[Federal Register Volume 88, Number 205 (Wednesday, October 25, 2023)]
[Notices]
[Pages 73394-73395]
[FR Doc No: 2023-23529]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

National Highway Traffic Safety Administration

[Docket No. NHTSA-2021-0037; Notice 2]

BMW of North America, LLC, Grant of Petition for Decision of
Inconsequential Noncompliance

AGENCY: National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA),
Department of Transportation (DOT).

ACTION: Grant of petition.

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

SUMMARY: BMW of North America, LLC, a subsidiary of BMW AG, Munich,
Germany, (collectively ``BMW''), has determined that certain Model Year
(MY) 2018-2021 BMW K 1600 motorcycles do not fully comply with Federal
Motor Vehicle Safety Standard (FMVSS) No. 123, Motorcycle Controls and
Displays. BMW filed an original noncompliance report dated March 18,
2021, and, subsequently, BMW petitioned NHTSA on April 9, 2021, for a
decision that the subject noncompliance is inconsequential as it
relates to motor vehicle safety. This notice announces the grant of
BMW's petition.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Frederick Smith, General Engineer,
NHTSA, Office of Vehicle Safety Compliance,<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Overview

    BMW has determined that certain MY 2018-2021 BMW K 1600 motorcycles
do not fully comply with the requirements of paragraph S5.2.5 of FMVSS
No. 123, Motorcycle Controls and Displays (49 CFR 571.123). BMW filed a
noncompliance report dated March 18, 2021, pursuant to 49 CFR part 573,
Defect and Noncompliance Responsibility and Reports. BMW subsequently
petitioned NHTSA on April 9, 2021, for an exemption from the
notification and remedy requirements of 49 U.S.C. Chapter 301 on the
basis that this noncompliance is inconsequential as it relates to motor
vehicle safety, pursuant to 49 U.S.C. 30118(d) and 30120(h) and 49 CFR
part 556, Exemption for Inconsequential Defect or Noncompliance.
    Notice of receipt of BMW's petition was published with a 30-day
public comment period, on June 17, 2022, in the Federal Register (87 FR
36579). No comments were received. To view the petition and all
supporting documents log onto the Federal Docket Management System
(FDMS) website at https://www.regulations.gov/. Then follow the online
search instructions to locate docket number ``NHTSA-2021-0037.''

II. Motorcycles Involved

    Approximately 4,966 MY 2018-2021 BMW K 1600 GTL, B, and Grand
America motorcycles manufactured between April 13, 2017, and February
23, 2021, are potentially involved.

III. Noncompliance

    BMW explains that the subject motorcycles are equipped with
passenger footrests that fold upward and slightly forward, but not
rearward, when not in use, and therefore do not fully comply with the
requirements specified in paragraph S5.2.5 of FMVSS No. 123.

IV. Rule Requirements

    Paragraph S5.2.5 of FMVSS No. 123 includes the requirements
relevant to this petition. Footrests shall be provided for each
designated seating position. Each footrest for a passenger other than
an operator shall fold rearward and upward when not in use.

V. Summary of BMW's Petition

    The following views and arguments presented in this section, ``V.
Summary of BMW's Petition,'' are the views and arguments provided by
BMW and do not reflect the views of the Agency. BMW describes the
subject noncompliance and contends that the noncompliance is
inconsequential as it relates to motor vehicle safety.
    BMW says that that while ``there are slight differences in the
geometry and mounting locations'' between each model of the affected
motorcycles, the passenger footrest ``is attached to the mounting
bracket and the bracket is bolted to the motorcycle frame.'' BMW notes
that ``the mounting locations for the rider footrest are identical, but
for the K 1600 GTL, the mounting location for the passenger footrest is
higher.''
    BMW states that despite there being ``no possibility for ground
contact to occur with the passenger footrest'' while in a banked turn,
BMW conducted an analysis ``to determine the distance between the
passenger footrest and the ground when other motorcycle components
contact the ground.'' \1\ BMW also conducted test rides with the
affected K 1600 GTL and K 1600 Grand America model motorcycles.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ Details of BMW's analysis can be found in its petition at
https://www.regulations.gov/document/NHTSA-2021-0037-0001.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    For the analysis, BMW examined the ``various components that could
contact the ground during a banked turn'' and ``the lean angles at
which a specific component will contact the ground.'' BMW explains that
the ``lean angle is the angle that is subtended by the intersection of
a plane passing through the longitudinal axis of the motorcycle when it
is upright (vertical), and a plane passing through the longitudinal
axis of the motorcycle when the motorcycle is at a specific angle
(i.e., the lean angle) from upright (vertical).''
    As a result of the analysis, BMW found that it is not possible for
the passenger footrest on the subject vehicles to contact the ground
while in a banked turn. Furthermore, BMW says that ``if the lean angle
is increased, there are a number of motorcycle components that would
contact the ground and, at those points, the passenger footrest is
still approximately several inches from the ground.''
    BMW says that it has not received any complaints from vehicle
owners and is not aware of any accidents or injuries that have occurred
because of this issue. Additionally, BMW says that vehicle production
has been corrected.
    BMW concludes that the subject noncompliance is inconsequential as
it relates to motor vehicle safety and that its petition to be exempted
from providing notification of the noncompliance, as required by 49
U.S.C. 30118, and a remedy for the noncompliance, as required by 49
U.S.C. 30120, should be granted.

VI. NHTSA's Analysis

    The burden of establishing the inconsequentiality of a failure to
comply with a performance requirement is substantial and difficult to
meet. Accordingly, the Agency has not found many such noncompliances
inconsequential.\2\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \2\ Cf. Gen. Motors Corporation; Ruling on Petition for
Determination of Inconsequential Noncompliance, 69 FR 19897, 19899
(Apr. 14, 2004) (citing prior cases where noncompliance was expected
to be imperceptible, or nearly so, to vehicle occupants or
approaching drivers).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In determining inconsequentiality of a noncompliance, NHTSA focuses
on the safety risk to individuals who experience the type of event
against which a recall would otherwise protect.\3\ In general, NHTSA
does not

consider the absence of complaints or injuries when determining if a
noncompliance is inconsequential to safety. The absence of complaints
does not mean vehicle occupants have not experienced a safety issue,
nor does it mean that there will not be safety issues in the future.\4\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ See Gen. Motors, LLC; Grant of Petition for Decision of
Inconsequential Noncompliance, 78 FR 35355 (June 12, 2013) (finding
noncompliance had no effect on occupant safety because it had no
effect on the proper operation of the occupant classification system
and the correct deployment of an air bag); Osram Sylvania Prods.
Inc.; Grant of Petition for Decision of Inconsequential
Noncompliance, 78 FR 46000 (July 30, 2013) (finding occupant using
noncompliant light source would not be exposed to significantly
greater risk than occupant using similar compliant light source).
    \4\ See Morgan 3 Wheeler Limited; Denial of Petition for
Decision of Inconsequential Noncompliance, 81 FR 21663, 21666 (Apr.
12, 2016); see also United States v. Gen. Motors Corp., 565 F.2d
754, 759 (D.C. Cir. 1977) (finding defect poses an unreasonable risk
when it ``results in hazards as potentially dangerous as sudden
engine fire, and where there is no dispute that at least some such
hazards, in this case fires, can definitely be expected to occur in
the future'').
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    NHTSA has evaluated the merits of the inconsequential noncompliance
petition and supplemental materials submitted by BMW and has determined
that this particular noncompliance is inconsequential to motor vehicle
safety. Specifically, the Agency considered the following when making
its decision:
    In pertinent part, S5.2.5 requires that each footrest for a
passenger other than an operator fold rearward and upward when not in
use. NHTSA has issued several interpretations of section S5.2.5. In a
letter dated February 16, 1982, to American Honda Motor Co., Inc., with
respect to a proposed footboard design, the then Chief Counsel
commented that ``[w]e consider that the purpose of S5.2.5 is to prevent
accidents caused by rigid footrests contacting the ground in a banking
turn.'' \5\ Various other NHTSA letters provided the same
interpretation of the footrest requirement in S5.2.5.\6\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ https://www.nhtsa.gov/interpretations/aiam3524.
    \6\ An earlier interpretation from 1973 also to American Honda
stated that S5.2.5 regulates ``only the direction in which footrests
shall retract, so that if they are inadvertently left down when not
in use they will fold rearward and upward should they hit an
obstacle while the motorcycle is travelling forward.'' That
interpretation suggests that contact of the footrests with obstacles
other than the ground or roadway may be a consideration. However,
all other agency interpretations of S5.2.5 focus on footrest contact
with the ground/roadway. See https://www.nhtsa.gov/interpretations/nht73-622.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    BMW conducted a measurement analysis for the K1600 GTL Motorcycle
including lean angle to determine the distance between the passenger
footrest and the ground when other motorcycle components contact the
ground during a banked turn. The analysis indicated that the first
component that would contact the ground would be the rider's footrest
at 39 degrees lean angle, followed by other components such as the
engine spoiler that would contact the ground at 43 degrees. Next,
components including the center stand would contact the ground at 46
degrees. The BMW analysis demonstrated that, as the motorcycle lean
angle increases, all of these components contact the ground well before
the passenger footrest would make contact with the ground.
    Additionally, BMW conducted a measurement analysis for the K1600 B
Motorcycle including lean angle to determine the distance between the
passenger footrest and the ground when other motorcycle components
contact the ground during a banked turn. The analysis indicated that
the first component that would contact the ground would be the rider's
footrest at 39 degrees, followed by other components such as the engine
spoiler that would contact the ground at 42 degrees. Next, components
including the engine spoiler would contact the ground at 43.5 degrees.
According to BMW's analysis, as the motorcycle lean angle increases,
all of these components contact the ground before the passenger
footrest would make contact with the ground.
    Furthermore, BMW conducted a measurement analysis for the K1600
Grand America Motorcycle including lean angle to determine the distance
between the passenger footrest and the ground when other motorcycle
components contact the ground during a banked turn. The analysis
indicated that the first component that would contact the ground would
be the rider's floorboard at a lean angle of 34.5 degrees, followed by
other components such as the rider footrest that would contact the
ground at 39 degrees. Next, components including the silencer would
contact the ground at 42 degrees. As motorcycle lean angle increases,
all of these components contact the ground well before the passenger
footrest would make contact with the ground.
    BMW also conducted real-world test rides with a K 1600 GTL and with
a K 1600 Grand America. On-board videos were taken to provide a close-
up view of certain components prior to, and at, contact with the
ground. The videos confirmed the findings from the measurement
analysis.
    NHTSA considers the purpose of S5.2.5 is to prevent accidents
caused by rigid passenger footrests contacting the ground when a
motorcycle is leaned over in a turn. BMW's measurement analysis and
real-world testing clearly demonstrate there is no possibility for the
passenger footrests to contact the ground while the motorcycle is under
control in a banked turn because numerous other components would
contact the ground first, preventing either passenger footrest from
ever contacting the ground. Therefore, this noncompliance is
inconsequential to motor vehicle safety.

VII. NHTSA's Decision

    In consideration of the foregoing, NHTSA finds that BMW has met its
burden of persuasion that the subject FMVSS No. 123 noncompliance in
the affected motorcycles is inconsequential to motor vehicle safety.
Accordingly, BMW's petition is hereby granted, and BMW is consequently
exempted from the obligation of providing notification of, and a free
remedy for, that noncompliance under 49 U.S.C. 30118 and 30120.
    NHTSA notes that the statutory provisions (49 U.S.C. 30118(d) and
30120(h)) that permit manufacturers to file petitions for a
determination of inconsequentiality allow NHTSA to exempt manufacturers
only from the duties found in sections 30118 and 30120, respectively,
to notify owners, purchasers, and dealers of a defect or noncompliance
and to remedy the defect or noncompliance. Therefore, this decision
only applies to the subject motorcycles that BMW no longer controlled
at the time it determined that the noncompliance existed. However, the
granting of this petition does not relieve vehicle distributors and
dealers of the prohibitions on the sale, offer for sale, or
introduction or delivery for introduction into interstate commerce of
the noncompliant motorcycles under their control after BMW notified
them that the subject noncompliance existed.

(Authority: 49 U.S.C. 30118, 30120: delegations of authority at 49
CFR 1.95 and 501.8)

Otto G. Matheke III,
Director, Office of Vehicle Safety Compliance.
[FR Doc. 2023-23529 Filed 10-24-23; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-59-P


[Federal Register Volume 78, Number 24 (Tuesday, February 5, 2013)]
[Notices]
[Pages 8122-8123]
[FR Doc No: 2013-02492]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

[EPA-R01-OAR-2013-0020; A-1-FRL-9776-2]

Adequacy Status of Motor Vehicle Emission Budgets for
Transportation Conformity Purposes; Connecticut

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Notice of adequacy.

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

SUMMARY: In this notice, EPA is notifying the public that EPA has found
that the 2017 and 2025 motor vehicle emissions budgets (MVEBs) in the
June 22, 2012 Connecticut State Implementation Plan (SIP) revision are
adequate for transportation conformity purposes. The submittal includes
MOVES2010 motor vehicle emissions budgets for 2017 and 2025 for the
Connecticut portion of the New York-Northern New Jersey-Long Island,
NY-NJ-CT fine particle (PM2.5) nonattainment area. On March
2, 1999, the D.C. Circuit Court ruled that budgets in submitted SIPs
cannot be used for conformity determinations until EPA has
affirmatively found them adequate. As a result of our finding, the
State of Connecticut can use the MOVES2010 motor vehicle emissions
budgets from the submitted plan for future conformity determinations
for the Connecticut portion of the New York-Northern New Jersey-Long
Island, NY-NJ-CT PM2.5 area.

DATES: These motor vehicle emissions budgets are effective February 20,
2013.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Donald O. Cooke, Environmental
Scientist, Air Quality Planning Unit, U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency, EPA New England Regional Office, Five Post Office Square, Suite
100 (CAQ), Boston, MA 02109-3912,<PHONE_NUMBER><EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Throughout this document, whenever ``we,''
``us'' or ``our'' is used, we mean EPA.
    Today's notice is simply an announcement of a finding that we have
already made. EPA New England sent a letter to Connecticut Department
of Energy and Environmental Protection on January 8, 2013, stating that
the 2017 and 2025 MOVES2010 motor vehicle emissions budgets in the June
22, 2012 State Implementation Plan (SIP) are adequate for
transportation conformity purposes. This finding will also be announced
on EPA's conformity Web site: http://www.epa.gov/otaq/stateresources/transconf/adequacy.htm, (once there, click on ``What SIP submissions
has EPA already found adequate or inadequate?''). The adequate motor
vehicle emissions budgets (MVEBs) are provided in the following table:

                                    Adequate Motor Vehicle Emissions Budgets
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                           Direct PM2.5 (tons    NOX (tons per
                                                                                per year)            year)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Year 2017 MVEBs for the Connecticut Portion of the New York-Northern New                575.8           12,791.8
 Jersey-Long Island, NY-NJ-CT 1997 annual PM2.5 and 2006 24-hour PM2.5
 Area....................................................................
Year 2025 MVEBs for the Connecticut Portion of the New York-Northern New                516              9,728.1
 Jersey-Long Island, NY-NJ-CT 1997 annual PM2.5 and 2006 24-hour PM2.5
 Area....................................................................
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Transportation conformity is required by section 176(c) of the
Clean Air Act. EPA's conformity rule requires that transportation
plans, programs, and projects conform to state air quality
implementation plans and establishes the criteria and procedures for
determining whether or not they do conform. Conformity to a SIP means
that transportation activities will not produce new air quality
violations, worsen existing violations, or delay timely attainment of
the national ambient air quality standards.
    The criteria by which we determine whether a SIP's motor vehicle
emission budgets are adequate for conformity purposes are outlined in
40 CFR 93.118(e)(4). Please note that an adequacy review is separate
from EPA's completeness review, and it also should not be used to
prejudge EPA's ultimate approval of the SIP. Even if we find a budget
adequate, the SIP could later be disapproved.
    We have described our process for determining the adequacy of
submitted

SIP budgets in a May 14, 1999 memorandum entitled ``Conformity Guidance
on Implementation of March 2, 1999 Conformity Court Decision.''
Additional guidance on EPA's adequacy process was published in a July
1, 2004 Federal Register final rulemaking, ``Transportation Conformity
Rule Amendments for the New 8-hour Ozone and PM2.5 National
Ambient Air Quality Standards and Miscellaneous Revisions for Existing
Areas; Transportation Conformity Rule Amendments: Response to Court
Decision and Additional Rule Changes'' (69 FR 40004). We followed this
guidance in making our adequacy determination.

    Authority:  42 U.S.C. 7401-7671q.

    Dated: January 25, 2013.
H. Curtis Spalding,
Regional Administrator, EPA New England.
[FR Doc. 2013-02492 Filed 2-4-13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


[Federal Register Volume 77, Number 172 (Wednesday, September 5, 2012)]
[Notices]
[Page 54599]
[FR Doc No: 2012-21787]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Federal Emergency Management Agency

[Internal Agency Docket No. FEMA-3347-EM; Docket ID FEMA-2012-0002]

Louisiana; Amendment No. 1 to Notice of an Emergency Declaration

AGENCY: Federal Emergency Management Agency, DHS.

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: This notice amends the notice of an emergency declaration for
the State of Louisiana (FEMA-3347-EM), dated August 27, 2012, and
related determinations.

DATES: Effective Date: August 28, 2012.

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

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The notice of an emergency declaration for
the State of Louisiana is hereby amended to include the following areas
among those areas determined to have been adversely affected by the
event declared an emergency by the President in his declaration of
August 27, 2012.

    The parishes of Acadia, Allen, Avoyelles, Cameron, East Baton
Rouge, East Feliciana, Franklin, Iberia, Iberville, Jefferson Davis,
Morehouse, Natchitoches, Ouachita, Pointe Coupee, Rapides, St.
Helena, St. Martin, St. Mary, and West Baton Rouge for emergency
protective measures (Category B),limited to direct federal
assistance, under the Public Assistance program.

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

W. Craig Fugate,
Administrator, Federal Emergency Management Agency.
[FR Doc. 2012-21787 Filed 9-4-12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 9111-23-P


[Federal Register Volume 78, Number 113 (Wednesday, June 12, 2013)]
[Notices]
[Page 35352]
[FR Doc No: 2013-13961]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Office of the Secretary

Applications for Certificates of Public Convenience and Necessity
and Foreign Air Carrier Permits

    Notice of Applications for Certificates of Public Convenience and
Necessity and Foreign Air Carrier Permits Filed Under Subpart B
(formerly Subpart Q) during the Week Ending May 25, 2013. The following
Applications for Certificates of Public Convenience and Necessity and
Foreign Air Carrier Permits were filed under Subpart B (formerly
Subpart Q) of the Department of Transportation's Procedural Regulations
(See 14 CFR 301.201 et. seq.). The due date for Answers, Conforming
Applications, or Motions to Modify Scope are set forth below for each
application. Following the Answer period DOT may process the
application by expedited procedures. Such procedures may consist of the
adoption of a show-cause order, a tentative order, or in appropriate
cases a final order without further proceedings.

    Docket Number: DOT- OST-2013-0109.
    Date Filed: May 21, 2013.
    Due Date for Answers, Conforming Applications, or Motion to Modify
Scope: June 11, 2013.
    Description: Application of AirTanker Services Limited requesting a
foreign air carrier permit and exemption authority to engage in: (a)
Foreign charter air transportation of persons and property from any
point or points behind any Member State of the European Union via any
point or points in any Member State and via intermediate points to any
point or points in the United States and beyond; (b) foreign charter
air transportation of persons and property between any point or points
in the United States and any point or points in any member of the
European Common Aviation Area; (c) other charters pursuant to the prior
approval requirements set forth in Part 212 of the Department's
Economic Regulations; and (d) transportation authorized by any
additional route rights made available to European Community carries in
the future.

Barbara J. Hairston,
Acting Program Manager, Docket Operations, Federal Register Liaison.
[FR Doc. 2013-13961 Filed 6-11-13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-9X-P


[Federal Register Volume 88, Number 112 (Monday, June 12, 2023)]
[Notices]
[Pages 38124-38126]
[FR Doc No: 2023-12420]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

National Highway Traffic Safety Administration

[Docket No. NHTSA-2023-0024]

Agency Information Collection Activities; Notice and Request for
Comment; First Responder Incident Advanced Reporting Program

AGENCY: National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA),
Department of Transportation (DOT).

ACTION: Notice and request for comments on a new information
collection.

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

SUMMARY: NHTSA invites public comments about our intention to request
approval from the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for a new
information collection. Before a federal agency can collect certain
information from the public, it must receive approval from OMB. Under
procedures established by the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, before
seeking OMB approval, Federal agencies must solicit public comment on
proposed collections of information, including extensions and
reinstatement of previously approved collections. This document
describes a collection of information for which NHTSA intends to seek
OMB approval on the First Responder Incident Advanced Reporting Program
(FRIAR) in which first responders (e.g., law enforcement, fire
department, and emergency medical services) may submit information
about fatalities, injuries, or crashes that may have been caused due to
a motor vehicle or equipment defect.

DATES: Comments must be submitted on or before August 11, 2023.

ADDRESSES: You may submit comments identified by the Docket No. NHTSA-
2023-0024 through any of the following methods:
     Electronic submissions: Go to the Federal eRulemaking
Portal at http://www.regulations.gov. Follow the online instructions
for submitting comments.
     Fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>.
     Mail or Hand Delivery: Docket Management, U.S. Department
of Transportation, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE, West Building, Room W12-
140, Washington, DC 20590, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through
Friday, except on Federal holidays. To be sure someone is there to help
you, please call<PHONE_NUMBER> before coming.
    Instructions: All submissions must include the agency name and
docket number for this notice. Note that all comments received will be
posted without change to http://www.regulations.gov, including any
personal information provided. Please see the Privacy Act heading
below.
    Privacy Act: Anyone is able to search the electronic form of all
comments received into any of our dockets by the name of the individual
submitting the comment (or signing the comment, if submitted on behalf
of an association, business, labor union, etc.). You may review DOT's
complete Privacy Act Statement in the Federal Register published on
April 11, 2000 (65 FR 19477-78) or you may visit https://www.transportation.gov/privacy.
    Docket: For access to the docket to read background documents or
comments received, go to http://www.regulations.gov or the street
address listed above. Follow the online instructions for accessing the
dockets via internet.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For additional information or access
to background documents, contact Tanya Topka, Office of Defects
Investigation (NEF-100),<PHONE_NUMBER>, National Highway Traffic
Safety Administration, W48-336, U.S. Department of Transportation, 1200
New Jersey Avenue SE, Washington, DC 20590.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995
(44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.), before an agency submits a proposed
collection of information to OMB for approval, it must first publish a
document in the Federal Register providing a 60-day comment period and
otherwise consult with members of the public and affected

agencies concerning each proposed collection of information. The OMB
has promulgated regulations describing what must be included in such a
document. Under OMB's regulation (at 5 CFR 1320.8(d)), an agency must
ask for public comment on the following: (a) whether the proposed
collection of information is necessary for the proper performance of
the functions of the agency, including whether the information will
have practical utility; (b) the accuracy of the agency's estimate of
the burden of the proposed collection of information, including the
validity of the methodology and assumptions used; (c) how to enhance
the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected;
and (d) how to minimize the burden of the collection of information on
those who are to respond, including the use of appropriate automated,
electronic, mechanical, or other technological collection techniques or
other forms of information technology, e.g., permitting electronic
submission of responses. In compliance with these requirements, NHTSA
asks for public comments on the following proposed collection of
information for which the agency is seeking approval from OMB.
    Title: First Responder Incident Advanced Reporting (FRIAR)
Information Collection.
    OMB Control Number: New.
    Form Number(s): N/A.
    Type of Request: Approval of a new collection of information.
    Type of Review Requested: Regular.
    Requested Expiration Date of Approval: 3 years from date of
approval.
    Summary of the Collection of Information: The purpose of this
collection is to provide first responders with a distinct mechanism to
report to NHTSA's Office of Defects Investigation (ODI) regarding
fatalities, injuries, or crashes that may have been caused due to an
alleged defect. Currently, ODI collects Vehicle Owner Questionnaires
(VOQ) to gather information from the public about alleged or suspected
safety defects. The FRIAR collection is a separate method to collect
safety and defect related information from the first responder
community that will expedite and prioritize ODI's review of such
reports.
    The FRIAR program will differ from the agency VOQ review process
because first responders, based on their experience, may identify an
incident(s) or crash that involves a potential safety-related problem
that warrants swift review by ODI. An ODI safety defect analyst or
investigator will follow-up with the first responder within 24 business
hours (or 3 business days) upon receipt of a report. Reports submitted
to ODI, in combination with other information obtained by ODI, are
analyzed to determine if a potential defect exists that may require
further investigation or the initiation of a recall. FRIAR was designed
and created in the wake and review of the General Motors (GM) ignition
switch recall and the 2015 Workforce Assessment document,\1\ and the
program will provide first responders a direct reporting mechanism to
NHTSA for alleged safety defects that they may see in the field.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ Workforce Assessment: The Future of NHTSA's Defect
Investigations, https://www.nhtsa.gov/staticfiles/communications/pdf/workforce-assessment-june2015.pdf, last accessed July 13, 2022.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    A first responder may submit a report(s) through NHTSA's Vehicle
Safety Hotline, or NHTSA's www.nhtsa.gov website, which will have a
section specified for first responders. The reports may contain an
allegation of a safety defect that the first responder encountered that
may be related to a vehicle, equipment, tire(s), child restraints,
injuries, a crash, property damage, or fatality. This information
collection is not expected to be burdensome to first responders since
submitting the FRIAR form is voluntary and will require less than 5
minutes to complete.
    Description of the Need for the Information and Proposed Use of the
Information: First responders have not had a direct or public method of
reporting alleged safety defects to ODI, and the FRIAR program will
address this reporting disparity.
    Affected Public: State and Local First Responders (e.g., law
enforcement, fire department, and emergency medical services).
    Estimated Number of Respondents: approximately 100 respondents a
year.
    Respondents include a combination of State or local agencies that
respond to car crashes, investigate crashes, and complete crash
reports. NHTSA estimates that FRIAR will receive approximately 100
reports each year. Currently, even without a mechanism or prompt for
collecting this information, NHTSA receives unsolicited tips and
information from first responders regarding suspected vehicle defects
(approximately 1 report a month) via telephone or email correspondence
with NHTSA staff that work with first responders in other official
capacities and duties. We anticipate that FRIAR will collect about 10
reports a month. NHTSA will conduct outreach to first responder
communities to raise awareness about the FRIAR program that may
increase the number of reports received over time. Therefore, it is
estimated that the FRIAR project will generate, on average, 100 reports
a year in the first year and the number of reports will increase over
time.
    Frequency: Ongoing.
    The data will be collected on an ongoing basis (e.g., whenever a
first responder decides to voluntarily submit information about a
crash, fatality, or injury occurs that they suspect could be related to
a safety-related motor vehicle or equipment defect, which is expected
to be infrequent) and is voluntary. It is anticipated that each
response will be unique and will not be from the same agency, station,
jurisdiction, etc., and there is no limit to how many reports a single
agency or entity can submit to the FRIAR program during a given year.
    Estimated Total Annual Burden Hours: 25 hours.
    NHTSA estimates that the total burden hours for this information
collection will be 25 hours per year. This is based on NHTSA's
estimates that there will be 100 FRIAR reports submitted each year and
that each report will take first responders approximately 15 minutes to
complete (completion of the form will take 5 minutes and the follow-up
phone call will take 10 minutes).
    NHTSA estimates the cost associated with the burden hours by
looking at average wages for different categories of first responders.
The Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS) estimates that the mean hourly
wage is $34.02 an hour for police and sheriff's patrol officers (BLS
Code 33-3051),\2\ $26.58 an hour for firefighters (BLS Code 33-
2011),\3\ $17.64 per hour for emergency medical technicians (EMT) (BLS
Code 29-2042).\4\ First responders may have to utilize overtime to
submit reports to FRIAR, and the standard overtime calculation is: 1
hour overtime = 1.5 x hourly rate (e.g., time + 1 half). Therefore,
NHTSA estimates the hourly labor costs for FRIAR respondents for 15
minutes using the overtime rate to be: $12.76 for police and sheriff's
patrol officers, $9.97 for firefighters, and $6.62 for emergency
medical technicians (EMT). NHTSA estimates that between all categories
of respondents, we will receive approximately 100 reports each year
with each report taking 15 minutes

to complete. NHTSA estimates that the total of 25 burden hours will be
distributed equally among the respondent categories and the average
total labor costs associated with these burden hours will be $244.58 a
year ([sum of all three 15 min average overtime rates hourly wage
rates/3] x 25 hours).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \2\ Occupational Employment and Wages, May 2021, 33-5051Police
and Sheriff's Patrol Officers, https://www.bls.gov/oes/current/oes333051.htm, last accessed June 28, 2022.
    \3\ Occupational Employment and Wages, May 2021, 33-2011
Firefighters, https://www.bls.gov/oes/current/oes332011.htm, last
accessed June 28, 2022.
    \4\ Occupational Employment and Wages, May 2021, Emergency
Medical Technicians, https://www.bls.gov/oes/current/oes292042.htm,
last accessed June 28, 2022.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Estimated Total Annual Burden Cost: This collection is not expected
to result in any costs to respondents other than the cost associated
with the burden hours.
    Public Comments Invited: You are asked to comment on any aspects of
this information collection, including (a) whether the proposed
collection of information is necessary for the proper performance of
the functions of the Department, including whether the information will
have practical utility; (b) the accuracy of the Department's estimate
of the burden of the proposed information collection; (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 the use of automated collection
techniques or other forms of information technology.
    Authority: The Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995; 44 U.S.C. chapter
35, as amended; 49 CFR 1.49; and DOT Order 1351.29A.

Jeffrey Lee Quandt,
Deputy Director, Office of Defect Investigation.
[FR Doc. 2023-12420 Filed 6-9-23; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-59-P


[Federal Register: April 2, 2010 (Volume 75, Number 63)]
[Notices]
[Page 16877]
[DOCID:fr02ap10-127]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

Sunshine Act Meeting

    Notice is hereby given, pursuant to the provisions of the
Government in the Sunshine Act, Public Law 94-409, that the Securities
and Exchange Commission will hold an Open Meeting on Wednesday, April
7, 2010 at 10 a.m., in the Auditorium, Room L-002.
    The subject matter of the Open Meeting will be:

Item 1: The Commission will consider whether to propose revisions to
Regulation AB and other rules regarding the offering process,
disclosure and reporting for asset-backed securities. The proposed
amendments would revise the shelf offering process and eligibility
criteria for asset-backed securities and require asset-backed issuers
to provide enhanced disclosures including information regarding each
asset in the underlying pool in a standardized, tagged format. The
Commission will also consider proposed revisions to Securities Act Rule
144A and other rules for privately-placed asset-backed securities.

    At times, changes in Commission priorities require alterations in
the scheduling of meeting items.
    For further information and to ascertain what, if any, matters have
been added, deleted or postponed, please contact:
    The Office of the Secretary at<PHONE_NUMBER>.

    Dated: March 31, 2010.
Elizabeth M. Murphy,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2010-7628 Filed 3-31-10; 4:15 pm]
BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 76, Number 172 (Tuesday, September 6, 2011)]
[Notices]
[Pages 55148-55153]
[FR Doc No: 2011-22627]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-65225; File No. SR-BATS-2011-018]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; BATS Exchange, Inc.; Order
Approving Proposed Rule Change To Adopt Rules for the Qualification,
Listing and Delisting of Companies on the Exchange

August 30, 2011.

I. Introduction

    On May 12, 2011, BATS Exchange, Inc. (``BATS'' or ``Exchange'')
filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (``Commission''),
pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934
(``Act''),\1\ and Rule 19b-4 thereunder,\2\ a proposed rule change to
adopt rules for the qualification, listing, and delisting of companies
on the Exchange. The proposed rule change was published for comment in
the Federal Register on June 1, 2011.\3\ The Commission received no
comment letters regarding the proposal. This order approves the
proposed rule change.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1).
    \2\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4.
    \3\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 64546 (May 25,
2011), 76 FR 31660 (June 1, 2011) (``Notice'').
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

II. Description of the Proposal

    The Exchange proposes rules to adopt a program for the
qualification, listing, and delisting of companies on the Exchange
(``Listing Rules'').\4\ The Exchange proposes to eliminate its current
rules related to securities traded on the Exchange pursuant to unlisted
trading privileges, and to replace such rules with the Listing Rules,
which the Exchange notes are primarily based on and substantially
similar to the rules of The NASDAQ Stock Market LLC (``NASDAQ'').\5\
The Exchange proposes to adopt two distinct tiers of securities to be
listed on the Exchange: Tier I and Tier II. The Exchange represents
that the proposed standards for a security's initial and continued
listing on Tier I are nearly identical to the existing standards
applicable to listing on The Nasdaq Global Market (``NGM''), and that
the proposed standards for a security's initial and continued listing
on Tier II are nearly identical to the existing standards applicable to
listing on The Nasdaq Capital Market (``NCM'').\6\ While the
quantitative standards for Tier I and II differ, the Exchange notes
that the qualitative standards for both tiers are the same and are
nearly identical to NGM's existing qualitative standards.\7\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ The Listing Rules are comprised of definitions, the
Exchange's general regulatory authority, the procedures and
prerequisites for gaining a listing on the Exchange, the listing
standards for units, the disclosure obligations of listed companies,
Direct Registration Program requirements, the quantitative listing
requirements and standards for listing on the Exchange in Tiers I
and II, the corporate governance standards applicable to all listed
companies; special listing standards for securities other than
common or preferred stock and warrants; the consequences of a
failure to meet the Exchange's listing standards; and the Exchange's
listing fees.
    \5\ See Notice, supra note 3, 76 FR at 31661. The Exchange is
not proposing any changes to the rules of the Exchange's options
market. Id.
    \6\ The Notice identifies to which market's quantitative
standards (either NGM or NCM) and the NASDAQ rules the proposed BATS
standards are comparable. Id. The Exchange is not proposing to adopt
a tier equivalent to the NASDAQ Global Select Market. Id.
    \7\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

A. General Regulatory Authority of the Exchange

    The Exchange proposes to have general, broad discretionary
authority over the initial and continued listing of securities on the
Exchange in order to maintain the quality of and public confidence in
its market, to prevent fraudulent and manipulative acts and practices,
to promote just and equitable principles of trade, and to protect
investors and the public interest. The Exchange notes that it may use
such discretion to deny initial listing, to apply additional or more
stringent standards for the initial or continued listing of particular
securities, or to suspend or delist particular securities based on any
event, condition, or circumstance that exists or occurs that makes
initial or continued listing of the securities on the Exchange
inadvisable or unwarranted in the opinion of the Exchange, even though
the securities meet all enumerated standards for initial or continued
listing.\8\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \8\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange also proposes guidance regarding the circumstances in
which it would invoke discretionary authority and the types of factors
it would consider when making determinations pursuant to such
authority. In addition, the Exchange proposes guidance on its use of
discretionary authority as it relates to a Company \9\ whose business
plan is to complete an initial public offering and engage in a merger
or acquisition with one or more unidentified Companies within a
specific period of time. The Exchange would permit the listing of such
a Company if the Company were to meet all applicable initial listing
standards, as well as the factors considered pursuant to its
discretionary authority. The Exchange further proposes guidance on the
use of its discretionary authority when a Company files for protection
under any provision of the federal bankruptcy laws or comparable
foreign laws.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \9\ For purposes of the Listing Rules, a ``Company'' would be
any issuer of a security listed or applying to list on the Exchange,
including an issuer that is not incorporated (e.g., a limited
partnership).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

B. General Procedures and Prerequisites for Listing

    The Exchange proposes an application process that a Company must
complete in order to be listed on the Exchange. To apply for listing on
the Exchange, a Company would have to execute a Listing Agreement and a
Listing Application on forms made available by the Exchange in order to
provide the information required by Section 12(b) of the Act.\10\ A
Company's qualifications would be determined on the basis of financial
statements that are either: (1) Prepared in accordance with U.S.
generally accepted accounting principles; (2) reconciled to U.S.
generally accepted accounting principles as required by the
Commission's rules; or (3) prepared in accordance with International
Financial Reporting Standards, as issued by the International
Accounting Standards Board, for Companies that are permitted to file
financial statements using those standards consistent with the
Commission's rules.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \10\ 15 U.S.C. 78l(b).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange also proposes prerequisites for an applicant Company
to become listed on the Exchange: (1) The security would have to be
registered pursuant to Section 12(b) of the Act \11\ or subject to an
applicable exemption; (2) the Company would have to be audited by a
registered independent public accountant; (3) the securities would have
to be eligible for a Direct Registration Program operated by a clearing
agency registered under Section 17A of the Act,\12\ subject to certain
exceptions; (4) the Company would have to pay the Exchange's listing
fees; (5) the securities would have to be in good standing with the
Commission or Other Regulatory Authority; \13\ (6) the Exchange would
have to certify to the

Commission, and the securities would have to become effective, pursuant
to Section 12(d) of the Act; \14\ and (7) the securities would have to
be depositary eligible pursuant to the rules and procedures of a
securities depository registered as a clearing agency under Section 17A
of the Act.\15\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \11\ Id.
    \12\ 15 U.S.C. 78q-1. `` `Direct Registration Program' means any
program by a Company, directly or through its transfer agent,
whereby a shareholder may have securities registered in the
shareholder's name on the books of the Company or its transfer agent
without the need for a physical certificate to evidence ownership.''
Proposed BATS Rule 14.1(a)(6).
    \13\ See proposed BATS Rule 14.1(t).
    \14\ 15 U.S.C. 78l(d).
    \15\ 15 U.S.C. 78q-1.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange proposes to permit Companies, which have securities
listed on another national securities exchange, to apply to list those
securities on the Exchange. The Exchange represents that this would
foster competition among markets and further the development of the
national market system.\16\ The Exchange would make an independent
determination of whether such Companies satisfy all applicable listing
standards and would require Companies to enter into a dual listing
agreement with the Exchange.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \16\ See Notice, supra note 3, 76 FR at 31662.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    While the Exchange would certify such dually listed securities for
listing on the Exchange, it would not exercise its authority separately
to designate or register such dually listed securities as national
market system securities within the meaning of Section 11A of the Act
or the rules thereunder. As a result, these securities, which already
would be designated as national market system securities under the
Consolidated Quotation Service (``CQS'') and Consolidated Tape
Association national market system plans (``CQ and CTA Plans'') or the
Nasdaq Unlisted Trading Privileges national market system plan (``UTP
Plan''), as applicable, would remain subject to those plans. For
purposes of the national market system, such securities would continue
to trade under their current ticker symbols. The Exchange would
continue to send all quotations and transaction reports in such
securities to the processor for the CTA Plan or UTP Plan, as
applicable.

C. Disclosure Obligations

    The Exchange proposes requirements for Companies to provide
information to the Exchange, to file financial reports and other
documentation required pursuant to the Securities Act of 1933 and the
rules and regulations thereunder, and to make public disclosures,
including disclosures required pursuant to Regulation FD.\17\ Such
requirements would include providing the Exchange's Surveillance
Department with notification prior to public release of material
information. The Exchange also proposes obligations regarding
notification to the Exchange of administrative matters and corporate
actions. The Exchange proposes additional guidance to Companies on the
importance of them providing prompt and complete notifications. The
Exchange represents that such notice is critical to the proper
functioning of the capital markets and to investor confidence.\18\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \17\ 17 CFR 243.100 et seq.
    \18\ See Notice, supra note 3, 76 FR at 31662.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

D. Quantitative Listing Requirements and Standards for Tier I
Securities \19\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \19\ The Exchange proposes to divide the quantitative listing
standards into two subcategories in the Listing Rules: listing
requirements and listing standards. Listing requirements would be
quantitative metrics, all of which a Company would have to meet for
initial or continued listing on a particular tier. Listing standards
would consist of bundles of quantitative metrics; however, unlike
listing requirements, a Company only would have to meet at least one
listing standard to become listed or to continue listing.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

1. Primary Equity Securities--Initial Listing Requirements and
Standards
    The Exchange proposes to adopt quantitative initial listing
requirements pertaining to the public float, distribution of shares,
and trading volume of the security. Specifically, a Company would have
to have a minimum bid price of $4 per share, a minimum of 1.1 million
publicly held shares, and a minimum of 400 round lot holders.
    The Exchange also proposes to require that the issuer of the
security meet at least one of the following standards--income, equity,
market value, or total assets/total revenue. The income standard would
require that an issuer have annual pre-tax income from continuing
operations of at least $1 million in the most recently completed fiscal
year or in two of the three most recently completed fiscal years, $15
million in stockholders' equity, a market value of publicly held shares
of at least $8 million, and at least three registered and active Market
Makers.\20\ The equity standard would require that an issuer have
stockholders' equity of at least $30 million, a two-year operating
history, a market value of publicly held shares of at least $18
million, and at least three registered and active Market Makers. The
market value standard for currently publicly traded Companies would
require a market value of listed securities of at least $75 million, a
market value of publicly held shares of at least $20 million, and at
least four registered and active Market Makers. Finally, the total
assets/total revenue standard would require that total assets and total
revenue for the most recent fiscal year and two of the three most
recently completed fiscal years be at least $75 million, that the
market value of publicly held shares be at least $20 million, and that
the issuer have at least four registered and active Market Makers.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \20\ ``Market Maker'' means a member of the Exchange that acts
as a market maker on the Exchange. See BATS Rules Chapter XI.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

2. Rights and Warrants, and Preferred Stock and Secondary Classes of
Common Stock--Initial Listing Requirements
    For initial listing, the Exchange proposes to require that at least
450,000 rights or warrants be issued, and that the underlying security
be listed on the Exchange or be a covered security, and that the issuer
have at least three registered and active Market Makers. For warrants,
the Exchange would also require that there be at least 400 round lot
holders. When the primary equity security of an issuer is listed on the
Exchange as a Tier I security or is a covered security, the Exchange
would require that the preferred stock or secondary classes of common
stock meet similar requirements. Specifically, the Exchange would
require that there be at least 200,000 publicly held shares with a
market value of at least $4 million, a minimum bid price of $4 per
share, at least 100 round lot holders, and at least three registered
and active Market Makers. When the primary equity security of an issuer
is not listed on the Exchange as a Tier I security or is not a covered
security, the Exchange proposes that the preferred stock and/or
secondary class of common stock be listed on the Exchange as a Tier I
security so long as the security has met the initial listing
requirements and standards for primary equity securities on Tier I.
3. Units--Initial Listing and Maintenance Requirements
    The Exchange proposes that all units must have at least one equity
component, and that all components of such units must satisfy the
requirements for initial and continued listing as Tier I securities,
except for debt components.\21\ All components of a unit

would have to be issued by the same issuer, and all units and issuers
of such units would have to comply with the initial and continued
listing requirements of Tier I. For initial listing, a unit would have
to have at least three registered and active Market Makers, and, for
continued listing, a unit would have to have at least two registered
and active Market Makers, one of which could be a Market Maker entering
a stabilizing bid.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \21\ The Exchange proposes that all debt components of a unit,
if any, must meet the following requirements: (1) The debt issue
must have an aggregate market value or principal amount of at least
$5 million; (2) the issuer of the debt security must have equity
securities listed on the Exchange as a Tier I security; and (3) in
the case of convertible debt, the equity into which the debt is
convertible must itself be subject to real-time last sale reporting
in the United States, and the convertible debt must not contain a
provision which gives the company the right, at its discretion, to
reduce the conversion price for periods of time or from time to time
unless the company establishes a minimum period of ten business days
within which such price reduction will be in effect.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

4. Primary Equity Securities--Maintenance Requirements and Standards
    For continued approval of a primary equity security listing, the
Exchange proposes to require that there be a minimum bid price of $1
per share and at least 400 total holders. The Exchange would also
require that issuers meet at least one of the following standards--
equity, market value, or total assets/total revenue. The equity
standard would require that stockholders' equity be at least $10
million, that there be at least 750,000 publicly held shares with a
market value of at least $5 million, and that there be at least two
registered and active Market Makers. The market value standard would
require that the market value of listed securities be at least $50
million, that there be at least 1.1 million publicly held shares with a
market value of at least $15 million, and that there be at least two
registered and active Market Makers. The total assets/total revenue
standards would require that there be total assets and total revenue of
at least $50 million each for the most recently completed fiscal year
or two of the three most recently completed fiscal years, at least 1.1
million publicly held shares with a market value of at least $15
million, and at least four registered and active Market Makers.
5. Rights and Warrants, Preferred Stock and Secondary Classes of Common
Stock--Maintenance Requirements and Standards
    For continued listing, the Exchange proposes to require that the
rights or warrants continue to be listed on the Exchange as a Tier I
security or be a covered security, and that there be at least two
registered and active Market Makers, one of which could be a Market
Maker entering a stabilizing bid. For preferred stock and secondary
classes of common stock, the Exchange also proposes that a Company's
primary equity security be listed on the Exchange as a Tier I security
or as a covered security. The Exchange further proposes that the
preferred stock or secondary class of common stock have at least
100,000 publicly held shares with a market value of at least $1
million, a minimum bid price of $1 per share, at least 100 public
holders, and at least two registered and active Market Makers. When a
Company's primary equity security is not listed on the Exchange as a
Tier I security or is not a covered security, the Exchange proposes
that the preferred stock and/or secondary class of common stock may
continue to be listed on the Exchange as a Tier I security so long as
the security has met the continued listing criteria for primary equity
securities.

E. Quantitative Listing Requirements and Standards for Tier II
Securities \22\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \22\ See supra note 19.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

1. Primary Equity Securities--Initial Listing Requirements and
Standards
    The Exchange proposes to adopt quantitative initial listing
requirements pertaining to the public float, distribution of shares,
and trading volume of a security. Specifically, the Exchange would
require a Company to have a minimum bid price of $4 per share, a
minimum of one million publicly held shares, at least 300 round lot
holders, and at least three registered and active Market Makers.\23\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \23\ For American Depository Receipts, the Exchange would also
require there be at least 400,000 issued.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange would also require that the issuer of the security
meets at least one of the following standards--equity, market value, or
net income. The equity standard would require stockholders' equity of
at least $5 million, a market value of publicly held shares of at least
$15 million, and a two-year operating history. The market value
standard would require a market value of listed securities of at least
$50 million, stockholders' equity of at least $4 million, and a market
value of publicly held shares of at least $15 million. The net income
standard would require net income from continuing operations of at
least $750,000 in the most recently completed fiscal year or in two of
the three most recently completed fiscal years, stockholders' equity of
at least $4 million, and a market value of publicly held shares of at
least $5 million.
2. Preferred Stock and Secondary Classes of Common Stock; Rights,
Warrants, and Convertible Debt--Initial Listing Requirements
    When the primary equity security of an issuer is listed on the
Exchange as a Tier II security or is a covered security, the Exchange
proposes to require that the preferred stock or secondary classes of
common stock have at least 200,000 publicly held shares with a market
value of at least $3.5 million, a minimum bid price of $4 per share, at
least 100 round lot holders, and at least three registered and active
Market Makers. When a company's primary equity security is not listed
on the Exchange as a Tier II security or is not a covered security, the
Exchange proposes that the preferred stock and/or secondary class of
common stock be listed on the Exchange as a Tier II security so long as
the security has met the initial listing requirements and standards for
primary equity securities on Tier II.
    For initial listing of rights, warrants, and put warrants, the
Exchange also proposes to require that at least 400,000 are issued and
that the underlying security is listed on the Exchange or is a covered
security. For warrants, the Exchange further proposes to require that
there be at least 400 round lot holders, and at least three registered
and active Market Makers.
    For initial listing of convertible debt securities, the Exchange
would require that the principal amount outstanding be at least $10
million, that the current last sale information be available in the
United States with respect to the underlying security into which the
bond or debenture is convertible, and that the security have at least
three registered and active Market Makers. In addition to these
conditions, the Exchange proposes to require that issuers also meet one
of the following conditions: (1) That the issuer of the debt has an
equity security that is listed on the Exchange, NASDAQ, NYSE Amex LLC
(``NYSE Amex''), or the New York Stock Exchange (``NYSE''); (2) that an
issuer whose equity security is listed on the Exchange, NASDAQ, NYSE
Amex, or NYSE directly or indirectly owns a majority interest in, or is
under common control with, the issuer of the debt security, or has
guaranteed the debt security; (3) a nationally recognized securities
rating organization (an ``NRSRO'') has assigned a current rating to the
debt security that is no lower than an S&P Corporation ``B'' rating or
equivalent rating by another NRSRO; or (4) if no NRSRO has assigned a
rating to the issue, an NRSRO has currently assigned: (a) an investment
grade rating to an immediately senior issue; or (b) a rating that is no
lower than an S&P Corporation ``B'' rating, or an equivalent rating by
another NRSRO, to a pari passu or junior issue.
    For initial listing of index warrants, the Exchange would require
that the

minimum public distribution be at least one million warrants, that
there be a minimum of 400 public holders, that the market value of the
index warrants be at least $4 million, and that the issuer have a
minimum tangible net worth in excess of $150 million.
3. Units--Initial Listing and Maintenance Requirements
    The Exchange proposes that all component parts of units must meet
the Tier II requirements for initial and continued listing. Further,
the minimum period for listing of the units would be 30 days from the
first day of listing, except the period could be shortened if the units
are suspended or withdrawn for regulatory purposes. Companies and
underwriters seeking to withdraw units from listing would have to
provide the Exchange with notice of such intent at least 15 days prior
to withdrawal. For initial listing, a unit would have to have at least
three registered and active Market Makers, and, for continued listing,
a unit would have to have at least two registered and active Market
Makers, one of which may be a Market Maker entering a stabilizing bid.
4. Primary Equity Securities--Maintenance Requirements and Standards
    For continued approval of a primary equity security listing, the
Exchange proposes to require a minimum bid price of $1 per share, at
least 300 public holders, at least 500,000 publicly held shares with a
market value of at least $1 million, and at least two registered and
active Market Makers, one of which may be a Market Maker entering a
stabilizing bid.
    Additionally, the Exchange proposes to require that issuers meet at
least one of the following standards--equity, market value, or net
income. The equity standard would require that stockholders' equity be
at least $2.5 million. The market value standard would require that the
market value of listed securities be at least $35 million. The net
income standard would require net income from continuing operations of
$500,000 in the most recently completed fiscal year or in two of the
three most recently completed fiscal years.
5. Preferred Stock and Secondary Classes of Common Stock; Rights,
Warrants, and Convertible Debt--Maintenance Requirements
    When the primary equity security is listed on the Exchange as a
Tier II security or is a covered security, the Exchange proposes that a
Company's preferred stock or secondary class of common stock have a
minimum bid price of $1 per share, at least 100 public holders, at
least 100,000 publicly held shares, a market value of publicly held
shares of at least $1 million, and at least two registered and active
Market Makers, one of which may be a Market Maker entering a
stabilizing bid. When a Company's primary equity security is not listed
on the Exchange as a Tier II security or is not a covered security, the
Exchange proposes that the preferred stock and/or secondary class of
common stock be listed on the Exchange as a Tier II security so long as
the security has met the criteria of the continued listing of primary
equity securities on Tier II.
    For rights, warrants, and put warrants (i.e., instruments that
grant the holder the right to sell to the issuing Company a specified
number of shares of the Company's common stock, at a specified price
until a specified period of time), the Exchange proposes that the
underlying security remain listed on the Exchange or be a covered
security, and that there be at least two registered and active Market
Makers, one of which may be a Market Maker entering a stabilizing bid.
    For continued listing of convertible debt securities, the Exchange
proposes to require a principal amount outstanding of at least $5
million, at least two registered and active Market Makers, one of which
may be a Market Maker entering a stabilizing bid, and current last sale
information available in the United States with respect to the
underlying security into which the bond or debenture is convertible.

F. Corporate Governance Standards

    As noted by the Exchange, in addition to having quantitative
listing standards based on the standards applicable to NASDAQ-listed
Companies, particularly those designated as NGM or NCM securities, the
Exchange proposes nearly identical qualitative standards to those of
NGM for both tiers of the Exchange.\24\ Specifically, the Exchange
proposes to adopt corporate governance standards relating to a
Company's board of directors, audit committee requirements, independent
director oversight of executive compensation, a mandatory code of
conduct, shareholder meetings (including proxy solicitation and
quorum), review of related party transactions, and shareholder approval
(including voting rights). The Exchange believes that preliminarily
adopting uniform corporate governance standards to those of NASDAQ
would assist issuers and their advisors in determining the Exchange's
requirements.\25\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \24\ See Notice, supra note 3, 76 FR at 31665.
    \25\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

G. Listing Standards for Other Securities

    The Exchange proposes listing standards applicable to ``other
securities,'' including exchange traded funds, index-linked securities,
selected equity-linked debt securities, trust issued receipts, and
index warrants. The Exchange notes that the proposed standards for
these securities are both similar to the Exchange's current standards
applicable to securities traded on the Exchange pursuant to unlisted
trading privileges, as well as NASDAQ's standards.\26\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \26\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

H. Failure to Meet Listing Standards

    The Exchange proposes that securities of a Company that do not meet
the listing standards set forth in the Listing Rules are subject to
delisting from, or denial of initial listing on, the Exchange.
Accordingly, the Exchange proposes procedures for the independent
review, suspension, and delisting of Companies that fail to satisfy one
or more requirements or standards for initial or continued listing, and
thus are deficient with respect to the listing standards.
    The Listings Qualifications Department would be responsible for
identifying deficiencies that could lead to delisting or denial of a
listing application, notifying the Company of the deficiency or denial,
and issuing Staff Delisting Determinations and Public Reprimand
Letters. The Exchange also proposes various responsibilities when a
Company receives notice of a deficiency, including public notification
responsibilities.
    The Hearings Panel, upon timely request by a Company, would review
a staff delisting determination, denial of a listing application, or
public reprimand letter at an oral or written hearing, and issue a
decision that could, among other things, grant an exception to the
Exchange's listing standards or affirm a delisting. The Exchange
Listing and Hearings Review Council, upon timely appeal by a Company or
on its own initiative, could review the decisions of the Hearings
Panel. Finally, the Exchange Board of Directors could exercise
discretion to review a Listing Council decision.
    The Exchange also proposes procedures related to Commission
notification of the Exchange's final delisting determinations, rules
applicable to adjudicators and advisors,

and general information relating to the adjudicatory process.
    A Company's failure to maintain compliance with the applicable
provisions of the Listing Rules would result in the termination of the
listing unless an exception is granted to the Company. The termination
of the Company's listing would become effective in accordance with the
procedures set forth in the Listing Rules.

I. Listing Fees

    The Exchange proposes to commence its listings business by charging
entry fees of $100,000 and $50,000 for Companies listed on Tiers I and
II, respectively. The initial primary listing fee for both tiers would
include a $25,000 non-refundable application fee. The Exchange also
proposes to charge annual fees of $35,000 and $20,000 for Companies
listed on Tiers I and II, respectively, on a prorated basis.
    The Exchange proposes to waive the entry fee for any Company that
is listed on another national securities exchange if such Company
transfers its listing to the Exchange, is dually-listed on the Exchange
and another national securities exchange but ceases to maintain its
listing on that other national securities exchange, or is listed on
another national securities exchange but not listed on the Exchange, if
the issuer of such securities is acquired by an unlisted Company and,
in connection with the acquisition, the unlisted Company lists
exclusively on the Exchange. Annual dual listing fees would be $15,000
for both tiers and would be prorated.\27\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \27\ The Exchange does not propose to charge for ministerial
changes implemented by a Company (e.g., name changes and symbol
changes), nor does the Exchange propose to charge a fee for
necessary work related to corporate actions of a Company (e.g., a
reverse stock split, re-incorporation, etc.).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

III. Discussion

    After careful review of the proposal, the Commission finds that the
proposed rule change is consistent with the requirements of the Act and
the rules and regulations thereunder applicable to a national
securities exchange.\28\ In particular, the Commission finds that the
proposal is consistent with Section 6(b)(5) of the Act,\29\ which
requires, among other things, that the rules of an exchange be designed
to promote just and equitable principles of trade, to remove
impediments to and perfect the mechanism of a free and open market and
a national market system, and, in general, to protect investors and the
public interest.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \28\ In approving this proposed rule change, the Commission has
considered the proposed rule's impact on efficiency, competition,
and capital formation. See 15 U.S.C. 78c(f).
    \29\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange has proposed an extensive program for the
qualification, listing, and delisting of Companies on the Exchange and
has represented that its rules are nearly identical to listing rules of
an existing national securities exchange. As the Commission has noted,
the development and enforcement of adequate standards governing the
initial listing and maintenance of listing of securities is an activity
of critical importance to financial markets and the investing public.
Listing standards serve as a means for a marketplace to screen issuers
and to provide listed status only to bona fide companies with
sufficient float, investor base, and trading interest to maintain fair
and orderly markets. Once an issuer has been approved for initial
listing, the maintenance criteria allow a marketplace to monitor the
status and trading characteristics of that issue to ensure that it
continues to meet standards for market depth and liquidity.\30\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \30\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 55642 (April 18,
2007), 72 FR 20395 (April 24, 2007) (granting accelerated approval
to certain NCM listing standards); Securities Exchange Act Release
No. 37481 (July 25, 1996), 61 FR 40270, 40273-74 (August 1, 1996)
(granting accelerated approval to establish new quantitative and
qualitative listing standards of Chicago Stock Exchange,
Incorporated (``Chx'')) (``Chx Listing Standards Approval'');
Securities Exchange Act Release No. 34429 (July 22, 1994), 59 FR
38998, 39002 (August 1, 1994) (granting accelerated approval to new
quantitative and qualitative listing standards of Pacific Stock
Exchange, Inc. (``PSE'')) (``PSE Listing Standards Approval'').
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In addition to the quantitative standards, the qualitative
requirements, such as audit committees, independent director oversight
of executive compensation, a mandatory code of conduct, shareholder
meetings (including proxy solicitation and quorum), review of related
party transactions, shareholder approval (including voting rights), and
disclosure policies are designed to ensure that companies trading on
the Exchange will adequately protect the interests of public
shareholders.\31\ The Commission also notes that, because extensive
listing and maintenance standards are being adopted, only companies
suitable for exchange listing are eligible for trading on the
Exchange.\32\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \31\ Id.
    \32\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Commission believes that inclusion of a security for listing on
an exchange should not depend solely on meeting quantitative criteria,
but should also entail an element of judgment given the expectations of
investors and the imprimatur of listing on a particular market.\33\ The
Commission believes that this rule provides the necessary flexibility
to determine whether to list an issuer while ensuring that certain
minimum standards must be met. Thus, the Commission believes that the
listing and maintenance standards strike the appropriate balance
between protecting investors and providing a marketplace for issuers
satisfying the disclosure requirements under the federal securities
laws. The standards will provide important guidance on the Exchange
review process, and will alert issuers seeking to list on the Exchange
of its specific standards.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \33\ See Chx Listing Standards Approval, supra note 30, 61 FR at
40274; PSE Listing Standards Approval Order, supra note 30, 59 FR at
39002.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Commission also believes the proposal is consistent with
Section 6(b)(9) of the Act \34\ because the rules will prohibit the
listing of any security issued in a limited partnership rollup
transaction (as defined in Section 14(h) of the Act), unless such
transaction satisfies the criteria of Section 6(b)(9) and a broker-
dealer that is a member of a national securities association subject to
Section 15A(b)(12) of the Act participates in the rollup transaction.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \34\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(9).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Finally, the Commission finds that the proposal is consistent with
Section 6(b)(4) of the Act,\35\ which requires that the rules of an
exchange provide for the equitable allocation of reasonable dues, fees,
and other charges among members and issuers, and other persons using
its facilities. Specifically, as proposed, the Exchange will establish
a pricing structure that is not variable based on the number of shares
or other metrics. The fees are designed to be equitable in that they
will be the same amongst issuers seeking to list Tier I securities and
the same amongst issuers seeking to list Tier II securities. Further,
the Commission notes the Exchange will not charge additional fees that
issuers incur at other exchanges, including fees for issuance of
additional shares, name changes, and other corporate actions. Finally,
the Commission also notes that the Exchange's pricing, in general, will
be roughly equivalent to or less than what issuers would pay at other
national securities exchanges,\36\ and

will not include multiple other fees applicable on other national
securities exchanges to additional shares issued by listed companies,
corporate actions, and related activities of issuers.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \35\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(4).
    \36\ For instance, issuers listing on NGM pay between $125,000
and $225,000 initially (depending on the number of shares) and
between $35,000 and $99,500 annually, compared to proposed Tier I
fees of $100,000 initially and $35,000 annually. See NASDAQ Rule
5910(a) and (c). Similarly, issuers listing on NCM pay either
$50,000 or $75,000 initially (depending on the number of shares) and
between $17,500 and $75,000 annually, compared to proposed Tier II
fees of $50,000 initially and $20,000 annually. See NASDAQ Rule
5920(a) and (c).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

IV. Conclusion

    It Is Therefore Ordered, pursuant to Section 19(b)(2) of the
Act,\37\ that the proposed rule change (SR-BATS-2011-0118) be, and
hereby is, approved.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \37\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(2).

    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets,
pursuant to delegated authority.\38\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \38\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Elizabeth M. Murphy,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2011-22627 Filed 9-2-11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 88, Number 249 (Friday, December 29, 2023)]
[Notices]
[Pages 90192-90193]
[FR Doc No: 2023-28753]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Coast Guard

[Docket No. USCG-2023-0292]

National Chemical Transportation Safety Advisory Committee;
January 2024 Meeting

AGENCY: United States Coast Guard, Department of Homeland Security.

ACTION: Notice of open Federal advisory committee meeting.

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

SUMMARY: The National Chemical Transportation Safety Advisory Committee
(Committee) will conduct a series of subcommittee meetings over two
days in League City, TX, and a full committee meeting in Texas City, TX
to discuss matters relating to the safe and secure marine
transportation of hazardous materials. The subcommittee meetings will
also be available by videoconference for those unable to attend in
person, however the full committee meeting will be held in person only.
All meetings will be open to the public.

DATES:
    Meetings: National Chemical Transportation Safety Advisory
Committee subcommittees will meet on Tuesday, January 30 and Wednesday,
January 31, 2024, from 9 a.m. to 5 p.m. Central Standard Time (CST)
each day. The full Committee will meet on Thursday, February 1, 2024,
from 9 a.m. until 5 p.m. CST. Please note these meetings may close
early if the Committee has completed its business.
    Comments and supporting documents: To ensure your comments are
reviewed by Committee members before the meeting, submit your written
comments no later than January 16, 2024.

ADDRESSES: The subcommittee meetings will be held at INEOS Oligomers
USA, 2600 South Shore Boulevard, Suite 400, League City, TX 77573, and
the full committee meeting will be held at U.S. Coast Guard Marine
Safety Unit Texas City, 3101 FM 2004, Texas City, TX 77591.
    Pre-registration Information: Pre-registration is required for in-
person access to the meeting or to attend the subcommittee meetings by
videoconference. Public attendees will be required to pre-register no
later than noon Eastern Standard Time on January 16, 2024, to be
admitted to the meeting. In-person attendance may be capped due to
limited space in the meeting venue, and registration will be on a
first-come-first-served basis. To pre-register, contact Lieutenant
Ethan Beard at [email protected]. You will be asked to provide
your name, telephone number, email, company, or group with which you
are affiliated (for subcommittee meetings only), and whether you wish
to attend virtually or in person; if a foreign national, also provide
your country of citizenship, passport country, country of residence,
place of birth, passport number, and passport expiration date.
    The National Chemical Transportation Safety Advisory Committee is
committed to ensuring all participants have equal access regardless of
disability status. If you require reasonable accommodation due to a
disability to fully participate, please email Lieutenant Ethan Beard at
[email protected] or call<PHONE_NUMBER> as soon as possible.
    Instructions: You are free to submit comments at any time,
including orally at the meetings as time permits, but if you want
Committee members to review your comment before the meetings, please
submit your comments no later than January 16, 2024. We are
particularly interested in comments on the topics in the ``Agenda''
section below. We encourage you to submit comments through the Federal
Decision

Making Portal at https://www.regulations.gov. To do so, go to https://www.regulations.gov, type USCG-2023-0292 in the search box and click
``Search''. Next, look for this document in the Search Results column,
and click on it. Then click on the Comment option. If your material
cannot be submitted using https://www.regulations.gov, contact the
individual in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section of this
document for alternate instructions. You must include the docket number
USCG-2023-0292. We do not redact personal information from comments
which are posted at https://www.regulations.gov, so any personal
information provided in a comment posted will be viewable by the
public. You may wish to review the Privacy and Security Notice found
via a link on the homepage of https://www.regulations.gov, and DHS's
eRulemaking System of Records notice (85 FR 14226, March 11, 2020). If
you encounter technical difficulties with comment submission, contact
the individual listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section of
this notice.
    Docket Search: Documents mentioned in this notice as being
available in the docket, and all public comments, will be in our online
docket at https://www.regulations.gov and can be viewed by following
that website's instructions. Additionally, if you go to the online
docket and sign-up for email alerts, you will be notified when comments
are posted.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Lieutenant Ethan T. Beard, Alternate
Designated Federal Officer of the National Chemical Transportation
Safety Advisory Committee, telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>, or email
[email protected].

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Notice of the meeting of the National
Chemical Transportation Safety Advisory Committee is in compliance with
the Federal Advisory Committee Act, (Pub. L. 117-286, 5. U.S.C. ch.
10). The Committee is authorized by section 601 of the Frank LoBiondo
Coast Guard Authorization Act of 2018 (Pub. L. 115-282, 132 Stat. 4192)
and is codified in 46 U.S.C. 15101. The Committee operates under the
provisions of the Federal Advisory Committee Act and 46 U.S.C. 15109.
The Committee provides advice and recommendations to the Secretary of
Homeland Security through the Commandant of the U.S. Coast Guard on
matters related to the safe and secure marine transportation of
hazardous materials. The subcommittees listed in the agenda below were
established specifically to address open task statements and will be
closed upon issuance of final report.

Agenda

Tuesday, January 30, 2024

    Two subcommittees will meet to discuss the following task
statements:
9 a.m.-noon CST
    Task Statement 22-03: Recommendations on Testing Requirements for
Anti-Flashback Burners for Vapor Control Systems.
1:30 p.m.-5 p.m. CST
    Task Statement 21-01: Recommendations on Loading Limits of Gas
Carriers and USCG Supplement to International Hazardous Zone
Requirements.

Wednesday, January 31, 2024

    Two subcommittees will meet to discuss the following task
statements:
9 a.m.-noon CST
    Task Statement 22-01: Recommendations to Support Reductions to
Emissions and Environmental Impacts Associated with Marine Transport of
Chemicals, Liquefied Gases and Liquefied Natural Gas (LNG).
1:30 p.m.-5 p.m. CST
    Task Statement 22-02: Recommendations on Industry Best Practices
and Regulatory Updates Related to the Maritime Transportation of
Lithium Batteries.
    The task statements and other subcommittee information are located
at Homeport at the following address: https://homeport.uscg.mil/missions/federal-advisory-committees/national-chemical-transportation-safety-advisory-committee-(nctsac)/task-statements. The agenda for the
discussion of each task statement will include the following:
    (1) Introduction and review subcommittee task statement.
    (2) Public comment period.
    (3) Subcommittee discussion and preparation of any proposed
recommendations for the full Committee meeting on February 1, 2024.
    (4) Adjournment of meeting.

Thursday, February 1, 2024

    The agenda for the National Chemical Transportation Safety Advisory
Committee meeting on Thursday, February 1, 2024 is as follows:
    (1) Call to order.
    (2) Roll call and determination of quorum.
    (3) Remarks from U.S. Coast Guard leadership.
    (4) Chairman and Designated Federal Officer's remarks.
    (5) Acceptance of June 15, 2023 meeting minutes and status of task
items.
    (6) Committee will review, discuss, and formulate recommendations
on the following items:
    a. Task Statement 21-01: Recommendations on Loading Limits of Gas
Carriers and U.S. Coast Guard Supplement to International Hazardous
Zone Requirements;
    b. Task Statement 22-01: Recommendations to Support Reductions to
Emissions and Environmental Impacts Associated with Marine Transport of
Chemicals, Liquefied Gases and Liquefied Natural Gas (LNG);
    c. Task Statement 22-02: Recommendations on Industry Best Practices
and Regulatory Updates Related to the Maritime Transportation of
Lithium Batteries;
    d. Task Statement 22-03: Recommendations on Testing Requirements
for Anti-Flashback Burners for Vapor Control Systems.
    (7) Subcommittee recommendation discussion.
    (8) Presentation of Task Statement 23-01: Recommendations to Update
CG-ENG Policy Letter 02-15.
    (9) Task statement tracking discussion.
    (10) Public comment period.
    (11) Set next meeting date and location.
    (12) Adjournment of meeting.
    A copy of all meeting documentation will be available at: https://homeportr.uscg.mil/missions/federal-advisory-committees/national-chemical-transportation-safety-advisory-committee-(nctsac)/committee-
meetings no later than January 24, 2024. Alternatively, you may contact
Lieutenant Ethan Beard as noted in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT
section above.
    Public comments or questions will be taken throughout the meetings
as the Committee discusses the issues and prior to deliberations and
voting. There will be a final public comment period at the end of
meetings. Speakers are requested to limit their comments to two
minutes. Contact the individual listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION
CONTACT section above, to register as a speaker.

    Dated: December 22, 2023.
Jeffrey G. Lantz,
Director of Commercial Regulations and Standards.
[FR Doc. 2023-28753 Filed 12-28-23; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 9110-04-P