance with the
provisions of 5 U.S.C. 552, will be available for Web site viewing and
printing in the Commission's Public Reference Room, 100 F Street NE.,
Washington, DC 20549, on official business days between the hours of 10
a.m. and 3 p.m. Copies of the filing also will be available for
inspection and copying at the principal office of the Exchange. All
comments received will be posted without change; the Commission does
not edit personal identifying information from submissions. You should
submit only information that you wish to make available publicly. All
submissions should refer to File Number SR-Phlx-2012-30 and should be
submitted on or before April 10, 2012.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \15\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12).

    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets,
pursuant to delegated authority.\15\
Kevin M. O'Neill,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2012-6618 Filed 3-19-12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 81, Number 131 (Friday, July 8, 2016)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 44496-44499]
[FR Doc No: 2016-15909]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. FAA-2015-2964; Directorate Identifier 2014-NM-206-AD;
Amendment 39-18584; AD 2016-14-03]
RIN 2120-AA64

Airworthiness Directives; Airbus Airplanes

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

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: We are adopting a new airworthiness directive (AD) for all
Airbus Model A319, A320, and A321 series airplanes. This AD is intended
to complete certain mandated programs intended to support the airplane
reaching its limit of validity (LOV) of the engineering data that
support the established structural maintenance program. This AD
requires reinforcing the forward pressure bulkhead at a certain
stringer on both the left-hand and right-hand sides, and doing related
investigative and corrective actions if necessary. We are issuing this
AD to prevent fatigue cracking of the forward pressure bulkhead, which
could result in reduced structural integrity of the airplane.

DATES: This AD becomes effective August 12, 2016.
    The Director of the Federal Register approved the incorporation by
reference of a certain publication listed in this AD as of August 12,
2016.

ADDRESSES: For service information identified in this final rule,
contact Airbus, Airworthiness Office--EIAS, 1 Rond Point Maurice
Bellonte, 31707 Blagnac Cedex, France; telephone +33 5 61 93 36 96; fax
+33 5 61 93 44 51; email

<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Internet http://www.airbus.com. You
may view this referenced service information at the FAA, Transport
Airplane Directorate, 1601 Lind Avenue SW., Renton, WA. For information
on the availability of this material at the FAA, call<PHONE_NUMBER>. It
is also available on the Internet at http://www.regulations.gov by
searching for and locating Docket No. FAA-2015-2964.

Examining the AD Docket

    You may examine the AD docket on the Internet at http://www.regulations.gov by searching for and locating Docket No. FAA-2015-
2964; or in person at the Docket Management Facility between 9 a.m. and
5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays. The AD docket
contains this AD, the regulatory evaluation, any comments received, and
other information. The street address for the Docket Office (telephone
800-647-5527) is Docket Management Facility, U.S. Department of
Transportation, Docket Operations, M-30, West Building Ground Floor,
Room W12-140, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., Washington, DC 20590.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Sanjay Ralhan, Aerospace Engineer,
International Branch, ANM-116, Transport Airplane Directorate, FAA,
1601 Lind Avenue SW., Renton, WA 98057-3356; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>;
fax<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Discussion

    We issued a notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) to amend 14 CFR
part 39 by adding an AD that would apply to all Airbus Model A319,
A320, and A321 series airplanes. The NPRM published in the Federal
Register on July 30, 2015 (80 FR 45457) (``the NPRM''). The NPRM was
intended to complete certain mandated programs intended to support the
airplane reaching its LOV of the engineering data that support the
established structural maintenance program. The NPRM proposed to
require reinforcing the forward pressure bulkhead at a certain stringer
on both the left-hand and right-hand sides, and doing related
investigative and corrective actions if necessary. We are issuing this
AD to prevent fatigue cracking of the forward pressure bulkhead, which
could result in reduced structural integrity of the airplane.
    The European Aviation Safety Agency (EASA), which is the Technical
Agent for the Member States of the European Union, has issued EASA
Airworthiness Directive 2014-0209, dated September 19, 2014 (referred
to after this as the Mandatory Continuing Airworthiness Information, or
``the MCAI''), to correct an unsafe condition on all Model A319, A320,
and Model A321 series airplanes. The MCAI states:

    During the A320 fatigue test campaign for Extended Service Goal
(ESG), it was determined that fatigue damage could develop on the
forward pressure bulkhead at Frame (FR) 35 on left hand (LH) side
and right hand (RH) side.
    This condition, if not detected and corrected, could affect the
structural integrity of the aeroplane.
    To address this potential unsafe condition, a reinforcement
modification was developed, which has been published through Airbus
Service Bulletin (SB) A320-53-1268 for in-service application to
allow aeroplanes to operate up to the new ESG limit.
    For the reasons described above, this [EASA] AD requires
reinforcement of the centre fuselage forward pressure bulkhead at
FR35.

    The forward pressure bulkhead reinforcement includes related
investigative actions of measuring the diameters of certain fastener
holes, and if they are not oversized, doing a rotating probe inspection
for cracking of the fastener holes.
    Required corrective actions include cold expanding crack-free holes
or repairing oversize or cracked holes by using a method approved by
the FAA, EASA, or Airbus's EASA Design Organization Approval (DOA).
    You may examine the MCAI in the AD docket on the Internet at http://www.regulations.gov by searching for and locating Docket No. FAA-2015-
2964-0002.

Comments

    We gave the public the opportunity to participate in developing
this AD. The following presents the comments received on the NPRM and
the FAA's response to each comment.

Request To Reference Revised Service Information

    American Airlines requested that we reference Revision 03 of Airbus
Service Bulletin A320-53-1268, dated May 7, 2015, as the appropriate
source of service information.
    We agree with American Airlines' request. No additional work is
specified by this revision for airplanes modified by any previous
issue. We have revised paragraphs (g) and (h) of this AD to refer to
Airbus Service Bulletin A320-53-1268, Revision 03, dated May 7, 2015;
and revised paragraph (i) of this AD to also give credit for previous
actions accomplished in accordance with Airbus Service Bulletin A320-
53-1268, Revision 02, dated July 15, 2014.

Request for Applicability Clarification

    United Airlines (UAL) stated that the effectivity of Airbus Service
Bulletin A320-53-1268, Revision 02, dated July 15, 2014, does not match
the NPRM applicability. UAL also stated that the NPRM applicability
does not mention pre-modification 153832 airplanes, and that Airbus
Service Bulletin A320-53-1268, Revision 02, dated July 15, 2014, is
classified as Airbus Modification 153832.
    UAL stated that several alternative methods of compliance (AMOCs)
may be needed because Airbus will add to the effectivity of Airbus
Service Bulletin A320-53-1268, Revision 02, dated July 15, 2014, after
operators purchase an extended design service goal from Airbus.
    We agree to clarify the applicability. The requirements of this AD
apply to all airplanes identified in the applicability of the AD. If
there is any conflict between the AD applicability and the service
information effectivity, then the AD takes precedence. The
applicability of this AD also matches the applicability of the
corresponding MCAI AD.
    If operators are planning to operate the airplane beyond the LOV of
engineering data approved for the original type design, the actions
specified in this AD must be done in order to address the identified
unsafe condition. We acknowledge that AMOCs may be needed to allow the
use of future revisions of the service information. Therefore, we
encourage operators to coordinate with Airbus for effective planning
and compliance with the AD requirements if they intend to operate their
fleet beyond its LOV. We have not changed this final rule in this
regard.

Request for Terminating Action Clarification

    UAL questioned why there is no terminating action in the proposed
AD. UAL stated that the reinforcement specified in this proposed AD is
intended to prevent fatigue cracking of the forward pressure bulkhead
but there is no reference to related inspection tasks or termination of
existing Airworthiness Limitation Items (ALIs). UAL noted that, for
example, ALI 533186 is applicable for pre-Mod 153832 (Airbus Service
Bulletin A320-53-1268) airplanes. UAL stated this will cause confusion
as to whether or not ALI inspections are required if there is no
terminating action paragraph.
    In regard to UAL's question on terminating action, ALI inspections

must be accomplished on an airplane to be in compliance with the
approved type design independent of the forward pressure bulkhead
reinforcement required by this AD. Accomplishing the reinforcement does
not preclude the need for ALI inspections.
    However, when the effectivity of an ALI inspection identifies pre-
modification airplanes, then it is not applicable to airplanes in a
post-modification configuration. Thus, ALI inspections that are
identified as pre-Mod 153832 (Airbus Service Bulletin A320-53-1268) do
not affect airplanes on which the reinforcement specified in Airbus
Service Bulletin A320-53-1268 has been done. We have not changed this
AD in this regard.

Conclusion

    We reviewed the relevant data, considered the comments received,
and determined that air safety and the public interest require adopting
this AD with the changes described previously and minor editorial
changes. We have determined that these minor changes:
     Are consistent with the intent that was proposed in the
NPRM for correcting the unsafe condition; and
     Do not add any additional burden upon the public than was
already proposed in the NPRM.
    We also determined that these changes will not increase the
economic burden on any operator or increase the scope of this AD.

Related Service Information Under 1 CFR Part 51

    Airbus has issued Service Bulletin A320-53-1268, Revision 03, dated
May 7, 2015. The service information describes procedures for
reinforcing the forward pressure bulkhead at frame 35, stringer 30, on
both the left-hand and right-hand sides; and for doing repairs. This
service information is reasonably available because the interested
parties have access to it through their normal course of business or by
the means identified in the ADDRESSES section of this AD.

Costs of Compliance

    We estimate that this AD affects 48 airplanes of U.S. registry.
    We also estimate that it will take about 21 work-hours per product
to comply with the basic requirements of this AD. The average labor
rate is $85 per work-hour. Based on these figures, we estimate the cost
of this AD on U.S. operators to be $85,680, or $1,785 per product.
    According to the manufacturer, some of the costs of this AD may be
covered under warranty, thereby reducing the cost impact on affected
individuals. We do not control warranty coverage for affected
individuals. As a result, we have included all costs in our cost
estimate.

Authority for This Rulemaking

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

Regulatory Findings

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

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39

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

Adoption of the Amendment

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

PART 39--AIRWORTHINESS DIRECTIVES

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

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

Sec.  39.13  [Amended]

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

2016-14-03 Airbus: Amendment 39-18584. Docket No. FAA-2015-2964;
Directorate Identifier 2014-NM-206-AD.

(a) Effective Date

    This AD becomes effective August 12, 2016.

(b) Affected ADs

    None.

(c) Applicability

    This AD applies to the Airbus airplanes, certificated in any
category, identified in paragraphs (c)(1), (c)(2), and (c)(3) of
this AD, all manufacturer serial numbers.
    (1) Airbus Model A319-111, -112, -113, -114, -115, -131, -132,
and -133 airplanes.
    (2) Airbus Model A320-211, -212, -214, -231, -232, and -233
airplanes.
    (3) Airbus Model A321-111, -112, -131, -211, -212, -213, -231,
and -232 airplanes.

(d) Subject

    Air Transport Association (ATA) of America Code 53, Fuselage.

(e) Reason

    This AD is intended to complete certain mandated programs
intended to support the airplane reaching its limit of validity
(LOV) of the engineering data that support the established
structural maintenance program. We are issuing this AD to prevent
fatigue cracking of the forward pressure bulkhead, which could
result in reduced structural integrity of the airplane.

(f) Compliance

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

(g) Reinforcement, Related Investigative Actions, and Corrective
Actions

    Before the accumulation of 48,000 total flight cycles or 96,000
total flight hours, whichever occurs first: Reinforce the forward
pressure bulkhead at frame 35, stringer 30, on both the left-hand
and right-hand sides; and do all applicable related investigative
and corrective actions; in accordance with the Accomplishment
Instructions of Airbus Service Bulletin A320-53-1268, Revision 03,
dated May 7, 2015, except as provided by paragraph (h) of this AD.
Do all applicable related investigative and corrective actions
before further flight.

(h) Exception to Service Information Specifications

    Although Airbus Service Bulletin A320-53-1268, Revision 03,
dated May 7, 2015, specifies to contact Airbus for repair

instructions, and specifies that action as ``RC'' (Required for
Compliance), this AD requires repair before further flight using a
method approved by the Manager, International Branch, ANM-116,
Transport Airplane Directorate, FAA; or the European Aviation Safety
Agency (EASA); or Airbus's EASA Design Organization Approval (DOA).

(i) Credit for Previous Actions

    This paragraph provides credit for actions required by paragraph
(g) of this AD, if those actions were performed before the effective
date of this AD using any of the Airbus service information
specified in paragraphs (i)(1) through (i)(3) of this AD. This
service information is not incorporated by reference in this AD.
    (1) Airbus Service Bulletin A320-53-1268, dated January 8, 2013,
which is not incorporated by reference in this AD.
    (2) Airbus Service Bulletin A320-53-1268, Revision 01, dated
July 23, 2013, which is not incorporated by reference in this AD.
    (3) Airbus Service Bulletin A320-53-1268, Revision 02, dated
July 15, 2014, which is not incorporated by reference in this AD.

(j) Other FAA AD Provisions

    The following provisions also apply to this AD:
    (1) Alternative Methods of Compliance (AMOCs): The Manager,
International Branch, ANM-116, Transport Airplane Directorate, FAA,
has the authority to approve AMOCs for this AD, if requested using
the procedures found in 14 CFR 39.19. In accordance with 14 CFR
39.19, send your request to your principal inspector or local Flight
Standards District Office, as appropriate. If sending information
directly to the International Branch, send it to ATTN: Sanjay
Ralhan, Aerospace Engineer, International Branch, ANM-116, Transport
Airplane Directorate, FAA, 1601 Lind Avenue SW., Renton, WA 98057-
3356; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax<PHONE_NUMBER>. Information may be
emailed to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Before using any
approved AMOC, notify your appropriate principal inspector, or
lacking a principal inspector, the manager of the local flight
standards district office/certificate holding district office. The
AMOC approval letter must specifically reference this AD.
    (2) Contacting the Manufacturer: For any requirement in this AD
to obtain corrective actions from a manufacturer, the action must be
accomplished using a method approved by the Manager, International
Branch, ANM-116, Transport Airplane Directorate, FAA; or EASA; or
Airbus's EASA DOA. If approved by the DOA, the approval must include
the DOA-authorized signature.
    (3) Required for Compliance (RC): Except as required by
paragraph (h) of this AD, if any service information contains
procedures or tests that are identified as RC, those procedures and
tests must be done to comply with this AD; any procedures or tests
that are not identified as RC are recommended. Those procedures and
tests that are not identified as RC may be deviated from using
accepted methods in accordance with the operator's maintenance or
inspection program without obtaining approval of an AMOC, provided
the procedures and tests identified as RC can be done and the
airplane can be put back in an airworthy condition. Any
substitutions or changes to procedures or tests identified as RC
require approval of an AMOC.

(k) Related Information

    (1) Refer to Mandatory Continuing Airworthiness Information
(MCAI) EASA AD 2014-0209, dated September 19, 2014, for related
information. This MCAI may be found in the AD docket on the Internet
at http://www.regulations.gov by searching for and locating Docket
No. FAA-2015-2964.
    (2) Service information identified in this AD that is not
incorporated by reference is available at the addresses specified in
paragraphs (l)(3) and (l)(4) of this AD.

(l) Material Incorporated by Reference

    (1) The Director of the Federal Register approved the
incorporation by reference (IBR) of the service information listed
in this paragraph under 5 U.S.C. 552(a) and 1 CFR part 51.
    (2) You must use this service information as applicable to do
the actions required by this AD, unless this AD specifies otherwise.
    (i) Airbus Service Bulletin A320-53-1268, Revision 03, dated May
7, 2015.
    (ii) Reserved.
    (3) For service information identified in this AD, contact
Airbus, Airworthiness Office--EIAS, 1 Rond Point Maurice Bellonte,
31707 Blagnac Cedex, France; telephone +33 5 61 93 36 96; fax +33 5
61 93 44 51; email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Internet http://www.airbus.com.
    (4) You may view this service information at the FAA, Transport
Airplane Directorate, 1601 Lind Avenue SW., Renton, WA. For
information on the availability of this material at the FAA, call
425-227-1221.
    (5) You may view this service information that is incorporated
by reference at the National Archives and Records Administration
(NARA). For information on the availability of this material at
NARA, call<PHONE_NUMBER>, or go to: http://www.archives.gov/federal-register/cfr/ibr-locations.html.

    Issued in Renton, Washington, on June 23, 2016.
Dorr M. Anderson,
Acting Manager, Transport Airplane Directorate, Aircraft Certification
Service.
[FR Doc. 2016-15909 Filed 7-7-16; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


[Federal Register: November 25, 2008 (Volume 73, Number 228)]
[Notices]
[Page 71709]
[DOCID:fr25no08-124]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

Proposed Collection; Comment Request

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

Extension:
    Rule 15c1-7; OMB Control No. 3235-0134; SEC File No. 270-146.

    Notice is hereby given that pursuant to the Paperwork Reduction Act
of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.) the Securities and Exchange Commission
(``Commission'') has submitted to the Office of Management and Budget a
request for approval of extension of the existing collection of
information provided for in the following rule: Rule 15c1-7 (17 CFR
240.15c1-7) under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (15 U.S.C. 78a et
seq.) (``Exchange Act'').
    Rule 15c1-7 states that any act of a broker-dealer designed to
effect securities transactions with or for a customer account over
which the broker-dealer (directly or through an agent or employee) has
discretion will be considered a fraudulent, manipulative, or deceptive
practice under the federal securities laws, unless a record is made of
the transaction immediately by the broker-dealer. The record must
include (a) the name of the customer, (b) the name, amount, and price
of the security, and (c) the date and time when such transaction took
place. The Commission estimates that 556 respondents collect
information related to approximately 400,000 transactions annually
under Rule 15c1-7 and that each respondent would spend approximately 5
minutes on the collection of information for each transaction, for
approximately 33,333 aggregate hours per year (approximately 60 hours
per respondent).
    Written comments are invited on: (a) Whether the proposed
collection of information is necessary for the proper performance of
the functions of the Commission, including whether the information
shall have practical utility; (b) the accuracy of the Commission's
estimates of the burden of the proposed collection of information; (c)
ways to enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to
be collected; and (d) ways to minimize the burden of the collection of
information on respondents, including through the use of automated
collection techniques or other forms of information technology.
Consideration will be given to comments and suggestions submitted in
writing within 60 days of this publication.
    Comments should be directed to Lewis W. Walker, Acting Director/
Chief Information Officer, Securities and Exchange Commission, c/o
Shirley Martinson, 6432 General Green Way, Alexandria, VA 22312 or send
an e-mail to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
    Dated: November 19, 2008.
Florence E. Harmon,
Acting Secretary.
[FR Doc. E8-27988 Filed 11-24-08; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 81, Number 126 (Thursday, June 30, 2016)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Page 42512]
[FR Doc No: 2016-15505]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Coast Guard

33 CFR Part 165

[Docket No. USCG-2016-0456]

Safety Zone; City of Charleston Independence Celebration,
Charleston, WV

AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS.

ACTION: Notice of enforcement of regulation.

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

SUMMARY: The Coast Guard will enforce safety zone for the City of
Charleston Independence Celebration Fireworks on the Kanawha River from
mile marker 58.1 to mile marker 59.1, in Charleston, WV on July 3,
2016. This action is needed to provide for the safety of life on
navigable waterways during a fireworks display on or over the waterway.
Our regulation for Recurring Marine Events in Captain of the Port Ohio
Valley Zone identifies the safety zone for this fireworks display.
During the enforcement period, no vessel may transit this regulated
area without approval from the Captain of the Port or a designated
representative.

DATES: The regulations in 33 CFR 165.801, Table 1, Sector Ohio Valley,
No. 31 will be enforced from 9:15 p.m. until 10:15 p.m. on July 3,
2016.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: If you have questions about this
notice of enforcement, call or email MST3 Robert Miller, Marine Safety
Unit Huntington, U.S. Coast Guard; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>,
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The Coast Guard will enforce a safety zone
for the annual City of Charleston Independence Celebration Fireworks
listed in 33 CFR 165.801, Table 1, Sector Ohio Valley, No. 31, from
9:15 p.m. until 10:15 p.m. on July 3, 2016. This safety zone extends
from mile marker 58.1 to mile marker 59.1 on the Kanawha River in
Charleston, WV. This action is being taken to provide for the safety of
life on navigable waterways during the fireworks display. Entry into
this safety zone is prohibited unless authorized by the Captain of the
Port Ohio Valley or a designated representative. Persons or vessels
desiring to enter into or passage through the zone must request
permission from the Captain of the Port Ohio Valley or a designated
representative. If permission is granted, all persons and vessels shall
comply with the instructions of the Captain of the Port Ohio Valley or
designated representative.
    This notice of enforcement is issued under authority of 33 CFR
165.801 and 5 U.S.C. 552 (a). In addition to this notice of enforcement
in the Federal Register, the Coast Guard plans to provide notification
of this enforcement period via the Local Notice to Mariners and updates
via marine information broadcasts on channel 16.

R.V. Timme,
Captain, U.S. Coast Guard, Captain of the Port Ohio Valley.
[FR Doc. 2016-15505 Filed 6-29-16; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 9110-04-P


[Federal Register Volume 80, Number 40 (Monday, March 2, 2015)]
[Notices]
[Pages 11254-11256]
[FR Doc No: 2015-04189]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-74363; File No. SR-BX-2015-013]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; NASDAQ OMX BX, Inc.; Notice of
Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of Proposed Rule Change To Amend the
Fee Schedule Under Exchange Rule 7018(a) and (e) With Respect to
Transactions in Securities Priced at $1 per Share or More

February 24, 2015.
    Pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934
(``Act''),\1\ and Rule 19b-4 thereunder,\2\ notice is hereby given that
on February 11, 2015, NASDAQ OMX BX, Inc. (``BX'' or ``Exchange'')
filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (``SEC'' or
``Commission'') the proposed rule change as described in Items I, II,
and III, below, which Items have been prepared by the Exchange. The
Commission is publishing this notice to solicit comments on the
proposed rule change from interested persons.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

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

    The Exchange proposes to amend the fee schedule under Exchange Rule
7018 with respect to transactions in securities priced at $1 or more
per share.
    The text of the proposed rule change is also available on the
Exchange's Web site at http://nasdaqomxbx.cchwallstreet.com, at the
principal office of the Exchange, and at the Commission's Public
Reference Room.

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

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

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

1. Purpose
    The Exchange is proposing to amend BX Rule 7018(a) and (e) to
modify the fees and rebates assessed under the rule applicable to
transactions in securities priced at $1 or more. Specifically, the
Exchange proposes to clarify and make uniform throughout BX Rule
7018(a) the term ``Midpoint pegging'', as well as in BX Rule 7018(e)
regarding credits for retail orders. The Exchange also proposes to
include within BX Rule 7018(a) a specific line item for a credit for an
``Order with Midpoint pegging that removes liquidity'' of $0.0005 per
share executed. The Exchange believes that these proposed changes
increase transparency as to how a member's credit is determined,
clarify the fee schedule, and do not change the overall current rate
for such credits except for the one minor change noted above.\3\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ The addition of the language concerning price improvement to
BX Rule 7018 merely reflects how the system for credits and fees
already currently operates, which is why this new language does not
change the overall current rates for such credits.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Changing the language for non-displayed orders entered by a member
that provides an average daily volume of 3.5 million or more shares
(but less than 5 million shares) of non-displayed liquidity to include
``other than orders with Midpoint pegging'' instead of ``including
those pegged to the midpoint'' results in no actual change. Currently,
a member would never receive the $0.0024 per share executed charge for
an order with Midpoint pegging because instead the member would have
qualified for the $0.0005 per share executed charge for an order with
Midpoint pegging entered by a member that provides an average daily
volume of 2 million or more shares of non-displayed liquidity during
the month.
    Additionally, the Exchange proposes to define ``price improvement''
to mean instances when the accepted price of an order differs from the
executed price of an order and incorporate it where applicable in BX
Rule 7018(a) and (e). The accepted price is the price the matching
engine assigns an order based on the instructions submitted by the
member. It may differ from a customer's limit price because of the
order type (e.g., pegging and post only orders) or for regulatory
reasons (e.g., Reg SHO, Reg NMS compliance or other regulatory
restrictions). The accepted price of an order will not be more
aggressive than the customer's limit price, and is often the same as
the customer's submitted limit price. An order can execute up to its
accepted price and this is the least advantageous price at which an
order can execute. Any execution price that is different than the
accepted price must be more advantageous than the accepted price. Thus,
executions where the accepted price does not equal the execution price
are situations when the order is receiving price improvement versus its
accepted price.
    The Exchange also proposes to change the fee assessed for BTFY and
BCRT orders in securities listed on The NASDAQ Stock Market LLC
(``NASDAQ'') (``Tape C''), the New York Stock Exchange (``NYSE'')
(``Tape A'') and on exchanges other than NASDAQ and the NYSE (``Tape
B'') (collectively, the ``Tapes'').
    BTFY \4\ is a routing option under which orders check the order
execution and trade reporting system owned and operated by BX (the
``System'') for available shares only if so instructed by the entering
firm and are thereafter routed to destinations on the System routing
table. If shares remain unexecuted after routing, they are posted to
the System book. Once on the System book, should the order subsequently
be locked or crossed by another market center, the System will not
route the order to the locking or crossing market center.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ See BX Rule 4758(a)(v).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    BCRT \5\ is a routing option under which orders check the System
and then route to PSX and NASDAQ. If shares remain unexecuted, they are
posted to the System book or cancelled. Once on the System book, should
the order subsequently be locked or crossed by another market center,
the System will not route the order to the locking or crossing market
center.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ See BX Rule 4758(a)(vii).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    For BTFY and BCRT orders, the Exchange currently passes through all
fees and rebates for orders that execute on PSX or NASDAQ. BTFY and
BCRT orders executed on BX result in a pass through charge of $0.0025
or $0.0026 per share executed on PSX \6\ and $0.0030 per share executed
on

NASDAQ.\7\ The Exchange is proposing to now assess a set charge of
$0.0030 per share executed for BTFY orders that execute on NYSE, NASDAQ
or PSX and $0.0007 per share executed for BTFY orders executed on any
other venue. The Exchange is also proposing to now assess a set charge
of $0.0030 per share executed for BCRT orders that executes on PSX or
NASDAQ in lieu of passing through credits and rebates.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ See NASDAQ OMX PHLX LLC Pricing Schedule, Section
VIII(a)(1).
    \7\ See NASDAQ Rule 7018(a).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    BX is proposing to eliminate pass through fees and assess a set fee
of $0.0030 per share executed for both BTFY and BCRT. The Exchange
currently passes through any routing fees charged and rebates to NASDAQ
or PSX for these orders, which currently is $0.0030 per share executed
on NASDAQ and varies by tape on PSX but also may vary based on changes
to those exchange's respective fee schedules.
2. Statutory Basis
    BX believes that the proposed rule change is consistent with the
provisions of Section 6 of the Act,\8\ in general, and with Sections
6(b)(4) and 6(b)(5) of the Act,\9\ in particular, in that it provides
for the equitable allocation of reasonable dues, fees and other charges
among members and issuers and other persons using any facility or
system which the Exchange operates or controls, and is designed to
prevent fraudulent and manipulative acts and practices, to promote just
and equitable principles of trade, to foster cooperation and
coordination with persons engaged in regulating, clearing, settling,
processing information with respect to, and facilitating transactions
in securities, to remove impediments to and perfect the mechanism of a
free and open market and a national market system, and, in general, to
protect investors and the public interest; and are not designed to
permit unfair discrimination between customers, issuers, brokers, or
dealers.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \8\ 15 U.S.C. 78f.
    \9\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(4) and (5).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange believes that the proposed changes (i) to make the
term ``Midpoint pegging'' uniform throughout BX Rule 7018(a) and (e),
to define ``price improvement' to mean instances when the accepted
price of an order differs from the executed price of an order and
incorporate it where applicable in BX Rule 7018(a) and (e), (ii) to
include within BX Rule 7018(a) a specific line item for a credit for an
``Order with Midpoint pegging that removes liquidity'' of $0.0005 per
share executed, and (iii) to change the language for non-displayed
orders entered by a member that provides an average daily volume of 3.5
million or more shares (but less than 5 million shares) of non-
displayed liquidity to include ``other than orders with Midpoint
pegging'' instead of ``including those pegged to the midpoint'' are
reasonable because they increase transparency as to how a member's
charges and credits are determined. The Exchange also believes that
these changes are consistent with an equitable allocation of fees and
are not unfairly discriminatory because the overall current rate for
such credits will not change except for the one minor change noted
above and they apply uniformly to all market participants to whom the
fee schedule is applicable.
    Additionally, the Exchange believes that the proposed changes to
the charges assessed for BTFY and BCRT orders in securities of any Tape
that execute on PSX are reasonable because they more closely align the
fee received with the costs associated with providing routing services.
The Exchange incurs costs in operating and supporting the routing
function, which are in addition to the fees of other exchanges that it
incurs when a routed order executes on another venue. To cover such
costs, the Exchange assesses the proposed fee for other routed orders,
such as BSTG and BSCN orders, which are assessed a charge of $0.0030
per share executed.\10\ Thus, the current pass through fee results in a
discount to the fee assessed for use of the routing function for other
routed orders.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \10\ For a description of BSTG and BSCN routing strategies, see
BX Rules 4758(a)(1)(A)(iii) and (iv).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange also believes that the proposed changes are reasonable
because they remove complexity from the fee schedule and assess a fee
that is not dependent on knowing what the current liquidity removal
rates are on PSX and NASDAQ. The Exchange believes that the proposed
changes to BTFY and BCRT order fees are equitably allocated because all
member firms that receive an execution on PSX and NASDAQ will be
assessed a fee that is more closely aligned with the costs incurred by
the Exchange, as noted above. Also, the Exchange believes that the
proposed changes to BTFY and BCRT order fees as to PSX do not
discriminate unfairly because they eliminate a distinction in the fees
whereby discounted fees are charged for use of the Exchange's routing
functionality. Moreover, the proposed changes do not discriminate
unfairly because they eliminate a distinction in the routing fees
whereby some fees are fixed and others are based on fee assessed by
other markets. As noted above, most routing fees are based on a set
fee, and are not tied to the fees of other markets.

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

    The Exchange does not believe that the proposed rule changes will
result in any burden on competition that is not necessary or
appropriate in furtherance of the purposes of the Act, as amended.\11\
BX notes that it operates in a highly competitive market in which
market participants can readily favor over 40 different competing
exchanges and alternative trading systems if they deem fee levels at a
particular venue to be excessive, or rebate opportunities available at
other venues to be more favorable. In such an environment, BX must
continually adjust its fees to remain competitive with other exchanges.
Because competitors are free to modify their own fees in response, and
because market participants may readily adjust their order routing
practices, BX believes that the degree to which fee changes in this
market may impose any burden on competition is extremely limited.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \11\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(8).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In this instance, the changes to routing fees and credits do not
impose a burden on competition because the Exchange's routing services
are optional and are the subject of competition from other exchanges
and broker-dealers that offer routing services, as well as the ability
of members to develop their own routing capabilities. The
standardization of fees for execution of BTFY and BCRT orders that
route from BX to PSX or NASDAQ are reflective of a need to better align
the fees received with the costs incurred in operating and supporting
the routing function. It removes an unnecessarily complex process to
determine the fee assessed with a set fee, which is consistent with
other BX routing fees. Under the current fees, a member firm must know
what the fee schedule is on PSX and NASDAQ at any given time. Thus, the
changes will simplify the fee schedule by providing certainty to the
fee assessed. For these reasons, the Exchange does not believe that any
of the proposed changes will impair the ability of members or competing
order execution venues to maintain their competitive standing in the
financial markets. Moreover, because there are numerous competitive
alternatives to the use of the Exchange, it is likely that BX will lose
market share as a result of the changes if they are unattractive to
market participants. Finally, the changes relating to Midpoint pegging

also will not result in any burden on competition because they serve to
clarify and enhance the understanding of members as to how rates are
assigned.
    Accordingly, BX does not believe that the proposed rule changes
will impair the ability of members or competing order execution venues
to maintain their competitive standing in the financial markets.

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

    No written comments were either solicited or received.

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

    The foregoing change has become effective pursuant to Section
19(b)(3)(A) of the Act \12\ and paragraph (f) of Rule 19b-4 \13\
thereunder. At any time within 60 days of the filing of the proposed
rule change, the Commission summarily may temporarily suspend such rule
change if it appears to the Commission that such action is necessary or
appropriate in the public interest, for the protection of investors, or
otherwise in furtherance of the purposes of the Act.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \12\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A).
    \13\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

IV. Solicitation of Comments

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

Electronic Comments

     Use the Commission's Internet comment form (http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml); or
     Send an email to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Please include
File Number SR-BX-2015-013 on the subject line.

Paper Comments

     Send paper comments in triplicate to Brent J. Fields,
Secretary, Securities and Exchange Commission, 100 F Street NE.,
Washington, DC 20549-1090.

All submissions should refer to File Number SR-BX-2015-013. This file
number should be included on the subject line if email is used.
    To help the Commission process and review your comments more
efficiently, please use only one method. The Commission will post all
comments on the Commission's Internet Web site (http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml). Copies of the submission, all subsequent amendments,
all written statements with respect to the proposed rule change that
are filed with the Commission, and all written communications relating
to the proposed rule change between the Commission and any person,
other than those that may be withheld from the public in accordance
with the provisions of 5 U.S.C. 552, will be available for Web site
viewing and printing in the Commission's Public Reference Room, 100 F
Street NE., Washington, DC 20549, on official business days between the
hours of 10:00 a.m. and 3:00 p.m. Copies of such filing also will be
available for inspection and copying at the principal office of the
Exchange. All comments received will be posted without change; the
Commission does not edit personal identifying information from
submissions. You should submit only information that you wish to make
available publicly. All submissions should refer to File Number SR-BX-
2015-013, and should be submitted on or before March 23, 2015.

    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets,
pursuant to delegated authority.\14\
Jill M. Peterson,
Assistant Secretary.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \14\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

[FR Doc. 2015-04189 Filed 2-27-15; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


[Federal Register: April 20, 2010 (Volume 75, Number 75)]
[Notices]
[Page 20672]
[DOCID:fr20ap10-103]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

Notice of Submission Deadline for Schedule Information for O'Hare
International Airport, John F. Kennedy International Airport, and
Newark Liberty International Airport for the Winter 2010 Scheduling
Season

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

ACTION: Notice of submission deadline.

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

SUMMARY: Under this notice, the FAA announces the submission deadline
of May 13, 2010, for Winter 2010 flight schedules at Chicago's O'Hare
International Airport (ORD), New York's John F. Kennedy International
Airport (JFK), and Newark Liberty International Airport (EWR) in
accordance with the International Air Transport Association (IATA)
Worldwide Scheduling Guidelines and FAA orders limiting scheduled
operations. The deadline of May 13, 2010, coincides with the schedule
submission deadline for the IATA 126th Schedules Conference. The U.S.
winter scheduling season for these airports is from October 31, 2010,
through March 26, 2011.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The FAA has designated ORD as an IATA Level
2, Schedules Facilitated Airport, and JFK and EWR as Level 3,
Coordinated Airports. The scheduled operations at JFK and EWR are
currently limited by FAA orders.\1\ The FAA is primarily concerned
about planned operations during peak hours but carriers may submit
schedule plans for the entire day. At ORD, the peak hours are 7 a.m. to
9 p.m. Central Time and at EWR and JFK from 6 a.m. to 11 p.m. Eastern
Time. Schedule information should include all planned commercial
operations including passenger, charter, and cargo flights. Carriers
must submit schedule information in sufficient detail to include at
minimum, the operating carrier, airline designator code, flight number,
scheduled time of operation, frequency, and effective dates. The FAA
encourages the use of IATA standard schedule information format and
data elements in the IATA Standard Schedules Information Manual.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ Order Limiting Scheduled Operations at John F. Kennedy
International Airport, 73 FR 3,510 (Jan. 18, 2008); 73 FR 8,737
(Feb. 14, 2008); 74 FR 51,650 (Oct. 7, 2009), (amendments to order).
Order Limiting Scheduled Operations at Newark Liberty International
Airport, 73 FR 29,550 (May 21, 2008); 74 FR 51,648 (Oct. 7, 2009),
(amendment to order).

---------------------------------------------------------------------------
DATES: Schedules must be submitted no later than May 13, 2010.

ADDRESSES: Schedules may be submitted to the Slot Administration Office
by e-mail to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>facsimile:<PHONE_NUMBER>; ARINC:
DCAYAXD; or mail to Slot Administration Office, AGC-240, Office of the
Chief Counsel, 800 Independence Ave., SW., Washington, DC 20591.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Rebecca MacPherson, Assistant Chief
Counsel for Regulations, Office of the Chief Counsel, AGC-40, Federal
Aviation Administration, 800 Independence Avenue, SW., Washington, DC
20591; telephone number:<PHONE_NUMBER> or e-mail:
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
    Issued in Washington, DC, on April 14, 2010.
Rebecca B. MacPherson,
Assistant Chief Counsel for Regulations.
[FR Doc. 2010-9029 Filed 4-19-10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


[Federal Register Volume 88, Number 176 (Wednesday, September 13, 2023)]
[Notices]
[Page 62835]
[FR Doc No: 2023-19792]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[SEC File No. 270-156, OMB Control No. 3235-0288]

Submission for OMB Review; Comment Request; Extension: Form 20-F

Upon Written Request Copies Available From: Securities and Exchange
Commission, Office of FOIA Services, 100 F Street NE, Washington, DC
20549-2736

    Notice is hereby given that, pursuant to the Paperwork Reduction
Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.), the Securities and Exchange
Commission (``Commission'') has submitted to the Office of Management
and Budget this request for extension of the previously approved
collection of information discussed below.
    Form 20-F (17 CFR 249.220f) is used to register securities of
foreign private issuers pursuant to Section 12 of the Securities
Exchange Act of 1934 (``Exchange Act'') (15 U.S.C. 78l) or as annual
and transitional reports pursuant to Sections 13 and 15(d) of the
Exchange Act (15 U.S.C. 78m(a) and 78o(d)). The information required in
the Form 20-F is used by investors in making investment decisions with
respect to the securities of such foreign private issuers. We estimate
that Form 20-F takes approximately 2,629.92 hours per response and is
filed by approximately 729 respondents. We estimate that 25% of the
2,629.92 hours per response (657.48 hours) is prepared by the issuer
for a total reporting burden of 479,303 (657.48 hours per response x
729 responses).
    An agency may conduct or sponsor, and a person is not required to
respond to, a collection of information unless it displays a currently
valid control number.
    The public may view background documentation for this information
collection at the following website: www.reginfo.gov. Find this
particular information collection by selecting ``Currently under 30-day
Review--Open for Public Comments'' or by using the search function.
Written comments and recommendations for the proposed information
collection should be sent within 30 days of publication of this notice
by October 13, 2023 to (i) www.reginfo.gov/public/do/PRAMain and (ii)
David Bottom, Director/Chief Information Officer, Securities and
Exchange Commission, c/o John Pezzullo, 100 F Street, NE, Washington,
DC 20549, or by sending an email to: [email protected].

    Dated: September 8, 2023.
Sherry R. Haywood,
Assistant Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2023-19792 Filed 9-12-23; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011-01-P