John Silvasi/ RTP/ USEPA/ US 08/ 30/ 2005 03: 19 PM T o Art Fraas, Amy Flynn c c Jim Ketcham Colwill, Allen Basala, Jan Tierney/ DC/ USEPA/ US@ EP A, Tom Helms, Denise Gerth, Robert Meyers/ DC/ USEPA/ US@ EP A, Ron Evans/ RTP/ USEPA/ US@ EP A, Lydia Wegman/ RTP/ USEPA/ US@ EPA S u b j e c t TSD for economic analysis   8 hr O3 NAAQS implementation rule ( phase 2)

Hi, Art & Amy,

As noted in last night's email, I am now forwarding to you the Tech. Support Document for the economic analysis ( difference analysis) that accompanies the 8 hr O3 NAAQS implementation rule ( phase 2).

John J. Silvasi Environmental Engineer Ozone Policy and Strategies Group ( C539 02) Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards U. S. Environmental Protection Agency Research Triangle Park, NC 27711 919 541 5666 ( v); 919 541 0824 ( fax)


[Federal Register: August 6, 2010 (Volume 75, Number 151)]
[Notices]
[Page 47668-47670]
[DOCID:fr06au10-147]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-62614; File No. SR-NASDAQ-2010-093]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; NASDAQ Stock Market LLC; Notice of
Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of Proposed Rule Change To Modify
Nasdaq Rule 7017(b)

July 30, 2010.
    Pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934
(the ``Act'') \1\ and Rule 19b-4 thereunder,\2\ notice is hereby given
that on July 27, 2010, the NASDAQ Stock Market LLC (``NASDAQ'' or the
``Exchange'') filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the
``Commission'') the proposed rule change as described in Items I and II
below, which Items have been prepared by the Exchange. The Commission
is publishing this notice to solicit comments on the proposed rule
change from interested persons.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

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

    NASDAQ proposes to modify Nasdaq Rule 7017(b) to establish on a
permanent basis a reduced user fee for non-professional users of the
National Quotation Dissemination Service.
    The text of the proposed rule change is below. Proposed new
language is in italics.
* * * * *
    7017. National Quotation Data Service (NQDS)
    (a) No Change.
    (b) [For a pilot period ending December 31, 2007, t] The charge
to be paid by a non-professional for each interrogation or display
device receiving all or any portion of the NQDS information
disseminated through an authorized vendor shall be $10.00 per month.
    (c) No Change.
* * * * *

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

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

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

1. Purpose
    NASDAQ disseminates market data feeds in two capacities. First,
NASDAQ disseminates consolidated or ``core'' data in its capacity as
Securities Information Processor (``SIP'') for the national market
system plan governing securities listed on NASDAQ as a national
securities exchange (``NASDAQ UTP Plan'').\3\ Second, NASDAQ separately
disseminates proprietary or ``non-core'' data in its capacity as a
registered national securities exchange. Non-core data is any data
generated by the NASDAQ Market Center Execution System that is
voluntarily disseminated by NASDAQ separate and apart from the
consolidated data.\4\ NASDAQ has numerous proprietary data products,
such as NASDAQ TotalView, NASDAQ Last Sale, and NASDAQ Basic.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 59039 (Dec. 2, 2008)
at p. 41.
    \4\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The National Quotation Dissemination Service (``NQDS'') is a
proprietary data product that contains the best bid and offer quotation
of each registered market maker quoting in NASDAQ-listed securities on
the NASDAQ Stock Market. NQDS data is used not only by firms,
associated persons, and other market professionals, but also by non-
professionals who receive the service through authorized vendors,
including, for example, on-line brokerage firms.
    Prior to August 31, 2000, NQDS data was available through
authorized vendors at a monthly rate of $50 for professional and non-
professional users alike. In August 2000, NASDAQ filed a proposed rule
change to reduce from $50 to $10 the monthly fee that non-professional
users pay to receive NQDS data. The Commission approved the pilot on
August 22, 2000, and the fee reduction commenced on August 31, 2000 on
a one-year pilot basis.\5\ On September 5, 2001, August 29, 2002,
August 15, 2003, and August 20, 2004, January 24, 2006, and April 25,
2007, NASDAQ filed proposed rule changes to extend the pilot for
additional one-year periods.\6\ Thus, the non-professional fee for NQDS
has remained unchanged for roughly 10 years.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 43190 (Aug. 22,
2000); 65 FR 52460 (Aug. 29, 2000).
    \6\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 44788 (Sept. 13,
2001); 66 FR 48303 (Sept. 19, 2001). Securities Exchange Act Release
No. 46446 (Aug. 30, 2002); 67 FR 57260 (Sept. 9, 2002). Securities
Exchange Act Release No. 48386 (Aug. 21, 2003); 68 FR 51618 (Aug.
27, 2003). Securities Exchange Act Release No. 50318 (Aug. 3, 2004);
69 FR 54821 (Sept. 10, 2004); Securities Exchange Act Release No.
53531 (Mar. 21, 2006); 71 FR 15506 (Mar. 28, 2006); Securities
Exchange Act Release No. 55668 (Apr. 25, 2007); 72 FR 24347 (May 2,
2007).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    NASDAQ is proposing to establish the fee-reduction on a permanent
basis beginning August 1, 2010.\7\ NASDAQ has consistently supported
broad, effective dissemination of market information to public
investors. NASDAQ notes that the existing proposed fee represents a
reduction by 80% of the fees that non-professionals paid for NQDS data
prior to August 31, 2000. Continuing the reduction of NQDS for non-
professional users demonstrates NASDAQ's continued commitment to
individual investors and responds to the demand for real-time market
data by non-professional market participants. In addition, NASDAQ
member firms often supply real-time market data to their customers
through automated means. Thus, NASDAQ member firms' customers will
benefit from the continued fee reduction.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ NASDAQ is simultaneously filing a proposal for authority
retroactively to apply the NQDS non-professional fee pilot for the
period from December 31, 2007 through August 1, 2010. See SR-NASDAQ-
2010-094 (July 27, 2010). NASDAQ previously sought authority
retroactively to assess the NQDS non-professional fee from December
31, 2007 going forward. See SR-NASDAQ-2009-055.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

2. Statutory Basis
    The Exchange believes that its proposal is consistent with Section
6(b) of the Act \8\ in general, and furthers the objectives of Section
6(b)(5) of the Act \9\ in particular, in that it is designed to promote
just and equitable principles of trade, to remove impediments to and
perfect the mechanism of a free and open market and a national market
system, and, in general to protect investors and the public interest.
The fee reduction enhances the public's access to market data that is
relevant to investors when they make financial decisions and encourages
increased public participation in the securities markets.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

    NQDS is precisely the sort of market data product that the
Commission envisioned when it adopted Regulation NMS. The Commission
concluded that Regulation NMS--by lessening regulation of the market in
proprietary data--would itself further the Act's goals of facilitating
efficiency and competition:

    [E]fficiency is promoted when broker-dealers who do not need the
data beyond the prices, sizes, market center identifications of the
NBBO and consolidated last sale information are not required to
receive (and

pay for) such data. The Commission also believes that efficiency is
promoted when broker-dealers may choose to receive (and pay for)
additional market data based on their own internal analysis of the
need for such data.\10\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \10\ Securities Exchange Act Release No. 51808 (June 9, 2005),
70 FR 37496 (June 29, 2005).

By removing ``unnecessary regulatory restrictions'' on the ability of
exchanges to sell their own data, Regulation NMS advanced the goals of
the Act and the principles reflected in its legislative history. If the
free market should determine whether proprietary data is sold to
broker-dealers at all, it follows that the price at which such data is
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
sold should be set by the market as well.

    NASDAQ's ability to price NQDS is constrained by (1) competition
between exchanges and other trading platforms that compete with each
other in a variety of dimensions; (2) the existence of inexpensive
real-time consolidated data and free delayed consolidated data, and (3)
the inherent contestability of the market for proprietary last sale
data.
    The market for proprietary quotation data products is currently
competitive and inherently contestable because there is fierce
competition for the inputs necessary to the creation of proprietary
data and strict pricing discipline for the proprietary products
themselves. Numerous exchanges compete with each other for listings,
trades, and market data itself, providing virtually limitless
opportunities for entrepreneurs who wish to produce and distribute
their own market data. This proprietary data is produced by each
individual exchange, as well as other entities, in a vigorously
competitive market.
    Broker-dealers currently have numerous alternative venues for their
order flow, including ten self-regulatory organization (``SRO'')
markets, as well as internalizing broker-dealers (``BDs'') and various
forms of alternative trading systems (``ATSs''), including dark pools
and electronic communication networks (``ECNs''). Each SRO market
competes to produce transaction reports via trade executions, and two
FINRA-regulated Trade Reporting Facilities (``TRFs'') compete to
attract internalized transaction reports. It is common for BDs to
further and exploit this competition by sending their order flow and
transaction reports to multiple markets, rather than providing them all
to a single market. Competitive markets for order flow, executions, and
transaction reports provide pricing discipline for the inputs of
proprietary data products.
    The large number of SROs, TRFs, BDs, and ATSs that currently
produce proprietary data or are currently capable of producing it
provides further pricing discipline for proprietary data products. Each
SRO, TRF, ATS, and BD is currently permitted to produce proprietary
data products, and many currently do or have announced plans to do so,
including NASDAQ, NYSE, NYSE Amex, NYSEArca, and BATS.
    Any ATS or BD can combine with any other ATS, BD, or multiple ATSs
or BDs to produce joint proprietary data products. Additionally, order
routers and market data vendors can facilitate single or multiple
broker-dealers' production of proprietary data products. The potential
sources of proprietary products are virtually limitless.
    The fact that proprietary data from ATSs, BDs, and vendors can by-
pass SROs is significant in two respects. First, non-SROs can compete
directly with SROs for the production and sale of proprietary data
products, as BATS and Arca did before registering as exchanges by
publishing proprietary book data on the Internet. Second, because a
single order can appear in an SRO proprietary product, a non-SRO
proprietary product, or both, the data available in proprietary
products is exponentially greater than the actual number of orders that
exist in the marketplace.
    Consolidated data provides two additional measures of pricing
discipline for proprietary data products that are a subset of the
consolidated data stream. First, the consolidated quotation data is
widely available in real-time at $1 per month for non-professional
users. Second, consolidated data is also available at no cost with a
15- or 20- minute delay. Because consolidated data contains marketwide
information, it constrains the fees assessed for proprietary data (such
as NQDS data). The mere availability of low-cost or free consolidated
data provides a powerful form of pricing discipline for proprietary
data products that contain data elements that are included in the
consolidated data, by highlighting the optional nature of proprietary
products.
    Market data vendors provide another form of price discipline for
proprietary data products because they control the primary means of
access to end users. Vendors impose price restraints based upon their
business models. For example, vendors such as Bloomberg and Reuters
that assess a surcharge on data they sell may refuse to offer
proprietary products that end users will not purchase in sufficient
numbers. Internet portals, such as Google, impose a discipline by
providing only data that will enable them to attract ``eyeballs'' that
contribute to their advertising revenue. Retail broker-dealers, such as
Schwab and Fidelity, offer their customers proprietary data only if it
promotes trading and generates sufficient commission revenue. Although
the business models may differ, these vendors' pricing discipline is
the same: They can simply refuse to purchase any proprietary data
product that fails to provide sufficient value. NASDAQ and other
producers of proprietary data products must understand and respond to
these varying business models and pricing disciplines in order to
market proprietary data products successfully.
    In addition to the competition and price discipline described
above, the market for proprietary data products is also highly
contestable because market entry is rapid, inexpensive, and profitable.
The history of electronic trading is replete with examples entrants
that swiftly grew into some of the largest electronic trading platforms
and proprietary data producers: Archipelago, Bloomberg Tradebook,
Island, RediBook, Attain, TracECN, BATS Trading and Direct Edge. Today,
BATS publishes certain data at no charge on its Web site and via data
feeds in order to attract order flow, and it uses market data revenue
rebates from the resulting executions to maintain low execution charges
for its users.\11\ A proliferation of dark pools and other ATSs operate
profitably with fragmentary shares of consolidated market volume.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \11\ However, BATS recently received approval to begin offering
and charging for three new data products, which include BATS Last
Sale Feed, BATS Historical Data Products, and a data product called
BATS Market Insight. See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 61885
(April 9, 2010), 75 FR 20018 (April 16, 2010) (SR-BATS-2010-002).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Regulation NMS, by deregulating the market for proprietary data,
has increased the contestability of that market. While broker-dealers
have previously published their proprietary data individually,
Regulation NMS encourages market data vendors and broker-dealers to
produce proprietary products cooperatively in a manner never before
possible. Multiple market data vendors already have the capability to
aggregate data and disseminate it on a profitable scale, including
Bloomberg, Reuters and Thomson.
    In continuing the current price for NQDS, NASDAQ considered the
competitiveness of the market for quotation data and all of the
implications of that competition. NASDAQ believes that it has
considered all relevant factors and has not considered irrelevant
factors in order to establish a fair, reasonable, and not

unreasonably discriminatory fee and an equitable allocation of fees
among all users. The existence of numerous alternatives to NQDS,
including real-time consolidated data, free delayed consolidated data,
and proprietary data from other sources ensures that NASDAQ cannot set
unreasonable fees, or fees that are unreasonably discriminatory,
without losing business to these alternatives. Accordingly, NASDAQ
believes that the acceptance of the NQDS product in the marketplace
demonstrates the consistency of these fees with applicable statutory
standards.

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

    NASDAQ does not believe that the proposed rule change will result
in any burden on competition that is not necessary or appropriate in
furtherance of the purposes of the Act, as amended. As the Commission
has recognized,\12\ the market for transaction execution and routing
services is highly competitive. Broker-dealers currently have numerous
alternative venues for their order flow, including multiple competing
self-regulatory organization markets, as well as broker-dealers and
aggregators such as electronic communications networks. A member firm
is able to select any venue of which it is a member or participant to
send its order flow. As such, if member firms believe that the proposed
fee for Supplemental MPIDs is excessive they may easily choose to move
their order flow elsewhere. NASDAQ believes that its proposed fees are
comparable to fees assessed by the NYSE for market access, but are set
at lower levels than the corresponding NYSE fees. NASDAQ also believes
that the proposed fee will encourage efficiency in member firms' use of
MPIDs.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \12\ Specifically, the Commission stated: ``Exchanges compete
not only with one another, but also with broker-dealers that match
customer orders within their own systems and also with a
proliferation of alternative trading systems (`ATSs') and electronic
communications networks (`ECNs') that the Commission has also
nurtured and authorized to execute trades in any listed issue. As a
result, market share of trading fluctuates among execution
facilities based on their ability to service the end customer. The
execution business is highly competitive and exhibits none of the
characteristics of a monopoly * * * .'' Securities Exchange Act
Release No. 59039 (December 2, 2008), 73 FR 74770, 74775 (December
9, 2008) (SR-NYSEArca-2006-21).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

    Written comments were neither solicited nor received.

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

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

    \13\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

IV. Solicitation of Comments

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

Electronic Comments

     Use the Commission's Internet comment form (http://
www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml); or
     Send an e-mail to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Please include
File Number SR-NASDAQ-2010-093 on the subject line.

Paper Comments

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

All submissions should refer to File Number SR-NASDAQ-2010-093. This
file number should be included on the subject line if e-mail is used.
To help the Commission process and review your comments more
efficiently, please use only one method. The Commission will post all
comments on the Commission's Internet Web site (http://www.sec.gov/
rules/sro.shtml). Copies of the submission, all subsequent amendments,
all written statements with respect to the proposed rule change that
are filed with the Commission, and all written communications relating
to the proposed rule change between the Commission and any person,
other than those that may be withheld from the public in accordance
with the provisions of 5 U.S.C. 552, will be available for Web site
viewing and printing in the Commission's Public Reference Room, on
official business days between the hours of 10 a.m. and 3 p.m. Copies
of the filing also will be available for inspection and copying at the
principal office of the Exchange. All comments received will be posted
without change; the Commission does not edit personal identifying
information from submissions. You should submit only information that
you wish to make available publicly. All submissions should refer to
File Number SR-NASDAQ-2010-093 and should be submitted on or before
August 27, 2010.

    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets,
pursuant to delegated authority.\14\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

Florence E. Harmon,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2010-19333 Filed 8-5-10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8010-01-P


[Federal Register: January 9, 2007 (Volume 72, Number 5)]
[Notices]
[Page 1034-1036]
[DOCID:fr09ja07-71]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. IC-27652; 812-13351]

FBR Fund Advisers, Inc., et al.; Notice of Application

December 29, 2006.
AGENCY: Securities and Exchange Commission (``Commission'').

ACTION: Temporary order and notice of application for a permanent order
under section 9(c) of the Investment Company Act of 1940 (the ``Act'').

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

SUMMARY OF APPLICATION: Applicants have received a temporary order
exempting them from section 9(a) of the Act, with respect to an
injunction entered against Friedman, Billings, Ramsey & Co., Inc.
(``FBR & Co.'') on or about December 22, 2006 by the United States
District Court for the District of Columbia, until the Commission takes
final action on an application for a permanent order. Applicants also
have applied for a permanent order.

APPLICANTS: FBR Fund Advisers, Inc. (``FBR Advisers''), FBR Investment
Services, Inc. (``FBRIS''), and FBR Investment Management, Inc.
(``FBRIM'') (collectively, the ``Applicants'').\1\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ Applicants request that any relief granted pursuant to the
application also apply to any other company of which FBR & Co. is or
becomes an affiliated person, other than any company of which
Emanual J. Friedman is or becomes an affiliated person (together
with Applicants, ``Covered Persons'').

FILING DATE: The application was filed on December 22, 2006. Applicants
have agreed to file a final amendment during the notice period, the
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
substance of which is reflected in this notice.

HEARING OR NOTIFICATION OF HEARING: An order granting the application
will be issued unless the Commission orders a hearing. Interested
persons may request a hearing by writing to the Commission's Secretary
and serving Applicants with a copy of the request, personally or by
mail. Hearing requests should be received by the Commission by 5:30
p.m. on January 23, 2007, and should be accompanied by proof of service
on Applicants, in the form of an affidavit or, for lawyers, a
certificate of service. Hearing requests should state the nature of the
writer's interest, the reason for the request, and the issues
contested. Persons who wish to be notified of a hearing may request
notification by writing to the Commission's Secretary.

ADDRESSES: Secretary, U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission, 100 F
Street, NE., Washington, DC 20549-1090. Applicants, c/o William
Ginivan, General Counsel, Friedman, Billings, Ramsey Group, Inc.,
Potomac Tower, 1001 Nineteenth Street North, Arlington, VA 22209.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Marilyn Mann, Senior Counsel, at (202)
551-6813, or Mary Kay Frech, Branch Chief, at<PHONE_NUMBER> (Division
of Investment Management, Office of Investment Company Regulation).

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

Applicants' Representations

    1. FBR Advisers, FBRIS, and FBRIM are wholly-owned subsidiaries of
Friedman, Billings, Ramsey Group, Inc. (``FBR''). FBR, a Virginia
corporation, is a diversified financial services holding company that
engages in investment banking, institutional brokerage and asset
management services, among other activities. FBR Advisers, an
investment adviser registered under the Investment Advisers Act of 1940
(``Advisers Act''), serves as investment adviser to certain series of
FBR Funds (the ``Funds''), an open-end management investment company
organized as a Delaware statutory trust and registered under the Act.
FBRIS, a broker-dealer registered under the Securities Exchange Act of
1934 (``Exchange Act''), serves as principal underwriter and
distributor of shares of the Funds. FBRIM, an investment adviser
registered under the Advisers Act, serves as investment adviser to
certain employees' securities companies (``ESCs''), as defined in
section 2(a)(13) of the Act, which are

investment vehicles formed for the benefit of employees of FBR and its
affiliates.
    2. On or about December 22, 2006, the United States District Court
for the District of Columbia entered a final judgment against FBR &
Co., a broker-dealer registered under the Exchange Act, in a matter
brought by the Commission (the ``Final Judgment'').\2\ FBR & Co. is a
wholly-owned subsidiary of FBR. The Commission alleged in the complaint
(``Complaint'') that, in connection with a Private Investment in Public
Equity offering of stock by CompuDyne Corporation, for which FBR & Co.
served as placement agent, FBR & Co. failed to establish, maintain and
enforce policies and procedures reasonably designed to prevent the
misuse of material, nonpublic information, unlawfully traded while
aware of material nonpublic information and conducted unregistered
sales of securities. One of the individuals alleged to have been
involved in the conduct underlying the Complaint is Emanuel J.
Friedman, the former co-chairman and co-chief executive officer of FBR,
former chairman and co-chief executive officer of FBR & Co., and former
chairman and co-chief executive officer of FBRIM. Without admitting or
denying any of the allegations in the Complaint, except as to
jurisdiction, FBR & Co. consented to the entry of the Final Judgment.
The Final Judgment permanently restrains and enjoins FBR & Co., and its
agents, servants, employees, and attorneys, from violating sections
10(b) and 15(f) of the Exchange Act and rule 10b-5 thereunder and
sections 5 and 17(a) of the Securities Act of 1933 (``Securities Act'')
(the ``Injunction'').\3\ FBR & Co. also consented to the payment of
disgorgement plus prejudgment interest in addition to civil penalties
in an aggregate amount of approximately $3.7 million.\4\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \2\ Securities and Exchange Commission v. Friedman, Billings,
Ramsey & Co., Inc., et al., Final Judgment as to Friedman, Billings,
Ramsey & Co., Inc., 06-CV-02160 (RCL) (D.D.C., filed Dec. 22, 2006).
    \3\ The Final Judgment also enjoins Mr. Friedman from violating
section 5 of the Securities Act and, as a controlling person
pursuant to section 20(a) of the Exchange Act, from violating
sections 10(b) and 15(f) of the Exchange Act and rule 10b-5
thereunder. The Final Judgment also imposes civil penalties on Mr.
Friedman. Mr. Friedman is an affiliated person of FBR under section
2(a)(3)(A) of the Act by virtue of his ownership of 6.09% of the
outstanding voting securities of FBR. The requested temporary and
permanent orders will not apply to Mr. Friedman or to any company of
which Mr. Friedman is or becomes an affiliated person, which
currently includes FBR.
    \4\ FBR & Co. also has agreed to certain undertakings designed
to ensure that it does not commit future violations with respect to
the misuse of material nonpublic information.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Applicants' Legal Analysis

    1. Section 9(a)(2) of the Act, in relevant part, prohibits a person
who has been enjoined from engaging in or continuing any conduct or
practice in connection with the purchase or sale of a security from
acting, among other things, as an investment adviser or depositor of
any registered investment company or a principal underwriter for any
registered open-end investment company, registered unit investment
trust or registered face-amount certificate company. Section 9(a)(3) of
the Act makes the prohibition in section 9(a)(2) applicable to a
company, any affiliated person of which has been disqualified under the
provisions of section 9(a)(2). ``Affiliated person'' is defined in
section 2(a)(3) of the Act to include any person directly or indirectly
controlling, controlled by, or under common control with, the other
person. Applicants state that FBR & Co. is an affiliated person of each
of the Applicants within the meaning of section 2(a)(3) of the Act
because FBR controls FBR & Co., FBR Advisers, FBRIS and FBRIM.
Applicants state that, as a result of the Injunction, they would be
subject to the prohibitions of section 9(a).
    2. Section 9(c) of the Act provides that the Commission shall grant
an application for an exemption from the disqualification provisions of
section 9(a) of the Act if it is established that these provisions, as
applied to the applicants, are unduly or disproportionately severe or
that the conduct of the applicants has been such as not to make it
against the public interest or protection of investors to grant the
exemption. Applicants have filed an application pursuant to section
9(c) seeking temporary and permanent orders exempting them from the
disqualification provisions of section 9(a) of the Act.
    3. Applicants believe they meet the standards for exemption
specified in section 9(c). Applicants state that the prohibitions of
section 9(a) as applied to them would be unduly and disproportionately
severe and that the conduct of Applicants has been such as not to make
it against the public interest or the protection of investors to grant
the exemption from section 9(a).
    4. Applicants state that although Mr. Friedman was co-chairman and
co-chief executive officer of FBR, co-chairman and co-chief executive
officer of FBRIM and also participated in the conduct described in the
Injunction, Mr. Friedman is no longer employed by FBR, FBRIM or FBR &
Co. Applicants also state that none of their officers, directors or
employees who are engaged in the provision of investment advisory or
underwriting services to the Funds or investment advisory services to
the ESCs participated in any way in the conduct underlying the
Injunction. Applicants further state that the conduct underlying the
Injunction did not involve any Funds or ESCs.
    5. Applicants state that the inability to continue providing
advisory and underwriting services to the Funds would result in
potentially severe hardships for the Funds and their shareholders.
Applicants also state that they have distributed, or will distribute as
soon as reasonably practicable, written materials, including an offer
to meet in person to discuss the materials, to the boards of directors
or trustees of the Funds (the ``Boards''), including the directors who
are not ``interested persons,'' as defined in section 2(a)(19) of the
Act, of such Funds and their independent legal counsel, as defined in
rule 0-1(a)(6) under the Act, if any, regarding the Injunction, any
impact on the Funds, and the application. Applicants will provide the
Boards with all information concerning the Injunction and the
application that is necessary for the Funds to fulfill their disclosure
and other obligations under the federal securities laws.
    6. Applicants also assert that, if they were barred from providing
services to the Funds, the effect on their businesses and employees
would be severe. Applicants state that they have committed substantial
resources to establish an expertise in underwriting and advising the
Funds. The Applicants have never before received an exemptive order
under section 9(c).
    7. Applicants further state that prohibiting FBRIM from continuing
to serve as investment adviser to the ESCs is not in the public
interest or in furtherance of the protection of investors. Because the
ESCs relate to employee retention and compensation matters and are
sponsored for employees of FBR and its affiliates, it would not be
consistent with the purposes of the employees' securities company
provisions of the Act to require another entity not affiliated with FBR
to serve as investment adviser to the ESCs. In addition, the
participating employees have agreed to participate in the ESCs with the
expectation that the ESCs will be managed by their employer.

Applicants' Condition

    Applicants agree that any order granting the requested relief shall
be subject to the following condition:
    Any temporary exemption granted pursuant to the application shall
be without prejudice to, and shall not limit the Commission's rights in
any manner with respect to, any Commission investigation of, or
administrative proceedings involving or against, Covered Persons,
including, without limitation, the consideration by the Commission of a
permanent exemption from section 9(a) of the Act requested pursuant to
the application or the revocation or removal of any temporary exemption
granted under the Act in connection with the application.

Temporary Order

    The Commission has considered the matter and finds that Applicants
have made the necessary showing to justify granting a temporary
exemption.
    Accordingly, it is hereby ordered, pursuant to section 9(c) of the
Act, that the Covered Persons are granted a temporary exemption from
the provisions of section 9(a), effective as of the date of the
Injunction, solely with respect to the Injunction, subject to the
condition in the application, until the date the Commission takes final
action on an application for a permanent order.

    By the Commission.
Jill M. Peterson,
Assistant Secretary.
 [FR Doc. E7-60 Filed 1-8-07; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 76, Number 98 (Friday, May 20, 2011)]
[Notices]
[Pages 29229-29230]
[FR Doc No: 2011-12439]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

Combined Notice of Filings 1

    Take notice that the Commission received the following electric
rate filings:

    Docket Numbers: ER01-313-012; ER01-424-012.
    Applicants: California Independent System Operator Corporation,
Pacific Gas and Electric Company.
    Description: Compliance Refund Report of Pacific Gas and Electric
Company.
    Filed Date: 05/12/2011.
    Accession Number: 20110512-5146.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Thursday, June 02, 2011.

    Docket Numbers: ER11-2048-003.
    Applicants: New York Independent System Operator, Inc.
    Description: New York Independent System Operator, Inc. submits
tariff filing per 35: NYISO Compliance Filing EITC OATT Attchmnt C 5/
11/11 to be effective 5/27/2011.
    Filed Date: 05/12/2011.
    Accession Number: 20110512-5133.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Friday, May 20, 2011.

    Docket Numbers: ER11-2875-002.
    Applicants: PJM Interconnection, L.L.C.
    Description: PJM Interconnection, L.L.C. submits tariff filing per
35: Compliance filing per Order issued in Docket No. ER11-2875-000 to
be effective 4/13/2011.
    Filed Date: 05/12/2011.
    Accession Number: 20110512-5093.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Thursday, June 02, 2011.

    Docket Numbers: ER11-3380-001.
    Applicants: Scylla Energy LLC.
    Description: Scylla Energy LLC submits tariff filing per 35.17(b):
Scylla Amendment Filing MBR Tariff to be effective 5/18/2011.
    Filed Date: 05/12/2011.
    Accession Number: 20110512-5095.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Thursday, June 02, 2011.

    Docket Numbers: ER11-3556-000.
    Applicants: San Diego Gas & Electric Company.
    Description: San Diego Gas & Electric Company submits tariff filing
per 35.13(a)(2)(iii: SDGE and Ocotillo EP Agreement to be effective 5/
12/2011.
    Filed Date: 05/12/2011.
    Accession Number: 20110512-5120.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Thursday, June 02, 2011.

    Docket Numbers: ER11-3557-000.
    Applicants: NorthWestern Corporation.
    Description: NorthWestern Corporation submits tariff filing per
35.13(a)(2)(iii: Service Agreement Nos. 584, 585, and 588--PPL Montana,
LLC to be effective 8/11/2009.
    Filed Date: 05/12/2011.
    Accession Number: 20110512-5129.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Thursday, June 02, 2011.

    Docket Numbers: ER11-3558-000.
    Applicants: NorthWestern Corporation
    Description: NorthWestern Corporation submits tariff filing per
35.13(a)(2)(iii: Service Agreement Nos. 586 and 587--PPL Montana, LLC
to be effective 5/10/2011.
    Filed Date: 05/12/2011.
    Accession Number: 20110512-5134.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Thursday, June 02, 2011.

    Docket Numbers: ER11-3559-000.
    Applicants: PJM Interconnection, L.L.C.
    Description: PJM Interconnection, L.L.C submits notice of
cancellation of a wholesale market participation agreement with Dauphin
County Industrial Development Authority et al.
    Filed Date: 05/12/2011.
    Accession Number: 20110512-5140.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Thursday, June 02, 2011.

    Any person desiring to intervene or to protest in any of the above
proceedings must file in accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of the
Commission's Rules of

Practice and Procedure (18 CFR 385.211 and 385.214) on or before 5 p.m.
Eastern time on the specified comment date. It is not necessary to
separately intervene again in a subdocket related to a compliance
filing if you have previously intervened in the same docket. Protests
will be considered by the Commission in determining the appropriate
action to be taken, but will not serve to make protestants parties to
the proceeding. Anyone filing a motion to intervene or protest must
serve a copy of that document on the Applicant. In reference to filings
initiating a new proceeding, interventions or protests submitted on or
before the comment deadline need not be served on persons other than
the Applicant.
    As it relates to any qualifying facility filings, the notices of
self-certification [or self-recertification] listed above, do not
institute a proceeding regarding qualifying facility status. A notice
of self-certification [or self-recertification] simply provides
notification that the entity making the filing has determined the
facility named in the notice meets the applicable criteria to be a
qualifying facility. Intervention and/or protest do not lie in dockets
that are qualifying facility self-certifications or self-
recertifications. Any person seeking to challenge such qualifying
facility status may do so by filing a motion pursuant to 18 CFR
292.207(d)(iii). Intervention and protests may be filed in response to
notices of qualifying facility dockets other than self-certifications
and self-recertifications.
    The Commission encourages electronic submission of protests and
interventions in lieu of paper, using the FERC Online links at http://www.ferc.gov. To facilitate electronic service, persons with Internet
access who will eFile a document and/or be listed as a contact for an
intervenor must create and validate an eRegistration account using the
eRegistration link. Select the eFiling link to log on and submit the
intervention or protests.
    Persons unable to file electronically should submit an original and
14 copies of the intervention or protest to the Federal Energy
Regulatory Commission, 888 First St., NE., Washington, DC 20426.
    The filings in the above proceedings are accessible in the
Commission's eLibrary system by clicking on the appropriate link in the
above list. They are also available for review in the Commission's
Public Reference Room in Washington, DC. There is an eSubscription link
on the Web site that enables subscribers to receive e-mail notification
when a document is added to a subscribed dockets(s). For assistance
with any FERC Online service, please e-mail<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
or call<PHONE_NUMBER> (toll free). For TTY, call<PHONE_NUMBER>.

    Dated: May 13, 2011.
Nathaniel J. Davis, Sr.,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2011-12439 Filed 5-19-11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 88, Number 237 (Tuesday, December 12, 2023)]
[Notices]
[Pages 86186-86188]
[FR Doc No: 2023-27160]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-99097; File No. SR-FICC-2023-016]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; Fixed Income Clearing Corporation;
Notice of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of Proposed Rule Change To
Amend the Clearing Agency Risk Management Framework

December 6, 2023.
    Pursuant to section 19(b)(1) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934
(``Act'') \1\ and Rule 19b-4 thereunder,\2\ notice is hereby given that
on December 1, 2023, Fixed Income Clearing Corporation (``FICC'') filed
with the Securities and Exchange Commission (``Commission'') the
proposed rule change as described in Items I, II and III below, which
Items have been prepared by the clearing agency. FICC filed the
proposed rule change pursuant to section 19(b)(3)(A) of the Act \3\ and
Rule 19b-4(f)(4) thereunder.\4\ The Commission is publishing this
notice to solicit comments on the proposed rule change from interested
persons.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1).
    \2\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4.
    \3\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A).
    \4\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(4).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

I. Clearing Agency's Statement of the Terms of Substance of the
Proposed Rule Change

    The proposed rule change of Fixed Income Clearing Corporation
(``FICC'') is provided hereto [sic] as Exhibit 5 and amends the
Clearing Agency Risk Management Framework (``Risk Management
Framework'', or ``Framework'') of FICC and its affiliates, The
Depository Trust Company (``DTC'') and National Securities Clearing
Corporation (``NSCC,'' and together with FICC and DTC, the ``Clearing
Agencies'').\5\ The proposed rule change would amend the Risk
Management Framework to clarify and revise the descriptions of certain
matters within the Framework, as further described below. The proposed
changes would update and clarify the Risk Management Framework but do
not reflect changes to how the Clearing Agencies comply with the
applicable requirements of Rule 17Ad-22(e), as described in greater
detail below.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ See Securities Exchange Act Release Nos. 81635 (September
15, 2017), 82 FR 44224 (September 21, 2017) (SR-DTC-2017-013; SR-
FICC-2017-016; SR-NSCC-2017-012) (``Initial Filing'') and Securities
Exchange Act Release Nos. 89271 (July 09, 2020), 85 FR 42933 (July
15, 2020) (SR-NSCC-2020-012); Securities Exchange Act Release No.
89269 (July 09, 2020), 85 FR 42954 (July 15, 2020) (SR-DTC-2020-
009); and Securities Exchange Act Release No. 89270 (July 09, 2020),
85 FR 42927 (July 15, 2020) (SR-FICC-2020-007) (together with the
Initial Filing, the ``Framework Filings'')
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

II. Clearing Agency's Statement of the Purpose of, and Statutory Basis
for, the Proposed Rule Change

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

(A) Clearing Agency's Statement of the Purpose of, and Statutory Basis
for, the Proposed Rule Change

1. Purpose
    The Clearing Agencies adopted the Risk Management Framework \6\ to
provide an outline for how each of the Clearing Agencies (i) maintains
a well-founded, clear, transparent and enforceable legal basis for each
aspect of its activities; (ii) comprehensively manages legal, credit,
liquidity, operational, general business, investment, custody, and
other risks that arise in or are borne by it; (iii) identifies,
monitors, and manages risks related to links it establishes with one or
more clearing agencies, financial market utilities, or trading markets;
(iv) meets the requirements of its participants and the markets it
serves efficiently and effectively; (v) uses, or at a minimum
accommodates, relevant internationally accepted communication
procedures and standards in order to facilitate efficient payment,
clearing and settlement; and (vi) publicly discloses certain
information, including market data. In this way, the Risk Management
Framework currently supports the Clearing Agencies' compliance with
Rules 17Ad-22(e)(1), (3), (20), (21), (22) and (23) of the
Standards,\7\ as described in the Framework Filings. In addition to
setting forth the way each of the Clearing Agencies addresses these
requirements, the Risk Management Framework also contains a section
titled ``Framework Ownership and Change Management'' that, among other
matters, describes the Framework ownership and the required governance
process for review and approval of changes to the Framework. In
connection with the annual review and approval of the Framework by the
Board of Directors of NSCC, DTC and FICC (each a ``Board'' and
collectively, the ``Boards''), the Clearing Agencies are proposing to
make certain revisions to the Framework.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ Supra note 5.
    \7\ 17 CFR 240.17Ad-22(e)(1), (3), (20), (21), (22) and (23).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The proposed changes would clarify and enhance the descriptions in
the Risk Management Framework, for example, (i) clarify the cadence of
publication of disclosure frameworks; (ii) clarify the description of
the Clearing Agencies recovery and wind-down processes and procedures;
and (iii) make other non-substantive clarifying and clean-up changes to
the Framework. Each of these categories of changes are discussed in
further detail below.
i. Proposed Amendment To Clarify the Cadence of Publication of
Disclosure Frameworks
    Section 4.1 of the Framework describes certain tools provided to
Clearing Agency participants to assist participants in understanding
the Clearing Agencies' products and services and their use. One such
tool is the publication of disclosure frameworks to the DTCC website.
The proposed change would enhance the description in the third bullet
of Section 4.1, to add that although each of the Clearing Agencies
publish to the DTCC website disclosure frameworks that are updated on a
biennial basis, such frameworks are also updated more frequently for
material changes.
ii. Proposed Amendment To Clarify the Description of Recovery and Wind-
Down
    Section 5 of the Framework describes the Clearing Agencies
identification of scenarios that may potentially prevent them from
being able to provide critical operations and services, and assessment
of options for recovery and orderly wind-down, and maintenance of
appropriate plans for recovery and orderly wind-down. The proposed
changes to Section 5 are primarily rephrasing and grammatical choices
that clarify the Framework and conform the language in the Framework to
the Clearing Agencies' stand-alone Recovery and Wind-Down Plans.
iii. Proposed Amendment To Make Other Non-Substantive Clarifying
Changes
    These proposed changes consist of rephrasing for clarity and
removal of unnecessary language in the Framework. These changes
include: (i) changes to Section 1 to simplify the description of other
documentation of the Clearing Agencies that support the

activities described in the Framework by removing statements regarding
the maintenance of those documents that are not relevant to the
operation of this Framework and removing redundant sentences; (ii) add
``and'' for grammatical purposes in the second sentence of the last
paragraph of Section 3.2 as well as the words ``when required'' as
clarifying language; (3) remove the words ``Market Risk'' from the
heading ``Clearing Agency Stress Testing Framework'' in Section 3.3.3
and add ``liquidity resources'' to align with other documentation of
the Clearing Agencies; (4) deletion of the word ``all'' in various
sentences in Section 4.2.2, as unnecessary.
2. Statutory Basis
    The Clearing Agencies believe that the proposed changes are
consistent with section 17A(b)(3)(F) of the Act \8\ for the reasons
described below. Section 17A(b)(3)(F) of the Act requires, in part,
that the rules of a registered clearing agency be designed to promote
the prompt and accurate clearance and settlement of securities
transactions, and to assure the safeguarding of securities and funds
which are in the custody or control of the clearing agency or for which
it is responsible.\9\ The proposed changes would clarify the
descriptions of certain matters within the Framework to improve
comprehensiveness and align with other documentation of the Clearing
Agencies, as described above. By creating clearer, updated
descriptions, the Clearing Agencies believe that the proposed changes
would make the Risk Management Framework more effective in providing an
overview of the important risk management activities of the Clearing
Agencies, as described therein.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \8\ 15 U.S.C. 78q-1(b)(3)(F).
    \9\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    As described in the Framework Filings, the risk management
functions described in the Risk Management Framework allow the Clearing
Agencies to continue to promote the prompt and accurate clearance and
settlement of securities transactions and continue to assure the
safeguarding of securities and funds which are in their custody or
control or for which they are responsible notwithstanding the default
of a member of an affiliated family. The proposed changes to improve
the clarity and accuracy of the descriptions of risk management
functions within the Framework would assist the Clearing Agencies in
carrying out these risk management functions. Therefore, the Clearing
Agencies believe these proposed changes are consistent with the
requirements of section 17A(b)(3)(F) of the Act.\10\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \10\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

(B) Clearing Agency's Statement on Burden on Competition

    The Clearing Agencies do not believe that the proposed changes to
the Framework described above would have any impact, or impose any
burden, on competition. As described above, the proposed rule changes
would improve the comprehensiveness of the Framework by creating
clearer, updated descriptions, thereby making the Risk Management
Framework more effective in providing an overview of the important risk
management activities of the Clearing Agencies. As such, the Clearing
Agencies do not believe that the proposed rule changes would have any
impact on competition.

(C) Clearing Agency's Statement on Comments on the Proposed Rule Change
Received From Members, Participants, or Others

    FICC has not received or solicited any written comments relating to
this proposal. If any written comments are received, they will be
publicly filed as an Exhibit 2 to this filing, as required by Form 19b-
4 and the General Instructions thereto.
    Persons submitting comments are cautioned that, according to
Section IV (Solicitation of Comments) of the Exhibit 1A in the General
Instructions to Form 19b-4, the Commission does not edit personal
identifying information from comment submissions. Commenters should
submit only information that they wish to make available publicly,
including their name, email address, and any other identifying
information.
    All prospective commenters should follow the Commission's
instructions on how to submit comments, available at https://www.sec.gov/regulatory-actions/how-to-submitcomments. General questions
regarding the rule filing process or logistical questions regarding
this filing should be directed to the Main Office of the Commission's
Division of Trading and Markets at [email protected] or 202-
551-5777.
    FICC reserves the right not to respond to any comments received.

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

    The foregoing rule change has become effective pursuant to section
19(b)(3)(A) \11\ of the Act and paragraph (f) \12\ of Rule 19b-4
thereunder. At any time within 60 days of the filing of the proposed
rule change, the Commission summarily may temporarily suspend such rule
change if it appears to the Commission that such action is necessary or
appropriate in the public interest, for the protection of investors, or
otherwise in furtherance of the purposes of the Act.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \11\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A).
    \12\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

IV. Solicitation of Comments

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

Electronic Comments

     Use the Commission's internet comment form (https://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml); or
     Send an email to [email protected]. Please include
file number SR-FICC-2023-016 on the subject line.

Paper Comments

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

All submissions should refer to file number SR-FICC-2023-016. This file
number should be included on the subject line if email is used. To help
the Commission process and review your comments more efficiently,
please use only one method. The Commission will post all comments on
the Commission's internet website (https://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml). Copies of the submission, all subsequent amendments, all
written statements with respect to the proposed rule change that are
filed with the Commission, and all written communications relating to
the proposed rule change between the Commission and any person, other
than those that may be withheld from the public in accordance with the
provisions of 5 U.S.C. 552, will be available for website viewing and
printing in the Commission's Public Reference Room, 100 F Street NE,
Washington, DC 20549 on official business days between the hours of 10
a.m. and 3 p.m. Copies of the filing also will be available for
inspection and copying at the principal office of FICC and on DTCC's
website (https://dtcc.com/legal/sec-rule-filings.aspx). Do not include
personal identifiable

information in submissions; you should submit only information that you
wish to make available publicly. We may redact in part or withhold
entirely from publication submitted material that is obscene or subject
to copyright protection. All submissions should refer to file number
SR-FICC-2023-016 and should be submitted on or before January 2, 2024.

    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets,
pursuant to delegated authority.\13\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \13\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Sherry R. Haywood,
Assistant Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2023-27160 Filed 12-11-23; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 84, Number 70 (Thursday, April 11, 2019)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 14602-14605]
[FR Doc No: 2019-07188]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. FAA-2019-0190; Product Identifier 2018-NM-177-AD; Amendment
39-19607; AD 2019-06-09]
RIN 2120-AA64

Airworthiness Directives; Airbus SAS Airplanes

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Final rule; request for comments.

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

SUMMARY: We are adopting a new airworthiness directive (AD) for certain
Airbus SAS Model A350-941 airplanes. This AD was prompted by reports
that baby bassinet inserts installed on airplane stowages and
partitions were found loose because a self-securing fixation device
(Loctite) had not been applied. This AD requires repetitive tightness
checks of the baby bassinet inserts installed on stowages and
partitions and, depending on findings, accomplishment of applicable
corrective actions, as specified in an European Aviation Safety Agency
(EASA) AD, which is incorporated by reference. We are issuing this AD
to address the unsafe condition on these products.

DATES: This AD becomes effective April 26, 2019.
    The Director of the Federal Register approved the incorporation by
reference of a certain publication listed in this AD as of April 26,
2019.
    We must receive comments on this AD by May 28, 2019.

ADDRESSES: You may send comments, using the procedures found in 14 CFR
11.43 and 11.45, by any of the following methods:

     Federal eRulemaking Portal: Go to http://www.regulations.gov. Follow the instructions for submitting comments.
     Fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>.
     Mail: U.S. Department of Transportation, Docket
Operations, M-30, West Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140, 1200 New
Jersey Avenue SE, Washington, DC 20590.
     Hand Delivery: U.S. Department of Transportation, Docket
Operations, M-30, West Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140, 1200 New
Jersey Avenue SE, Washington, DC 20590, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m.,
Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays.
    For the incorporation by reference (IBR) material described in the
``Related IBR Material Under 1 CFR part 51'' section in SUPPLEMENTARY
INFORMATION, contact EASA, Konrad-Adenauer-Ufer 3, 50668 Cologne,
Germany; telephone +49 221 89990 1000; email [email protected];
internet www.easa.europa.eu. You may find this IBR material on the EASA
website at https://ad.easa.europa.eu. You may view this IBR material at
the FAA, Transport Standards Branch, 2200 South 216th St., Des Moines,
WA. For information on the availability of this material at the FAA,
call<PHONE_NUMBER>. It is also available in the AD docket on the
internet at http://www.regulations.gov.

Examining the AD Docket

    You may examine the AD docket on the internet at http://www.regulations.gov by searching for and locating Docket No. FAA-2019-
0190; or in person at Docket Operations between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m.,
Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays. The AD docket contains
this AD, the regulatory evaluation, any comments received, and other
information. The street address for Docket Operations (telephone 800-
647-5527) is in the ADDRESSES section. Comments will be available in
the AD docket shortly after receipt.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Kathleen Arrigotti, Aerospace
Engineer, International Section, Transport Standards Branch, FAA, 2200
South 216th St., Des Moines, WA 98198; telephone and fax<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Discussion

    The EASA, which is the Technical Agent for the Member States of the
European Union, has issued EASA AD 2018-0271, dated December 12, 2018
(``EASA AD 2018-0271'') (also referred to as the Mandatory Continuing
Airworthiness Information, or ``the MCAI''), to correct an unsafe
condition for certain Airbus SAS Model A350-941 airplanes. The MCAI
states:

    Occurrences were reported that baby bassinet inserts installed
on Airbus A350 aeroplane stowages and on partitions were found
loose. Further investigation identified that a self-securing
fixation device (Loctite) had not been applied.
    This condition, if not detected and corrected, could lead to
detachment of a baby bassinet, possibly resulting in injury to the
infant or other aeroplane occupants.
    To address this potential unsafe condition, Airbus issued the
AOT [Alert Operators Transmission A25P011-17, Revision 1, dated
December 19, 2017] to provide inspection instructions.
    For the reasons described above, this [EASA] AD requires
repetitive tightness checks of the baby bassinet inserts installed
on stowages and partitions and, depending on findings,
accomplishment of applicable corrective action(s).
    This [EASA] AD is considered to be an interim measure and
further [EASA] AD action may follow.

Related IBR Material Under 1 CFR Part 51

    EASA AD 2018-0271 describes procedures for repetitive tightness
checks of baby bassinets inserts installed on stowages and partitions
and corrective actions. This material is reasonably available because
the interested parties have access to it through their normal course of
business or by the means identified in the ADDRESSES section, and it is
publicly available through the EASA website.

FAA's Determination

    This product has been approved by the aviation authority of another
country, and is approved for operation in the United States. Pursuant
to our bilateral agreement with the State of Design Authority, we have
been notified of the unsafe condition described in the MCAI and service
information referenced above. We are issuing this AD because we
evaluated all pertinent information and determined the unsafe condition
exists and is likely to exist or develop on other products of the same
type design.

Requirements of This AD

    This AD requires accomplishing the actions specified in EASA AD
2018-0271 described previously, as incorporated by reference, except
for any differences identified as exceptions in the regulatory text of
this AD.

Explanation of Required Compliance Information

    In the FAA's ongoing efforts to improve the efficiency of the AD
process, the FAA worked with Airbus and EASA to develop a process to
use certain EASA ADs as the primary source of information for
compliance with requirements for corresponding FAA ADs. As a result,
EASA AD 2018-0271 is incorporated by reference in the FAA final rule.
This AD, therefore, requires compliance with the provisions specified
in EASA AD 2018-0271, except for any differences identified as
exceptions in the regulatory text of this AD. Service information
specified in EASA AD 2018-0271 that is required for compliance with
EASA AD 2018-0271 is available on the internet at http://www.regulations.gov by searching for and locating Docket No. FAA-2019-
0190.

FAA's Justification and Determination of the Effective Date

    Since there are currently no domestic operators of this product,
notice and opportunity for public comment before issuing this AD are
unnecessary. In addition, for the reasons stated above, we find that
good cause exists for making this amendment effective in less than 30
days.

Comments Invited

    This AD is a final rule that involves requirements affecting flight
safety, and we did not precede it by notice and opportunity for public
comment. We invite you to send any written relevant data, views, or
arguments about this AD. Send your comments to an address listed under
the ADDRESSES section. Include ``Docket No. FAA-2019-0190; Product
Identifier 2018-NM-177-AD'' at the beginning of your comments. We
specifically invite comments on the overall regulatory, economic,
environmental, and energy aspects of this AD. We will consider all
comments received by the closing date and may amend this AD based on
those comments.
    We will post all comments we receive, without change, to http://www.regulations.gov, including any personal information you provide. We
will also post a report summarizing each substantive verbal contact we
receive about this AD.

Costs of Compliance

    Currently, there are no affected U.S.-registered airplanes. If an
affected airplane is imported and placed on the U.S. Register in the
future, we provide the following cost estimates to comply with this AD:

                  Estimated Costs for Required Actions
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                             Cost per
              Labor cost                   Parts cost        product
------------------------------------------------------------------------
1 work-hour x $85 per hour = $85......              $0              $85
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    We estimate the following costs to do any necessary on-condition
actions that would be required based on the results of any required
actions. We have no way of determining the number of aircraft that
might need this on-condition action:

                 Estimated Costs of On-Condition Actions
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                             Cost per
              Labor cost                   Parts cost        product
------------------------------------------------------------------------
1 work-hour x $85 per hour = $85......              $0              $85
------------------------------------------------------------------------

Authority for This Rulemaking

    Title 49 of the United States Code specifies the FAA's authority to
issue rules on aviation safety. Subtitle I, section 106, describes the
authority of the FAA Administrator. Subtitle VII: Aviation Programs,
describes in more detail the scope of the Agency's authority.
    We are issuing this rulemaking under the authority described in
Subtitle VII, Part A, Subpart III, Section 44701: ``General
requirements.'' Under that section, Congress charges the FAA with
promoting safe flight of civil aircraft in air commerce by prescribing
regulations for practices, methods, and procedures the Administrator
finds necessary for safety in air commerce. This regulation is within
the scope of that authority because it addresses an unsafe condition
that is likely to exist or develop on products identified in this
rulemaking action.
    This AD is issued in accordance with authority delegated by the
Executive Director, Aircraft Certification Service, as authorized by
FAA Order 8000.51C. In accordance with that order, issuance of ADs is
normally a function of the Compliance and Airworthiness Division, but
during this transition period, the Executive Director has delegated the
authority to issue ADs applicable to transport category airplanes and
associated appliances to the Director of the System Oversight Division.

Regulatory Findings

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

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39

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

Adoption of the Amendment

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

PART 39--AIRWORTHINESS DIRECTIVES

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

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

Sec.  39.13  [Amended]

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

2019-06-09 Airbus SAS: Amendment 39-19607; Docket No. FAA-2019-0190;
Product Identifier 2018-NM-177-AD.

(a) Effective Date

    This AD becomes effective April 26, 2019.

(b) Affected ADs

    None.

(c) Applicability

    This AD applies to Airbus SAS Model A350-941 airplanes,
certificated in any category, as identified in European Aviation
Safety Agency (EASA) AD 2018-0271, dated December 12, 2018 (``EASA
AD 2018-0271'').

(d) Subject

    Air Transport Association (ATA) of America Code 25, Equipment/
furnishings.

(e) Reason

    This AD was prompted by reports that baby bassinet inserts
installed on airplane stowages and partitions were found loose
because a self-securing fixation device (Loctite) had not been
applied. We are issuing this AD to address this condition, which, if
not detected and corrected, could lead to detachment of a baby
bassinet, possibly resulting in injury to the infant or other
airplane occupants.

(f) Compliance

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

(g) Requirements

    Except as specified in paragraph (h) of this AD: Comply with all
required actions and compliance times specified in, and in
accordance with, EASA AD 2018-0271.

(h) Exceptions to EASA AD 2018-0271

    (1) For purposes of determining compliance with the requirements
of this AD: Where EASA AD 2018-0271 refers to its effective date,
this AD requires using the effective date of this AD.
    (2) The ``Remarks'' section of EASA AD 2018-0271 does not apply
to this AD.

(i) No Reporting Requirement

    Although the service information referenced in EASA AD 2018-0271
specifies to submit certain information to the manufacturer, this AD
does not include that requirement.

(j) Other FAA AD Provisions

    The following provisions also apply to this AD:
    (1) Alternative Methods of Compliance (AMOCs): The Manager,
International Section, Transport Standards Branch, FAA, has the
authority to approve AMOCs for this AD, if requested using the
procedures found in 14 CFR 39.19. In accordance with 14 CFR 39.19,
send your request to your principal

inspector or local Flight Standards District Office, as appropriate.
If sending information directly to the International Section, send
it to the attention of the person identified in paragraph (k) of
this AD. Information may be emailed to: [email protected]. Before using any approved AMOC, notify your
appropriate principal inspector, or lacking a principal inspector,
the manager of the local flight standards district office/
certificate holding district office.
    (2) Contacting the Manufacturer: For any requirement in this AD
to obtain instructions from a manufacturer, the instructions must be
accomplished using a method approved by the Manager, International
Section, Transport Standards Branch, FAA; or EASA; or Airbus SAS's
EASA Design Organization Approval (DOA). If approved by the DOA, the
approval must include the DOA-authorized signature.
    (3) Required for Compliance (RC): For any service information
referenced in EASA AD 2018-0271 that contains RC procedures and
tests: Except as required by paragraph (j)(2) of this AD, RC
procedures and tests must be done to comply with this AD; any
procedures or tests that are not identified as RC are recommended.
Those procedures and tests that are not identified as RC may be
deviated from using accepted methods in accordance with the
operator's maintenance or inspection program without obtaining
approval of an AMOC, provided the procedures and tests identified as
RC can be done and the airplane can be put back in an airworthy
condition. Any substitutions or changes to procedures or tests
identified as RC require approval of an AMOC.

(k) Related Information

    For more information about this AD, contact Kathleen Arrigotti,
Aerospace Engineer, International Section, Transport Standards
Branch, FAA, 2200 South 216th St., Des Moines, WA 98198; telephone
and fax<PHONE_NUMBER>.

(l) Material Incorporated by Reference

    (1) The Director of the Federal Register approved the
incorporation by reference (IBR) of the service information listed
in this paragraph under 5 U.S.C. 552(a) and 1 CFR part 51.
    (2) You must use this service information as applicable to do
the actions required by this AD, unless this AD specifies otherwise.
    (i) European Aviation Safety Agency (EASA) AD 2018-0271, dated
December 12, 2018.
    (ii) [Reserved]
    (3) For EASA AD 2018-0271, contact EASA, Konrad-Adenauer-Ufer 3,
50668 Cologne, Germany; telephone +49 221 89990 6017; email
[email protected]; Internet www.easa.europa.eu. You may find this
EASA AD on the EASA website at https://ad.easa.europa.eu.
    (4) You may view this EASA AD at the FAA, Transport Standards
Branch, 2200 South 216th St., Des Moines, WA. For information on the
availability of this material at the FAA, call<PHONE_NUMBER>. EASA AD
2018-0271 may be found in the AD docket on the internet at http://www.regulations.gov by searching for and locating Docket No. FAA-
2019-0190.
    (5) You may view this service information that is incorporated
by reference at the National Archives and Records Administration
(NARA). For information on the availability of this material at
NARA, call<PHONE_NUMBER>, or go to: http://www.archives.gov/federal-register/cfr/ibr-locations.html.

    Issued in Des Moines, Washington, on March 26, 2019.
Michael Kaszycki,
Acting Director, System Oversight Division, Aircraft Certification
Service.
[FR Doc. 2019-07188 Filed 4-10-19; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


[Federal Register Volume 79, Number 24 (Wednesday, February 5, 2014)]
[Notices]
[Page 6895]
[FR Doc No: 2014-02372]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Docket No. CP14-50-000]

WBI Energy Transmission, Inc.; Notice of Request Under Blanket
Authorization

    Take notice that on January 22, 2014, WBI Energy Transmission, Inc.
(WBI Energy), P.O. Box 5601, Bismarck, North Dakota 58506-5601, filed
in Docket No. CP14-50-000, a prior notice request pursuant to sections
157.205 and 157.210 of the Commission's Regulations under the Natural
Gas Act (NGA). WBI Energy seeks authorization to construct and operate
approximately 15 miles of 16-inch diameter pipeline, one valve setting
and two new meter stations in McKenzie County, North Dakota (Garden
Creek II Pipeline). The facilities will allow WBI Energy to provide
incremental firm transportation service of 75,000 dekatherms/day for
ONEOK Rockies Midstream, L.L.C. from the tailgate of its Garden Creek
II Plant to an interconnect with Northern Border Pipeline Company. WBI
Energy proposes to perform these activities under its blanket
certificate issued in Docket No. CP82-487-000, all as more fully set
forth in the application which is on file with the Commission and open
to public inspection.
    The filing may also be viewed on the web at http://www.ferc.gov
using the ``eLibrary'' link. Enter the docket number excluding the last
three digits in the docket number field to access the document. For
assistance, please contact FERC Online Support at
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or toll free at<PHONE_NUMBER>, or TTY,
contact<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    Any questions concerning this application may be directed to Keith
A. Tiggelaar, Director of Regulatory Affairs, WBI Energy Transmission,
Inc., 1250 West Century Avenue, Bismarck, North Dakota 58503, or by
calling<PHONE_NUMBER> or<EMAIL_ADDRESS>    Any person or the Commission's staff may, within 60 days after
issuance of the instant notice by the Commission, file pursuant to Rule
214 of the Commission's Procedural Rules (18 CFR 385.214) a motion to
intervene or notice of intervention and pursuant to Section 157.205 of
the regulations under the NGA (18 CFR 157.205), a protest to the
request. If no protest is filed within the time allowed therefore, the
proposed activity shall be deemed to be authorized effective the day
after the time allowed for filing a protest. If a protest is filed and
not withdrawn within 30 days after the allowed time for filing a
protest, the instant request shall be treated as an application for
authorization pursuant to Section 7 of the NGA.
    Pursuant to Section 157.9 of the Commission's rules, 18 CFR 157.9,
within 90 days of this Notice the Commission staff will either:
complete its environmental assessment (EA) and place it into the
Commission's public record (eLibrary) for this proceeding, or issue a
Notice of Schedule for Environmental Review. If a Notice of Schedule
for Environmental Review is issued, it will indicate, among other
milestones, the anticipated date for the Commission staff's issuance of
the final environmental impact statement (FEIS) or EA for this
proposal. The filing of the EA in the Commission's public record for
this proceeding or the issuance of a Notice of Schedule for
Environmental Review will serve to notify federal and state agencies of
the timing for the completion of all necessary reviews, and the
subsequent need to complete all federal authorizations within 90 days
of the date of issuance of the Commission staff's FEIS or EA.
    Persons who wish to comment only on the environmental review of
this project should submit an original and two copies of their comments
to the Secretary of the Commission. Environmental commenter's will be
placed on the Commission's environmental mailing list, will receive
copies of the environmental documents, and will be notified of meetings
associated with the Commission's environmental review process.
Environmental commenter's will not be required to serve copies of filed
documents on all other parties. However, the non-party commentary, will
not receive copies of all documents filed by other parties or issued by
the Commission (except for the mailing of environmental documents
issued by the Commission) and will not have the right to seek court
review of the Commission's final order.
    The Commission strongly encourages electronic filings of comments,
protests and interventions in lieu of paper using the ``eFiling'' link
at http://www.ferc.gov. Persons unable to file electronically should
submit an original and 5 copies of the protest or intervention to the
Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street NE., Washington,
DC 20426.

    Dated: January 28, 2014.
Kimberly D. Bose,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2014-02372 Filed 2-4-14; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 77, Number 65 (Wednesday, April 4, 2012)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Page 20319]
[FR Doc No: 2012-8121]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 16

[Docket No. FAA-2012-0176]
RIN 2120-AJ97

Rules of Practice for Federally-Assisted Airport Enforcement
Proceedings (Retrospective Regulatory Review)

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM); correction.

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

SUMMARY: The FAA is correcting a notice of proposed rulemaking that
published in the Federal Register on March 5, 2012 (77 FR 13027). In
that document, the FAA proposed to amend its regulations to update,
simplify, and streamline rules of practice and procedure for filing and
adjudicating complaints against federally-assisted airports. This
correction clarifies that the notice number for that proposed
rulemaking is 12-02.

DATES: The comment period will close on May 4, 2012.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Melissa Loughlin, Office of
Rulemaking, ARM-204, Federal Aviation Administration, 800 Independence
Ave. SW., Washington, DC 20591; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>; facsimile
(202) 267-5075; email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Background

    On March 5, 2012, the FAA published a notice of proposed rulemaking
(NPRM) entitled, ``Rules of Practice for Federally-Assisted Airport
Enforcement Proceedings (Retrospective Regulatory Review)'' (77 FR
13027).
    In that NPRM, the FAA proposed to update, simplify, and streamline
rules of practice and procedure for filing and adjudicating complaints
against federally-assisted airports. The proposed requirements would
improve efficiency by enabling parties to file submissions with the FAA
electronically, and by incorporating modern business practices into how
the FAA handles complaints. If adopted, the amendment would reflect
changes in applicable laws and regulations, and apply lessons learned
since the existing rules were implemented in 1996.

Correction

    In FR Doc. 2012-4993, beginning on page 13027 in the Federal
Register of March 5, 2012, make the following correction:
    On page 13027, in the second column and fourth line under the
NPRM's publication, correct ``Notice No. 12-01'' to read as ``Notice
No. 12-02''.

    Issued in Washington, DC, on March 26, 2012.
Pamela Hamilton-Powell,
Director, Office of Rulemaking.
[FR Doc. 2012-8121 Filed 4-3-12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


[Federal Register Volume 76, Number 199 (Friday, October 14, 2011)]
[Notices]
[Page 63938]
[FR Doc No: 2011-26624]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Federal Emergency Management Agency

[Internal Agency Docket No. FEMA-4029-DR; Docket ID FEMA-2011-0001]

Texas; Amendment No. 4 to Notice of a Major Disaster Declaration

AGENCY: Federal Emergency Management Agency, DHS.

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: This notice amends the notice of a major disaster declaration
for the State of Texas (FEMA-4029-DR), dated September 9, 2011, and
related determinations.

DATES: Effective Date: September 21, 2011.

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 a major disaster declaration
for the State of Texas is hereby amended to include the Hazard
Mitigation Grant Program and the Public Assistance program for the
following areas among those areas determined to have been adversely
affected by the event declared a major disaster by the President in his
declaration of September 9, 2011.

    Bastrop County for Public Assistance, including direct Federal
assistance (already designated for Individual Assistance).
    All counties in the State of Texas are eligible to apply for
assistance under the Hazard Mitigation Grant 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. 2011-26624 Filed 10-13-11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 9111-23-P


[Federal Register: December 28, 2006 (Volume 71, Number 249)]
[Notices]
[Page 78170]
[DOCID:fr28de06-41]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Docket No. RP96-200-157]

CenterPoint Energy Gas Transmission Company; Notice of Negotiated
Rate Filing

December 19, 2006.
    Take notice that on December 15, 2006, CenterPoint Energy Gas
Transmission Company (CEGT) tendered for filing and approval a
negotiated rate agreement between CEGT and CenterPoint Energy Services,
Inc. CEGT states that it has entered into an agreement to provide firm
transportation service to this shipper under Rate Schedule FT and
requests the Commission accept and approve the transaction under which
transportation service will commence upon the ``in-service'' date
following completion of certain Line CP facilities.
    Any person desiring to intervene or to protest this filing must
file in accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of the Commission's Rules of
Practice and Procedure (18 CFR 385.211 and 385.214). Protests will be
considered by the Commission in determining the appropriate action to
be taken, but will not serve to make protestants parties to the
proceeding. Any person wishing to become a party must file a notice of
intervention or motion to intervene, as appropriate. Such notices,
motions, or protests must be filed in accordance with the provisions of
Sec.  154.210 of the Commission's regulations (18 CFR 154.210). Anyone
filing an intervention or protest must serve a copy of that document on
the Applicant. Anyone filing an intervention or protest on or before
the intervention or protest date need not serve motions to intervene or
protests on persons other than the Applicant.
    The Commission encourages electronic submission of protests and
interventions in lieu of paper using the ``eFiling'' link at http://www.ferc.gov.
 Persons unable to file electronically should submit an

original and 14 copies of the protest or intervention to the Federal
Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street, NE., Washington, DC
20426.
    This filing is accessible on-line at http://www.ferc.gov, using the

``eLibrary'' link and is available for review in the Commission's
Public Reference Room in Washington, DC. There is an ``eSubscription''
link on the Web site that enables subscribers to receive e-mail
notification when a document is added to a subscribed docket(s). For
assistance with any FERC Online service, please e-mail
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or call<PHONE_NUMBER> (toll free). For

TTY, call<PHONE_NUMBER>.

Magalie R. Salas,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. E6-22221 Filed 12-27-06; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 76, Number 232 (Friday, December 2, 2011)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Page 75446]
[FR Doc No: 2011-30884]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 71

[Docket No. FAA-2011-0894; Airspace Docket No. 11-AWP-14]

Amendment of Class E Airspace; Mercury, NV

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: This action amends Class E airspace at Mercury, Desert Rock
Airport, Mercury, NV. Decommissioning of the Mercury Non-Directional
Beacon (NDB) at Mercury, Desert Rock Airport has made this action
necessary for the safety and management of Instrument Flight Rules
(IFR) operations at the airport. This action also makes a minor
adjustment to the geographic coordinates in the regulatory text.

DATES: Effective date, 0901 UTC, February 9, 2012. The Director of the
Federal Register approves this incorporation by reference action under
1 CFR part 51, subject to the annual revision of FAA Order 7400.9 and
publication of conforming amendments.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Eldon Taylor, Federal Aviation
Administration, Operations Support Group, Western Service Center, 1601
Lind Avenue SW., Renton, WA 98057; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

History

    On September 12, 2011, the FAA published in the Federal Register a
notice of proposed rulemaking to amend controlled airspace at Mercury,
NV (76 FR 56127). Interested parties were invited to participate in
this rulemaking effort by submitting written comments on the proposal
to the FAA. No comments were received. Subsequent to publication, the
FAA's Aeronautical Products office made further adjustments to the
geographic coordinates listed in the regulatory text, and is included
in this rulemaking.
    Class E airspace designations are published in paragraph 6005, of
FAA Order 7400.9V dated August 9, 2011, and effective September 15,
2011, which is incorporated by reference in 14 CFR 71.1. The Class E
airspace designations listed in this document will be published
subsequently in that Order.

The Rule

    This action amends Title 14 Code of Federal Regulations (14 CFR)
part 71 by amending Class E airspace extending upward from 700 feet
above the surface, at Mercury, Desert Rock Airport, to accommodate IFR
aircraft approach procedures. The Mercury NDB has been decommissioned
the NDB approach cancelled. Also, the second boundary coordinate listed
in the regulatory text is adjusted to be in concert with the FAA's
aeronautical database. This action is necessary for the safety and
management of IFR operations. With the exception of editorial changes
and the changes noted above, this rule is the same as that proposed in
the NPRM.
    The FAA has determined this regulation only involves an established
body of technical regulations for which frequent and routine amendments
are necessary to keep them operationally current. Therefore, this
regulation: (1) Is not a ``significant regulatory action'' under
Executive Order 12866; (2) is not a ``significant rule'' under DOT
Regulatory Policies and Procedures (44 FR 11034; February 26, 1979);
and (3) does not warrant preparation of a regulatory evaluation as the
anticipated impact is so minimal. Since this is a routine matter that
will only affect air traffic procedures and air navigation, it is
certified this rule, when promulgated, will not have a significant
economic impact on a substantial number of small entities under the
criteria of the Regulatory Flexibility Act. The FAA's authority to
issue rules regarding aviation safety is found in Title 49 of the U.S.
Code. Subtitle 1, Section 106 discusses the authority of the FAA
Administrator. Subtitle VII, Aviation Programs, describes in more
detail the scope of the agency's authority. This rulemaking is
promulgated under the authority described in subtitle VII, part A,
subpart I, section 40103. Under that section, the FAA is charged with
prescribing regulations to assign the use of airspace necessary to
ensure the safety of aircraft and the efficient use of airspace. This
regulation is within the scope of that authority as it amends
controlled airspace at Mercury, Desert Rock Airport, Mercury, NV.

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 71

    Airspace, Incorporation by reference, Navigation (air).

Adoption of the Amendment

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

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

0
1. The authority citation for 14 CFR part 71 continues to read as
follows:

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

Sec.  71.1  [Amended]

0
2. The incorporation by reference in 14 CFR part 71.1 of the Federal
Aviation Administration Order 7400.9V, Airspace Designations and
Reporting Points, dated August 9, 2011, and effective September 15,
2011 is amended as follows:

Paragraph 6005 Class E airspace areas extending upward from 700
feet or more above the surface of the earth.

* * * * *

AWP NV E5 Mercury, NV [Amended]

Mercury, Desert Rock Airport, NV
    (Lat. 36[deg]37'10'' N., long. 116[deg]01'58'' W.)

    That airspace extending upward from 700 feet above the surface
within a 4.3-mile radius of the Mercury, Desert Rock Airport. That
airspace extending upward from 1,200 feet above the surface within
the area bounded by a line beginning at lat. 36[deg]41'00'' N.,
long. 116[deg]26'33'' W.; to lat. 36[deg]41'00'' N., long.
115[deg]56'03'' W.; to lat. 36[deg]16'00'' N., long. 115[deg]56'03''
W.; to lat. 36[deg]16'00'' N., long. 116[deg]08'03'' W.; to lat.
36[deg]36'00'' N., long. 116[deg]26'33'' W.; thence to the point of
beginning, excluding the portion within Restricted Area R-4808N.

    Issued in Seattle, Washington, on November 21, 2011.
Robert Henry,
Acting Manager, Operations Support Group, Western Service Center.
[FR Doc. 2011-30884 Filed 12-1-11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-M