[Federal Register Volume 82, Number 34 (Wednesday, February 22, 2017)]
[Notices]
[Pages 11392-11393]
[FR Doc No: 2017-03422]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

Proposed Collection; Comment Request

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

Extension:
    Rule 17f-7, SEC File No. 270-470, OMB Control No. 3235-0529.

    Notice is hereby given that, pursuant to the Paperwork Reduction
Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501-3521) (``Paperwork Reduction Act''), the
Securities and Exchange Commission (the ``Commission'') is soliciting
comments on the collections of information summarized below. The
Commission plans to submit these existing collections of information to
the Office of Management and Budget (``OMB'') for extension and
approval.
    Rule 17f-7 (17 CFR 270.17f-7) permits a fund under certain
conditions to maintain its foreign assets with an eligible securities
depository, which has to meet minimum standards for a

depository. The fund or its investment adviser generally determines
whether the depository complies with those requirements based on
information provided by the fund's primary custodian (a bank that acts
as global custodian). The depository custody arrangement also must meet
certain conditions. The fund or its adviser must receive from the
primary custodian (or its agent) an initial risk analysis of the
depository arrangements, and the fund's contract with its primary
custodian must state that the custodian will monitor risks and promptly
notify the fund or its adviser of material changes in risks. The
primary custodian and other custodians also are required to agree to
exercise at least reasonable care, prudence, and diligence.
    The collection of information requirements in rule 17f-7 are
intended to provide workable standards that protect funds from the
risks of using foreign securities depositories while assigning
appropriate responsibilities to the fund's primary custodian and
investment adviser based on their capabilities. The requirement that
the foreign securities depository meet specified minimum standards is
intended to ensure that the depository is subject to basic safeguards
deemed appropriate for all depositories. The requirement that the fund
or its adviser must receive from the primary custodian (or its agent)
an initial risk analysis of the depository arrangements, and that the
fund's contract with its primary custodian must state that the
custodian will monitor risks and promptly notify the fund or its
adviser of material changes in risks, is intended to provide essential
information about custody risks to the fund's investment adviser as
necessary for it to approve the continued use of the depository. The
requirement that the primary custodian agree to exercise reasonable
care is intended to provide assurances that its services and the
information it provides will meet an appropriate standard of care.
    The staff estimates that each of approximately 992 investment
advisers \1\ will make an average of 8 responses annually under the
rule to address depository compliance with minimum requirements, any
indemnification or insurance arrangements, and reviews of risk analyses
or notifications. The staff estimates each response will take 6 hours,
requiring a total of approximately 48 hours for each adviser.\2\ Thus
the total annual burden associated with these requirements of the rule
is approximately 47,616 hours.\3\ The staff further estimates that
during each year, each of approximately 15 global custodians will make
an average of 4 responses to analyze custody risks and provide notice
of any material changes to custody risk under the rule. The staff
estimates that each response will take 260 hours, requiring
approximately 1,040 hours annually per global custodian.\4\ Thus the
total annual burden associated with these requirements is approximately
15,600 hours.\5\ The staff estimates that the total annual hour burden
associated with all collection of information requirements of the rule
is therefore 63,216 hours.\6\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ In October 2016, Commission staff estimated that, as of June
2016, 992 investment advisers managed or sponsored open-end
registered funds (including exchange-traded funds) and closed-end
registered funds.
    \2\ 8 responses per adviser x 6 hours per response = 48 hours
per adviser.
    \3\ 992 advisers x 48 hours per adviser = 47,616 hours.
    \4\ 260 hours per response x 4 responses per global custodian =
1,040 hours per global custodian.
    \5\ 15 global custodians x 1,040 hours per global custodian =
15,600 hours.
    \6\ 47,616 hours + 15,600 hours = 63,216 hours.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The estimate of average burden hours is made solely for the
purposes of the Paperwork Reduction Act and is not derived from a
comprehensive or even a representative survey or study of the costs of
Commission rules and forms. Compliance with the collection of
information requirements of the rule is necessary to obtain the benefit
of relying on the rule's permission for funds to maintain their assets
in foreign custodians. The information provided under rule 17f-7 will
not be kept confidential. An agency may not conduct or sponsor, and a
person is not required to respond to, a collection of information
unless it displays a currently valid OMB control number.
    Written comments are invited on: (a) Whether the proposed
collection of information is necessary for the proper performance of
the functions of the agency, including whether the information has
practical utility; (b) the accuracy of the agency's estimate of the
burden of the collection of information; (c) ways to enhance the
quality, utility, and clarity of the information collected; and (d)
ways to minimize the burden of the collection of information on
respondents, including through the use of automated collection
techniques or other forms of information technology. Consideration will
be given to comments and suggestions submitted in writing within 60
days of this publication.
    Please direct your written comments to Pamela Dyson, Director/Chief
Information Officer, Securities and Exchange Commission, C/O Remi
Pavlik-Simon, 100 F Street NE., Washington, DC 20549; or send an email
to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
    Dated: February 15, 2017.
Eduardo A. Aleman,
Assistant Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2017-03422 Filed 2-21-17; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


[Federal Register: June 13, 2008 (Volume 73, Number 115)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Page 33735-33737]
[DOCID:fr13jn08-24]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Office of the Secretary

49 CFR Part 40

[Docket OST-2008-0184]
RIN OST 2105-AD67

Procedures for Transportation Workplace Drug and Alcohol Testing
Programs: State Laws Requiring Drug and Alcohol Rule Violation
Information

AGENCY: Office of the Secretary, DOT.

ACTION: Interim final rule.

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

SUMMARY: The Office of the Secretary (OST) is amending its drug and
alcohol testing procedures to authorize employers to disclose to State
commercial driver licensing (CDL) authorities the drug and alcohol
violations of employees who hold CDLs and operate commercial motor
vehicles (CMVs), when a State law requires such reporting. This rule
also permits third-party administrators (TPAs) to provide the same
information to State CDL licensing authorities where State law requires
the TPAs to do so for owner-operator CMV drivers with CDLs.

DATES: The rule is effective June 13, 2008. Comments to this interim
final rule should be submitted by August 12, 2008. Late-filed comments
will be considered to the extent practicable.

ADDRESSES: You may file comments identified by the docket number DOT-
OST-2008-0184 by any of the following methods:
     Federal eRulemaking Portal: Go to http://
www.regulations.gov and follow the online instructions for submitting
comments.
     Mail: Docket Management Facility, U.S. Department of
Transportation, 1200 New Jersey Ave., SE., West Building Ground Floor,
Room W12-140, Washington, DC 20590-0001.
     Hand Delivery or Courier: West Building Ground Floor, Room
W12-140, 1200 New Jersey Ave., SE., between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m. ET,
Monday through Friday, except Federal Holidays.
     Fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    Instructions: You must include the agency name and docket number
DOT-OST-2008-0184 or the Regulatory Identification Number (RIN) for the
rulemaking at the beginning of your comment. All comments received will
be posted without change to http://www.regulations.gov, including any
personal information provided.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For program issues, Bohdan Baczara or
Patrice M. Kelly, Office of Drug and Alcohol Policy and Compliance,
1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE., Washington, DC 20590;<PHONE_NUMBER>
(voice),<PHONE_NUMBER> (fax<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>(e-mail). For legal issues, Robert C. Ashby,
Deputy Assistant General Counsel for Regulations and Enforcement, 1200
New Jersey Avenue, SE., Washington, DC 20590;<PHONE_NUMBER> (voice),
(202) 366-9313 (fax) or<EMAIL_ADDRESS>(e-mail).

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Confidentiality of an employee's test
results is a cornerstone of the balance between public safety and
employee privacy that is crucial to the Department of Transportation's
testing program. Early in the Department of Transportation's drug
testing program, we recognized the need for confidentiality of employee
testing information and reflected this in our December 1, 1989 Federal
Register notice (54 FR 49854). This rule required the Medical Review
Officer (MRO) to disclose positive drug test result information only to
employers. The rule also required laboratories to maintain employee
test records in confidence, but permitted laboratories to disclose a
positive drug test result to the employee, employer, or the decision
maker in a lawsuit, grievance or other proceeding initiated by or on
behalf of the employee as a result of the employee's positive drug
test.
    Congress passed the Omnibus Transportation Employee Testing Act of
1991, which directed the Department to implement significant changes to
its substance abuse testing program, and specifically referenced
providing for the confidentiality of employee test results. The
Department amended its drug and alcohol testing regulations to
implement these statutory requirements. (59 FR 7340; February 15,
1994). As provided in the original 1989 DOT rules and the 1994
amendments, Part 40 includes strict and specific provisions for
maintaining the confidentiality of employee testing records.
Specifically, employers are permitted to release employee drug and
alcohol testing records to other employers only upon written consent
from the employee, and only when the consent authorized the release to
a specifically identified individual.
    In 2000, the Department revised its drug and alcohol testing
regulations (65 FR 79462). In this revision, the Department prohibited
MROs from disclosing employee drug testing information to other
employers and prohibited service agents and employers from using
blanket releases. We intended in 2000 for State safety agencies with
regulatory authority over employers to be provided with certain testing
information about an individual employee with no signed releases
necessary. In recent years, several States have passed legislation
requiring the release of certain test result and refusal information
for all CDL holders without the employees' consent. Specifically, the
States have required employers and/or their service agents to report to
their respective State CDL issuing and licensing authorities the drug
and alcohol violations of employees who are CMV drivers with CDLs. We
do not want our regulations to have the effect of prohibiting employers
and TPAs of owner-operators from providing the drug and alcohol test
results of CMV drivers with CDLs. Consequently, the Department must
take rapid action to avoid any such conflict.
    The Department believes that State action to suspend or revoke the
CDLs of CMV drivers who violate DOT rules until they demonstrate that
they have successfully completed the SAP process can have important
safety benefits. We support State legislation that can reliably provide
State CDL licensing authorities with the information they need to take
such action. In particular, the Department is concerned that, in the
absence of such action, CMV drivers with CDLs who do not seek required
Substance Abuse Professional (SAP) evaluations, yet continue to perform
safety-sensitive duties after they violate the Department's drug and
alcohol regulations (so-called ``job hoppers''), pose an unacceptable
safety risk to the public. We believe measures taken by States to
suspend or revoke the CDL licenses of CMV drivers who violate DOT drug
and alcohol rules will enhance the Department's efforts to ensure that
such drivers are evaluated by SAPs and receive treatment or education
before they resume safety-sensitive duties.
    To be consistent with our policy in enforcing the existing
regulations and because we want to ensure that 49 CFR Part 40 is
supportive of such State

legislation, we are acting at this time to amend section 40.331. This
amendment specifies that employers are authorized to respond--without
conflict with Part 40 confidentiality requirements--to State law
requirements by providing drug and alcohol violation information to
State CDL licensing authorities on all CMV drivers with CDLs who are
covered by DOT testing rules. This same authorization applies to TPAs
for owner-operators, since they are the party in the best position to
provide this data if owner-operators choose not to report their own
violations. We note that this amendment does not authorize the release
of individually identifiable testing information outside the scope of
the State laws requiring its provision to a State agency for safety
purposes. For example, if a State statute requires employers to provide
information on positive tests and refusals to the DMV for purposes of
taking action against the driver's CDL, it would be improper for the
DMV to release the test information to other third parties without the
written consent of the driver.
    An employer, or a TPA for an owner-operator, is in the best
position to provide this information reliably to State authorities
because it is the only entity with knowledge and information about all
drug and alcohol violations for an employee. For example, an MRO will
not necessarily know that an employee refused to go to the collection
site. Since MROs are not involved in the alcohol testing process, MROs
will not have any information concerning an alcohol test. Likewise, a
breath alcohol technician will not have any information about an
employee's drug test result. A SAP will have no records on an employee
who has not sought evaluation and treatment after a rule violation.
Many service agents are located out of State and may not know of a
State law requirement, and in any case they may not be readily subject
to State law jurisdiction. Most have no way of knowing whether the
employee is a CMV driver with a CDL or which DOT agency regulates the
employee. Employers, on the other hand, have all this information, and
are in-State employers subject to the State's jurisdiction.
    This amendment is not a mandate to employers or TPAs for owner-
operators to send information to State authorities. It simply
authorizes them to comply with the specifics of State information
collection requirements. For example, if State A requires only positive
drug tests to be transmitted to its Department of Motor Vehicles, an
employer or TPA could provide only records of the employee's positive
drug test without written employee consent. The employer or TPA could
not provide ``blanket'' information about refusals or alcohol tests to
State A without written employee consent, since this was not required
by State law. We note that enforcement of State laws that apply to a
given employer or TPA would remain a State responsibility.

Regulatory Analyses and Notices

Authority

    The statutory authority for this rule derives from the Omnibus
Transportation Employee Testing Act of 1991 (49 U.S.C. 102, 301, 322,
5331, 20140, 31306, and 45101 et seq.) and the Department of
Transportation Act (49 U.S.C. 322).

Administrative Procedure Act

    The Department has determined that this rule may be issued without
a prior opportunity for notice and comment because providing prior
notice and comment would be unnecessary, impracticable, or contrary to
the public interest. Because several States already have laws requiring
the reporting of test result information and other States may be
contemplating enacting such laws, it is important to clarify the status
of employers and TPAs for owner-operators seeking to comply with these
laws. As States work with drug testing program participants to
implement their laws, it is essential that the Department work, without
delay, to avoid any potential conflicts with Federal regulations that
could impede such employers and TPAs from providing needed information
to State agencies. It is important to resolve, as soon as possible,
questions that States and other participants have already raised about
the relationship of State law and DOT regulations in this area. Issuing
the interim final rule should help to avoid confusion that could, to
some extent, diminish the safety benefits that the combination of
Federal and State requirements concerning persons who violate drug
testing rules would otherwise have.
    This rule clarifies that, in the interest of safety, employers and
TPAs for owner-operators may comply with State reporting requirements
to disclose to their State CDL authorities the DOT drug and alcohol
violations of CMV drivers with CDLs. It would be inadvisable for the
Department to delay issuing this rule and consequently to delay the
safety benefits from continued compliance by employers with State laws.
For the same reasons, the Department finds that there is good cause to
make the rule effective immediately.

Executive Order 12866 and Regulatory Flexibility Act

    The Department has determined that this action is not considered a
significant regulatory action for purposes of Executive Order 12866 or
the Department's regulatory policies and procedures. The interim final
rule makes minor modifications to our rules to clarify that employers
and TPAs for owner-operators are authorized to release employee-
specific drug and alcohol testing information where required by State
law.
    This rule is being adopted solely to clarify that DOT rules do not
conflict with State laws requiring employers to submit drug and alcohol
test results to State safety agencies. As such, it imposes no
compliance costs on any business or governmental entity. Any costs
resulting from compliance of employers with State laws are attributable
to those State laws, not to this rule. Given the absence of compliance
costs to anyone, I certify that the interim final rule does not have a
significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities.
    The benefits of this rule, which are not quantifiable, involve
potential improvements to safety as the result of State procedures that
could prevent violators of DOT rules from driving commercial vehicles
for a time and in helping to prevent ``job hopping'' by drivers who
test positive for one company and then seek a job at another company.
It is important for the Department and States to begin realizing these
benefits at this time.

Executive Order 13132

    The Department has analyzed this proposed action in accordance with
the principles and criteria contained in Executive Order 13132, and has
determined that, by explicitly facilitating the operation of State
laws, the amendments is consistent with the Executive Order and that no
consultation is necessary. It avoids the preemption of State laws with
respect to the reporting of testing information by employers and third-
party administrators providing services to owner-operators.

List of Subjects in 49 CFR Part 40

    Administrative practice and procedures, Alcohol abuse, Alcohol
testing, Drug abuse, Drug testing, Laboratories, Reporting and
recordkeeping requirements, Safety, Transportation.

    Issued at Washington, DC, this 22nd day of May, 2008.
Mary E. Peters,
Secretary of Transportation.

0
For reasons discussed in the preamble, the Department of Transportation
amends Title 49 of the Code of Federal Regulations, Part 40, as
follows:

PART 40--PROCEDURES FOR TRANSPORTATION WORKPLACE DRUG AND ALCOHOL
TESTING PROGRAMS

0
1. The authority citation for 49 CFR part 40 continues to read as
follows:

    Authority: 49 U.S.C. 102, 301, 322, 5331, 20140, 31306, and
45101 et seq.; 49 U.S.C. 322.

0
2. Amend 40.331 by adding a new paragraph (g) to read as follows:

Sec.  40.331  To what additional parties must employers and service
agents release information?

* * * * *
    (g) Notwithstanding any other provision of this Part, as an
employer of Commercial Motor Vehicle (CMV) drivers holding commercial
driving licenses (CDLs) or as a third party administrator for owner-
operator CMV drivers with CDLs, you are authorized to comply with State
laws requiring you to provide to State CDL licensing authorities
information about all violations of DOT drug and alcohol testing rules
(including positive tests and refusals) by any CMV driver holding a
CDL.
* * * * *
[FR Doc. E8-13377 Filed 6-12-08; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4910-62-P