[Federal Register Volume 77, Number 217 (Thursday, November 8, 2012)]
[Notices]
[Pages 67047-67052]
[FR Doc No: 2012-27266]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-68134; File No. SR-MSRB-2012-08]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; Municipal Securities Rulemaking
Board; Notice of Filing of Proposed Rule Change Consisting of
Amendments to Streamline New Issue Information Submission Requirements
Under MSRB Rules G-32 and G-34

November 1, 2012.
    Pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934
(the ``Exchange Act'') \1\ and Rule 19b-4 thereunder,\2\ notice is
hereby given that on October 23, 2012, the Municipal Securities
Rulemaking Board (``MSRB'') 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 MSRB.
The Commission is publishing this notice to solicit comments on the
proposed rule change from interested persons.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

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

    The MSRB is filing with the Commission a proposed rule change
consisting of amendments to Rules G-8, on books and records, G-14 RTRS
Procedures, G-32, on disclosures in connection with primary offerings,
G-34, on CUSIP numbers, new issue, and market information requirements,
and the Electronic Municipal Market Access

(EMMA[supreg]) \3\ system facility (the ``proposed rule change''). The
MSRB requested an effective date for the proposed amendments no later
than May 6, 2013, or such earlier date to be announced by the MSRB in a
notice published on the MSRB Web site with at least a thirty day
advance notification prior to the effective date.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ EMMA is a registered trademark of the MSRB.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The text of the proposed rule change is available on the MSRB's Web
site at www.msrb.org/Rules-and-Interpretations/SEC-Filings/2012-Filings.aspx, at the MSRB's principal office, and at the Commission's
Public Reference Room.

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

    In its filing with the Commission, the MSRB 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 MSRB has prepared summaries, set forth in Sections
A, B, and C below, of the most significant aspects of such statements.

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

1. Purpose
    The proposed rule change amends Rules G-32 and G-34 to allow
underwriters to satisfy certain of their submission requirements under
Rule G-32 in connection with new issues of municipal securities by
their submission of data, pursuant to Rule G-34, to the New Issue
Information Dissemination Service (``NIIDS'') operated by the
Depository Trust and Clearing Corporation (``DTCC''). In addition, the
proposed rule change revises deadlines for the submission of data to
NIIDS, removes certain exceptions from the NIIDS submission
requirements under Rule G-34 for certain short term instruments,
modifies the EMMA system to include certain elements of the NIIDS data
on the EMMA Web site, and eliminates language describing auction rate
securities as having a short ``effective maturity,'' as further
described below under ``Summary of Proposed Rule Change'' and under
``Discussion of Comments.''
Background
    Rule G-32 requires underwriters to submit selected information
about most new issues of municipal securities to the MSRB by completing
electronic Form G-32 through EMMA's Primary Market Disclosure Service.
This information includes, among other items, the issuer name and issue
description for the new issue and, for each maturity of the new issue,
the CUSIP numbers, principal amounts and initial offering prices or
yields. Separately, Rule G-34 requires underwriters for most new issues
to submit comprehensive information to NIIDS. Information required to
be submitted to NIIDS generally includes all of the information
required for dealers to produce a ``when, as and if issued'' \4\
customer trade confirmation and also includes many of the same items of
information included in Form G-32.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ The term, ``when, as and if issued'' is used to describe the
time period in the life of a new issue of municipal securities from
the original date of the sale by the issuer to the delivery of the
securities to, and payment by, the underwriter. Sales made during
the ``when, as and if issued'' period (also called the ``when-
issued' period'') are subject to issuance of the securities.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    New Issue EMMA Submission Requirements Under Rule G-32. EMMA is an
information facility of the MSRB for receiving electronic submissions
of official statements, initial offering prices and other information
about new issues as well as on-going municipal securities disclosure
and other key documents and related information. EMMA makes such
documents and information, together with trade price and interest rate
information, available to the public at no charge on an Internet Web
site or by paid subscription. The submission of data under Rule G-32 to
EMMA's Primary Market Disclosure Service in connection with new issues
is required to be commenced by no later than the end of the day of
first execution of transactions in the offered municipal securities.\5\
The submission of documents relating to issues of municipal securities,
including official statements or preliminary official statements (if
applicable), and of certain additional items of information, is subject
to other submission deadlines as outlined in Rule G-32.\6\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ Under Rule G-32(b)(vi)(C)(1) and Section 2.6.2 of the EMMA
Dataport Manual (Information by the Date of First Execution of
Transactions), underwriters are required to initiate the Form G-32
submission process by no later than the date of first execution of
transactions in securities sold in the offering by submitting
certain issue-specific information about the new issue. ``Date of
first execution'' is defined in Rule G-32(d)(xi) as: ``the date on
which the underwriter executives its first transactions with a
customer or another broker, dealer or municipal securities dealer in
any security offered in a primary offering; provided that, for
offerings subject to Rule G-34(a)(ii)(C), `date of first execution'
shall mean the date corresponding to the Time of First Execution as
defined in Rule G-34(a)(ii)(C)(1)(b); further provided that, solely
for purposes of this rule, the date of first execution shall be
deemed to occur by no later than the closing date.''
    \6\ Securities 2.6.4 and 2.6.5 of the EMMA Dataport Manual set
out the basic timeframes for submitting documents and information to
EMMA in connection with a new issue.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    New Issue NIIDS Submission Requirements Under Rule G-34. NIIDS is a
centralized system for collecting from underwriters and disseminating
to market participants standardized electronic information describing
new issue securities. It was developed to ensure that all market
participants have access to information necessary for processing
transactions once the underwriter executes its first transactions in
the new issue. The information submitted by underwriters to NIIDS,
required to be completed by no later than two hours after Time of
Formal Award \7\ for most new issues of municipal securities,\8\ is
disseminated in real time to DTCC participants and other subscribers,
such as information vendors. Submissions to NIIDS also provide a
mechanism for underwriters to communicate the Time of Formal Award and
Time of First Execution \9\ to market participants that may trade in
the new issue to promote orderly trade execution and processing on the
first day of trading in a new issue. Consistent communication of these
events ensures that all market participants have sufficient data to
process and time to prepare pending trades in new issues for execution,
real-time trade reporting \10\

and sending of when-issued customer confirmations.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ ``Time of Formal Award'' is defined in Rule G-
34(a)(ii)(C)(1)(a) as: ``for competitive issues, the later of the
time the issuer announces the award or the time the issuer notifies
the underwriter of the award, and, for negotiated issues, the later
of the time the contract to purchase the securities from the issuer
is executed or the time the issuer notifies the underwriter of its
execution. If the underwriter and issuer have agreed in advance on a
Time of Formal Award, that time may be submitted to the new issue
information dissemination system in advance of the actual Time of
Formal Award.''
    \8\ Rule G-34(a)(ii)(C) currently provides exceptions to the
submission requirements for certain short-term instruments,
including variable rate instruments, auction rate products and
commercial paper. In addition, this requirement does not apply to
new issues that do not meet the eligibility criteria for CUSIP
number assignments or that consist of municipal fund securities
(such as interests in 529 college savings plans) under the general
exemption provided in Rule G-34(d).
    \9\ ``Time of First Execution'' is defined in Rule G-
34(a)(ii)(C)(1)(b) as: ``the time the underwriter plans to execute
its first transaction [sic] in the new issue. The underwriter shall
designate a Time of First Execution that is no less than two hours
after all information required by paragraph (a)(ii)(C) has been
transmitted to the new issue information dissemination system.''
    \10\ ``Real-time trade reporting'' refers to the reporting of
certain information about each purchase and sale transaction
effected in municipal securities to the MSRB's Real-Time Transaction
Reporting System (``RTRS''), as prescribed by Rule G-14, Rule G-14
RTRS Procedures and the RTRS Users Manual.'
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Planned Integration of EMMA and NIIDS New Issue Submission
Requirements. The MSRB launched EMMA as a pilot on March 31, 2008.\11\
On September 30, 2008, amendments to Rule G-34 became effective that
instituted the requirement for underwriters to provide new issue
information to NIIDS.\12\ During the early stages of planning for EMMA,
the MSRB had planned on integrating into EMMA's Primary Market
Disclosure Service the NIIDS data submitted by underwriters under Rule
G-34 for the purpose of also fulfilling the data submission
requirements under Rule G-32 and making such information available to
the public through the EMMA Web site. Due to divergent development
schedules and limited opportunities to ensure effective
interoperability between the two systems, the Primary Market Disclosure
Service was launched on June 1, 2009 requiring a separate submission of
new issue data to EMMA through Form G-32, although at that time the
MSRB continued to plan for future integration of the submission
processes under Rules G-32 and G-34.\13\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \11\ See Release No. 34-57577 (March 28, 2008), 73 FR 18022
(April 2, 2008) (File No. SR-MSRB-2007-06) (November 15, 2007).
    \12\ See Release No. 34-57750 (May 7 [sic], 2008), 73 FR 25815
(May 7, 2008) (File No. SR-MSRB-2007-08) (November 27, 2007).
    \13\ See MSRB Notice 2009-07 (March 23, 2009), in which the MSRB
noted that it would advise market participants of any future
development of a functionality providing for the use of NIIDS data
to fulfill Rule G-32 information submission requirements.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The MSRB believes there would be significant benefits in
integrating the NIIDS data into the EMMA submission process. While the
information required to be submitted under Rule G-32 is less extensive
than the information required for a NIIDS submission pursuant to Rule
G-34, re-keying information under both Rules G-32 and G-34 is time
consuming and this duplication of effort may increase the possibility
of error. In addition to reducing the submission burden on
underwriters, elimination of this duplicative data entry would result
in improved data quality on EMMA and throughout the marketplace. It
would allow both underwriters and enforcement agencies to concentrate
their compliance activities on ensuring exacting data submissions
through this single pipeline through which data would flow uniformly to
EMMA as well as to other market data vendors receiving the NIIDS
subscription feed.
    The integration of the NIIDS data into the EMMA submission process
also would accelerate the availability of Form G-32 data on EMMA by
displaying such information in real time upon receipt from NIIDS by no
later than two hours after the Time of Formal Award as provided under
Rule G-34, rather than by the close of business on the date of first
execution as currently provided under Rule G-32. In particular, use of
the NIIDS data to populate EMMA will allow for more rapid intra-day,
rather than end of day, dissemination of the maturity schedule,
interest rates and initial offering prices \14\ for new issues within
two hours after the Time of Formal Award. Furthermore, additional NIIDS
data elements not currently available through EMMA, such as the Time of
Formal Award and Time of First Execution as announced by the
underwriter, would be displayed on EMMA. To enhance transparency for a
broader scope of new issues of municipal securities, the MSRB is also
proposing to eliminate exceptions under Rule G-34 for submitting data
for certain new issues to NIIDS.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \14\ Initial offering prices or yields currently must be, and
would continue to be, disclosed for all maturities, including those
otherwise designated as ``not reoffered,'' through both EMMA and
NIIDS. See Release No. 34-67908 (September 21, 2012), 77 FR 59427
(September 27, 2012) (File No. SR-MSRB-2012-06) (June 28, 2012).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Summary of Proposed Rule Change
    The proposed rule change revises Rule G-32 to provide that an
underwriter's obligations to submit data about a new issue under that
rule would be fulfilled through submission of such data through NIIDS
as required pursuant to Rule G-34. Data for certain types of offerings
not required to use NIIDS (as described below) would continue to be
subject to existing Rule G-32 data submission requirements. In
addition, certain data elements that are not included in NIIDS, such as
underwriting spread (if not included in the official statement), the
existence of a continuing disclosure undertaking and the timing for
issuer submission of annual financial information, would be required to
be submitted to EMMA pursuant to existing timeframes set forth in Rule
G-32 and the EMMA Dataport Manual.
    Rule G-34 currently requires that information about most new issues
of municipal securities be submitted to NIIDS by no later than two
hours following the Time of Formal Award of a new issue. Rule G-34
currently exempts certain types of short-term instruments (including
variable rate instruments, auction rate products, and commercial
paper), as well as municipal fund securities (such as interests in 529
college savings plans) and issues ineligible for CUSIP number
assignment. The proposed rule change revises Rule G-34 to remove the
exception for underwriters to submit to NIIDS information about short-
term instruments such as variable rate instruments, auction rate
products and notes maturing in less than nine months, but would retain
this exception for commercial paper issues, municipal fund securities
and issues ineligible for CUSIP number assignment. The proposed rule
change adds a narrow exception from the requirement to provide a
minimum of two hours advance notice of the planned Time of First
Execution for offerings of variable rate instruments with a planned
settlement cycle of one day or less.
    The proposed rule change revises the EMMA facility by adding to the
EMMA display and to the EMMA primary market subscription the Time of
First Execution and Time of Formal Award.
    In addition, the proposed rule change includes amendments to Rule
G-8 to conform recordkeeping requirements to amended Rules G-32 and G-
34, and amendments to the Rule G-14 RTRS Procedures and Rules G-32 and
G-34 to make certain non-substantive technical changes. The technical
amendments to Rule G-32 correct a cross-reference to Exchange Act Rule
15c2-12, correct a mis-numbered paragraph defining the term ``obligated
person'' and eliminate section (e), which operated as a transitional
provision in June 2009 from the former pre-EMMA official statement
submission process under former Rule G-36 to the EMMA-based submission
process under current Rule G-32. The technical amendments to Rule G-34
improve the organization of certain provisions of the rule.
    Finally, the technical amendments to section (a)(ii)(B) of the Rule
G-14 RTRS Procedures under Rule G-14 revise language in such RTRS
Procedures that is parallel to the language regarding short-term
instruments that is being removed from Rule G-34 by the amendments
described above. Such amendments would more clearly describe the types
of securities to which the end-of-day RTRS reporting exception for
short-term instruments applies and also eliminate language describing
auction rate securities as having a short ``effective maturity.'' The
MSRB believes that auction rate securities should not be characterized
as having an effective short-term maturity

and has previously noted that, unlike other short-term municipal
securities with long-term maturity dates and short-term interest rate
reset periods (such as variable rate demand obligations), auction rate
securities generally do not have ``put'' features or liquidity
facilities that allow holders to tender their securities back to an
issuer-appointed representative on a periodic basis.\15\ Thus, the MSRB
is eliminating the use of the term ``effective maturity'' in the
context of auction rate securities in order to avoid any potential
implication that holders of auction rate securities have assurances of
liquidity on a short-term basis.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \15\ See MSRB Notice 2008-09 (February 19, 2008), in which the
MSRB published an alert regarding investor protection concerns
arising in the market for auction rate securities after widespread
auction failures began to occur at the beginning of 2008. The MSRB
also published educational information regarding this key difference
in the EMMA Education Center upon launch of the EMMA pilot on March
31, 2008, which states: ``An important distinction between auction
rate securities and variable rate demand obligations is that
investors in auction rate securities do not have a `put' right.
Thus, there is no assurance that the investor will be able to sell
its holdings during an auction. Instead, investors are dependent on
the success of the auction process. Among many other factors, the
pool of purchase bids that may be entered can vary widely from
auction to auction, and bids entered by broker-dealers, banks and
other market professionals that have the effect of supporting market
liquidity, if permitted, generally are not required under the legal
documents and therefore investors cannot be assured that such bids
will be entered in any particular auction. See http://emma.msrb.org/EducationCenter/WhatAreBonds.aspx. The MSRB thereafter launched its
Short-term Obligation Rate Transparency (``SHORT'') system on
January 30, 2009 pursuant to which certain key information regarding
periodic auctions for auction rate securities is made available to
the public through EMMA.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Effective Date of Proposed Rule Change
    The MSRB requested an effective date for the proposed amendments no
later than May 6, 2013, or such earlier date to be announced by the
MSRB in a notice published on the MSRB Web site with at least a thirty
day advance notification prior to the effective date.
2. Statutory Basis
    The MSRB believes that the proposed rule change is consistent with
Section 15B(b)(2)(C) of the Exchange Act, which provides that the
MSRB's rules shall:

Be designed to prevent fraudulent and manipulative acts and
practices, to promote just and equitable principles of trade, to
foster cooperation and coordination with persons engaged in
regulating, clearing, settling, processing information with respect
to, and facilitating transactions in municipal securities and
municipal financial products, to remove impediments to and perfect
the mechanism of a free and open market in municipal securities and
municipal financial products, and, in general, to protect investors,
municipal entities, obligated persons, and the public interest.

    The proposed rule change is consistent with Section 15B(b)(2)(C) of
the Exchange Act. There will be significant benefits in integrating the
NIIDS data into the EMMA submission process that will assist in
removing impediments to and perfecting the mechanism of a free and open
market, and that will also improve protections to all market
participants. The current requirement to re-key significant amounts of
information under both Rules G-32 and G-34 is time consuming and this
duplication of effort may increase the possibility of error. In
addition to reducing the submission burden on underwriters, elimination
of this duplicative data entry will result in improved data quality on
EMMA and throughout the marketplace. It will allow both underwriters
and enforcement agencies to concentrate their compliance activities on
ensuring exacting data submissions through this single pipeline through
which data would flow uniformly to EMMA as well as to other market data
vendors receiving the NIIDS subscription feed.
    The integration of the NIIDS data into the EMMA submission process
will also accelerate the availability of Form G-32 data on EMMA by
displaying such information in real time upon receipt from NIIDS, which
will occur by no later than two hours after the Time of Formal Award as
provided under Rule G-34, rather than by the close of business on the
date of first execution as currently provided under Rule G-32.
Furthermore, additional NIIDS data elements not currently available
through EMMA, such as the Time of Formal Award and Time of First
Execution as announced by the underwriter, will be displayed on EMMA.
    Finally, the proposed rule change eliminates exceptions under Rule
G-34 for submitting data for certain new issues to NIIDS. Thus,
enhanced real-time access to primary market data would become available
to the marketplace, both through NIIDS data disseminated by DTCC to
information vendors and EMMA data disseminated by the MSRB to market
participants and the general public, for a broader scope of new issues
of municipal securities.

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

    The MSRB does not believe that the proposed rule change would
impose any burden on competition not necessary or appropriate in
furtherance of the purposes of the Exchange Act, since it would apply
equally to all dealers that serve as underwriters of new issues of
municipal securities. The enhanced and more timely information flow
resulting from the proposed rule change would make such information
available to all persons on an equal and non-discriminatory basis.
    The marketplace and the general public would realize the
substantial benefits of more prompt, more complete and more accurate
information about new issue municipal securities, resulting in greater
marketplace efficiency that enhances liquidity and the quality of
pricing. In addition, the proposed rule change would reduce the burden
on dealers that serve as underwriters for new issues of municipal
securities. Such dealers would benefit from the reduced burden of
significantly diminished levels of duplicative data entry into two
separate information systems--including the burden of entering such
data and of undertaking appropriate quality control--with only a
minimal, one-time burden of reviewing and, if necessary, making minor
modifications to their internal policies and procedures with respect to
data submissions under MSRB rules. In addition to the reduced burden to
dealers resulting from the more efficient use of dealer resources to
ensure the accuracy of data submissions through this single pipeline,
the resultant improvement in data quality upon initial submission would
reduce the burden of making corrections at a later time when errors are
detected by market participants and would reduce the incidence of
potential problems with secondary market activity that can arise from
inaccuracies in the indicative data used by market participants to
price and process transactions.
    Some underwriters of new issues bearing short-term interest rates
previously exempted from the NIIDS submission requirements under Rule
G-34 would be required to modify their new issue information
dissemination processes to use NIIDS for such dissemination, rather
than the currently permissible use of other means of announcing
relevant new issue information promptly in a manner reasonably designed
to reach market participants that may trade the new issue. Such
underwriters, however, have not previously been exempted from the EMMA
submission requirements under Rule G-32, and the proposed rule change
would provide for much of the data currently required to be provided
through EMMA under Rule G-32 to instead be provided through NIIDS under
Rule G-34. Thus, such underwriters would realize a reduced burden of
compliance with Rule G-32

while facing a potential incremental change in the burden under Rule G-
34. Whether such incremental change in burden under Rule G-34 is an
increase or decrease would depend on whether, and to what extent, using
NIIDS to disseminate new issue information is more or less burdensome
than the alternative means currently used by such underwriters to
comply with Rule G-34 and the procedures and processes they currently
maintained for using two or more separate data submission processes for
new issues rather than a single process through NIIDS. If and to the
extent that such balance results in a net burden rather than a net
benefit, the bulk of such net burden likely would occur as up-front
costs of modifying procedures and likely would be minimal on an ongoing
basis.
    On balance, the MSRB believes that the benefits of the proposed
rule change greatly exceed any potential increased burden resulting
therefrom.

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

    On April 10, 2012, the MSRB requested comment on a proposal to
streamline new issue information submission requirements under Rules G-
32 and G-34 by allowing underwriters to satisfy certain of their
submission requirements under Rule G-32 by their submission of data to
NIIDS pursuant to Rule G-34.\16\ Specifically, the MSRB sought comment
on whether: (i) The timeframe under Rule G-32 for submission of data
for issues not subject to the NIIDS requirement or of data elements not
included in NIIDS should be accelerated to coincide with the Time of
First Execution, which typically would be within two-to-four hours
after the Time of Formal Award; \17\ (ii) removing the exception in
NIIDS for certain short-term instruments would present compliance
challenges; (iii) additional items of information available through
NIIDS that are not currently available through EMMA should be added to
the EMMA display; (iv) to extend the business day for purposes of
determining timeframes for compliance with Rule G-34 deadlines; \18\ or
(v) to shorten the time after the formal award occurs for first
executions of transactions and other related timeframes under Rule G-
34. The MSRB received comment letters from the Securities Industry and
Financial Markets Association (``SIFMA'') and TD Securities (USA) LLC
(``TD'').
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \16\ See MSRB Notice 2012-19 (April 10, 2012).
    \17\ Rule G-34 generally requires that underwriters submit
required data to NIIDS within two hours of the Time of Formal Award,
and that such NIIDS data be disseminated to the marketplace for at
least two hours prior to the Time of First Execution.
    \18\ Rule G-34 currently provides that only the hours between
9:00 a.m. and 5:00 p.m. Eastern Time on a Business Day for the
MSRB's Real-time Transaction Reporting System (RTRS) are used for
purposes of the timeframes set out in the rule.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Discussion of Comments
    SIFMA stated that it ``believe[s] this move towards straight-
through processing will be beneficial for market participants by
reducing transaction costs and increasing data integrity.'' TD stated
that it ``welcome[d] the effort to have one centralized system and one
pass in establishing the information necessary to satisfy the
regulations.'' The MSRB discusses additional comments from these
commenters below.
    Accelerating the deadline for completing submission of Form G-32
data not eligible to be submitted to NIIDS. While no written comments
were received on this question, the MSRB understands from conversations
with various industry participants that accelerating the submission
requirements for Form G-32 data not eligible to be submitted to NIIDS
may present compliance challenges for some industry participants,
particularly those that make manual submissions of information to NIIDS
and Form G-32. Thus, the MSRB determined not to accelerate such
timeframes but instead retain the existing timeframe for submission of
those Form G-32 data elements not able to be populated using NIIDS
data. Similarly, for those securities that are not eligible for
submission to NIIDS and therefore would continue to be submitted
through Form G-32, the MSRB is retaining all existing timeframes for
submission.
    Removing the exception for certain short term instruments from the
data submission requirements under Rule G-34. SIFMA noted that while
eliminating the exception under Rule G-34 for short term notes with
maturities of nine months or less would not be a challenge, eliminating
the exception for variable rate demand obligations (``VRDOs'') would
present operational challenges. SIFMA noted that daily and weekly VRDOs
are usually priced, allocated, ticketed and settled on the same or next
day. Removing the exception for VRDOs under Rule G-34 would subject
VRDOs to deadlines for both data submission and Time of First Execution
under Rule G-34. As SIFMA noted, issuers and underwriters already
typically agree in advance to a Time of Formal Award to avoid DTCC
disincentive fees for short settlements, which means that underwriters
generally are able to comply with the data submission requirements for
trade eligibility under Rule G-34. Based on additional feedback from
SIFMA, the larger concern results from the fact that purchasers of
VRDOs require same day cash settlement within a short period of time
following time of pricing and formal award and, as a result, the
mandatory minimum two hour time period between Time of Formal Award and
Time of First Execution required by Rule G-34 would present operational
challenges to ensure same day cash settlement.
    The purpose of the required two hour advanced notification
timeframe between disseminating NIIDS data and the announced Time of
First Execution is to ensure that dealers with pending trades in new
issues are able to receive and enter into trade processing systems
NIIDS data before the first transactions in the new issue are executed.
For VRDOs, there typically are not multiple dealers with pending
transactions in new issues, so the two hour advanced notification
timeframe is not as important as for other types of new issues with a
broad distribution. However, the MSRB believes that it is important
that as many types of securities as possible benefit from the
centralized data collection and dissemination of information provided
by NIIDS. Accordingly, the proposed rule change removes the exception
for short-term instruments (including VRDOs and auction rate securities
but not including commercial paper) from Rule G-34 with respect to the
requirement to submit information to NIIDS and announce the Time of
Formal Award and Time of First Execution, which can be done within the
existing timeframes of typical VRDO offerings. However, the proposed
rule change also adds a narrow exception from the requirement to
provide a minimum two hours of advance notice of the planned Time of
First Execution for offerings of variable rate instruments with a
planned settlement cycle of one day or less.
    Dissemination of Additional NIIDS information on EMMA. SIFMA
supported the dissemination of the Time of First Execution and Time of
Formal Award on EMMA but suggested that the addition of more NIIDS data
to EMMA be carefully considered to avoid obscuring important data.
SIFMA suggested that those that require additional NIIDS data consider
a subscription feed for such data. The MSRB agrees that careful
selection of NIIDs data is necessary and will consider this issue as it
reviews the full range of NIIDS data for potential

inclusion on EMMA at a future date. The MSRB determined that the only
new data elements from NIIDS to be added to the EMMA display and to the
EMMA primary market subscription product at this time are Time of First
Execution and Time of Formal Award.
    Extending Rule G-34 Business Day hours. SIFMA said that, while
expanding the 9:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m. Eastern timeframe for the
deadlines in Rule G-34 may not be problematic for dealers operating in
the Eastern Time zone, expanding these hours could cause significant
staffing challenges to those dealers operating in other time zones.
SIFMA suggested the MSRB not alter the existing 9:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m.
Eastern timeframe in Rule G-34. The MSRB decided against changing the
Rule G-34 Business Day hours.
    Shortening advanced notification timeframe between the submission
of all data to NIIDS and the Time of First Execution. TD said that the
two hour window between the time of disseminating NIIDS data and first
executions was ``tough enough'' especially for smaller shops that were
limited in staff, and that shortening the time period would create
undue pressure and add little to transparency. SIFMA stated that,
because most dealers receive the NIIDS data from one or more
information providers, the two hour dissemination period is frequently
needed to integrate the data into their own systems, irrespective of
the type of underwriting. However, SIFMA suggested that, where a dealer
has submitted data to NIIDS to make an issue ``trade eligible'' between
3:00 p.m. and 5:00 p.m. on a trading day, Rule G-34's current carry-
forward of the two hour dissemination period through to the first hours
of the following day may not be necessary because the dealer has been
able to disseminate and integrate the data through information
providers overnight. SIFMA therefore suggested that underwriters of any
issue that is made ``trade eligible'' between 3:00 p.m. and 5:00 p.m.
Eastern Time should be permitted to elect to waive the two business
hour dissemination period and set the Time of First Execution to be
9:00 a.m. Eastern Time the following morning.\19\ SIFMA noted that this
option would enable dealers to reduce the risk of carrying these
securities.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \19\ Currently, an underwriter disseminating NIIDS data at, for
example, 4:00 p.m. Eastern Time would not be able to set a Time of
First Execution for earlier than 10:00 a.m. Eastern Time the
following business day since the two hour advanced notification
timeframe must occur between the hours of 9:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m.
Eastern Time.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Recognizing these operational challenges, the MSRB decided against
shortening the required two hour minimum period between the time an
underwriter disseminates NIIDS information and the Time of First
Execution that can be set by an underwriter. However, the MSRB decided
that underwriters setting a Time of First Execution for the business
day following the day NIIDS data is disseminated should be able to set
a Time of First Execution for the following day as early as 9:00 a.m.
Eastern Time without having to wait until the full two-hour period has
elapsed. Acknowledging that dealers would have sixteen hours between
5:00 p.m. Eastern Time and the earliest possible Time of First
Execution at 9:00 a.m. Eastern Time to integrate disseminated NIIDS
data and prepare for the underwriter's announced Time of First
Execution, the MSRB believes that it would be appropriate that
underwriters wanting to set a Time of First Execution as early as 9:00
a.m. Eastern Time should be able to do so.

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

    Within 45 days of the date of publication of this notice in the
Federal Register or within such longer period (i) as the Commission may
designate up to 90 days of such date if it finds such longer period to
be appropriate and publishes its reasons for so finding or (ii) as to
which the self-regulatory organization consents, the Commission will:
    (A) By order approve or disapprove such proposed rule change, or
    (B) Institute proceedings to determine whether the proposed rule
change should be disapproved.

IV. Solicitation of Comments

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

Electronic Comments

     Use the Commission's Internet comment form (http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml); or
     Send an email to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Please include
File Number SR-MSRB-2012-08 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-MSRB-2012-08. This file
number should be included on the subject line if email is used. To help
the Commission process and review your comments more efficiently,
please use only one method. The Commission will post all comments on
the Commission's Internet Web site (http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml). Copies of the submission, all subsequent amendments, all
written statements with respect to the proposed rule change that are
filed with the Commission, and all written communications relating to
the proposed rule change between the Commission and any person, other
than those that may be withheld from the public in accordance with the
provisions of 5 U.S.C. 552, will be available for Web site viewing and
printing in the Commission's Public Reference Room on official business
days between the hours of 10:00 a.m. and 3:00 p.m. Copies of such
filing also will be available for inspection and copying at the
principal offices of the MSRB. 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-MSRB-2012-08, and should be submitted on or before
November 29, 2012.

    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets,
pursuant to delegated authority.\20\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \20\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Kevin M. O'Neill,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2012-27266 Filed 11-7-12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 82, Number 161 (Tuesday, August 22, 2017)]
[Notices]
[Pages 39942-39943]
[FR Doc No: 2017-17670]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

[Summary Notice No. 2017-13]

Petition for Exemption; Summary of Petition Received; KaiserAir,
Inc.

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

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: This notice contains a summary of a petition seeking relief
from specified requirements of Title 14 of the Code of Federal
Regulations. The purpose of this notice is to improve the public's
awareness of, and participation in, the FAA's exemption process.
Neither publication of this notice nor the inclusion or omission of
information in the summary is intended to affect the legal status of
the petition or its final disposition.

DATES: Comments on this petition must identify the petition docket
number and must be received on or before September 11, 2017.

ADDRESSES: Send comments identified by docket number FAA-2016-8866
using any of the following methods:
     Federal eRulemaking Portal: Go to http://www.regulations.gov and follow the online instructions for sending your
comments electronically.
     Mail: Send comments to Docket Operations, M-30; U.S.
Department of Transportation, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., Room W12-140,
West Building Ground Floor, Washington, DC 20590-0001.

     Hand Delivery or Courier: Take comments to Docket
Operations in Room W12-140 of the West Building Ground Floor at 1200
New Jersey Avenue SE., Washington, DC, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m.,
Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays.
     Fax: Fax comments to Docket Operations at<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    Privacy: In accordance with 5 U.S.C. 553(c), DOT solicits comments
from the public to better inform its rulemaking process. DOT posts
these comments, without edit, including any personal information the
commenter provides, to http://www.regulations.gov, as described in the
system of records notice (DOT/ALL-14 FDMS), which can be reviewed at
http://www.dot.gov/privacy.
    Docket: Background documents or comments received may be read at
http://www.regulations.gov at any time. Follow the online instructions
for accessing the docket or go to the Docket Operations in Room W12-140
of the West Building Ground Floor at 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE.,
Washington, DC, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday,
except Federal holidays.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Nia Daniels,<PHONE_NUMBER>, Office of
Rulemaking, Federal Aviation Administration, 800 Independence Avenue
SW., Washington, DC 20591.
    This notice is published pursuant to 14 CFR 11.85.

    Issued in Washington, DC, on August 3, 2017.
Lirio Liu,
Director, Office of Rulemaking.

Petition for Exemption

    Docket No.: FAA-2016-8866.
    Petitioner: KaiserAir, Inc.
    Section(s) of 14 CFR Affected: 121.613, 121.623(a), and 121.625.
    Description of Relief Sought: KaiserAir, Inc. would like an
exemption that would permit the flight release of KAI aircraft under
instrument flight rules when conditional language in a one-time
increment of the weather forcast states that the weather at the
destination, alternate airport, or both airports could be below the
authorized minimums when other time increments of the weather forcast
state the weather conditions will be at or above the authorized weather
minimums.

[FR Doc. 2017-17670 Filed 8-21-17; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


[Federal Register Volume 85, Number 110 (Monday, June 8, 2020)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 35021-35024]
[FR Doc No: 2020-12160]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. FAA-2020-0555; Project Identifier AD-2020-00615-E]
RIN 2120-AA64

Airworthiness Directives; General Electric Company Turbofan
Engines

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM).

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

SUMMARY: The FAA proposes to adopt a new airworthiness directive (AD)
for certain General Electric Company (GE) GEnx-1B64/P2, -1B67/P2, -
1B70/P2, -1B70C/P2,-1B70/75/P2, -1B74/75/P2, -1B76/P2, -1B76A/P2, and
GEnx-2B67/P model turbofan engines. This proposed AD was prompted by
the detection of melt-related freckles in the billet, which may reduce
the life limits of certain high-pressure turbine (HPT) rotor stage 2
disks and a certain stages 6-10 compressor rotor spool. This proposed
AD would require the removal of certain HPT rotor stage 2 disk and the
removal of a certain stages 6-10 compressor rotor spool before reaching
their new life limits. The FAA is proposing this AD to address the
unsafe condition on these products.

DATES: The FAA must receive comments on this proposed AD by July 23,
2020.

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 https://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: Deliver to Mail address above between 9
a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays.
    For service information identified in this NPRM, contact General
Electric Company, GE Aviation, Room 285, 1 Neumann Way, Cincinnati, OH
45215; phone:<PHONE_NUMBER>; email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>You
may view this service information at the FAA, Airworthiness Products
Section, Operational Safety Branch, 1200 District Avenue, Burlington,
MA 01803. For information on the availability of this material at the
FAA, call<PHONE_NUMBER>.

Examining the AD Docket

    You may examine the AD docket on the internet at https://www.regulations.gov by searching for and locating Docket No. FAA-2020-
0555; 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 NPRM, any comments received, and other information. The street
address for Docket Operations is listed above. Comments will be
available in the AD docket shortly after receipt.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mehdi Lamnyi, Aerospace Engineer, ECO
Branch, FAA, 1200 District Avenue, Burlington, MA 01803; phone: 781-
238-7743; fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>; email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Comments Invited

    The FAA invites you to send any written relevant data, views, or
arguments about this proposal. Send your comments to an address listed
under the ADDRESSES section. Include ``Docket No. FAA-2020-0555;
Project Identifier AD-2020-00615-E'' at the beginning of your comments.
The FAA specifically invites comments on the overall regulatory,
economic, environmental, and energy aspects of this NPRM. The FAA will
consider all comments received by the closing date and may amend this
NPRM because of those comments.
    Except for Confidential Business Information (CBI) as described in
the following paragraph, and other information as described in 14 CFR
11.35, the FAA will post all comments received, without change, to
https://www.regulations.gov, including any personal information you
provide. The FAA will also post a report summarizing each substantive
verbal contact received about this NPRM.

Confidential Business Information

    Confidential Business Information (CBI) is commercial or financial
information that is both customarily and actually treated as private by
its owner. Under the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) (5 U.S.C. 552),
CBI is exempt from public disclosure. If your comments responsive to
this AD contain commercial or financial information that is customarily
treated as private, that you actually treat as private, and that is
relevant or responsive to this AD, it is important that you clearly
designate the submitted comments as CBI. Please mark each page of your
submission containing CBI as ``PROPIN.'' The FAA will treat such marked
submissions as confidential under the FOIA, and they will not be placed
in the public docket of this AD. Submissions containing CBI should be
sent to Mehdi Lamnyi, Aerospace Engineer, ECO Branch, FAA, 1200
District Avenue, Burlington, MA 01803. Any commentary that the FAA
receives which is not specifically designated as CBI will be placed in
the public docket for this rulemaking.

Discussion

    The FAA was notified of the detection of melt-related freckles in
the billet during the forging inspection of HPT disks, which may reduce
the life limits of certain HPT rotor stage 2 disks and a certain stages
6-10 compressor rotor spool. The inspection process in place at the
time of production did not identify these freckles. The manufacturer
determined the need to reduce the life limits of the affected HPT rotor
stage 2 disks and a certain stages 6-10 compressor rotor spool. This AD
requires removal of these affected parts before reaching the new life
limits. This condition, if not addressed, could result in uncontained
release of both the HPT rotor stage 2 disk and the stages 6-10
compressor rotor spool, damage to the engine, and damage to the
aircraft.

Related Service Information

    The FAA reviewed GE GEnx-1B Service Bulletin (SB) 72-0473 R00,
dated April 14, 2020; GE GEnx-1B SB 72-0474 R00, dated April 14, 2020;
and GE GEnx-2B SB 72-0416 R00, dated April 14, 2020. GE GEnx-1B SB 72-
0473 R00 describes procedures for removing and replacing the HPT rotor
stage 2 disks on GE GEnx-1B model engines. GE GEnx-1B SB 72-0474 R00
describes procedures for removing and replacing the stages 6-10
compressor

rotor spool on GE GEnx-1B model engines. GE GEnx-2B SB 72-0416 R00
describes procedures for removing and replacing the HPT rotor stage 2
disks on GE GEnx-2B model engines.

FAA's Determination

    The FAA is proposing this AD because the Agency evaluated all the
relevant information and determined the unsafe condition described
previously is likely to exist or develop in other products of the same
type design.

Proposed AD Requirements

    This proposed AD would require the removal of certain HPT rotor
stage 2 disk and the removal of a certain stages 6-10 compressor rotor
spool before reaching their new life limits.

Interim Action

    The FAA considers this proposed AD interim action. The
investigation into identifying the complete population of affected
parts is on-going and the FAA will consider further rulemaking
depending on the results of the investigation.

Costs of Compliance

    The FAA estimates that this proposed AD affects two engines
installed on airplanes of U.S. registry; one engine requiring the HPT
rotor stage 2 disk replacement and one engine requiring the stages 6-10
compressor rotor spool replacement.
    The FAA estimates the following costs to comply with this proposed
AD:

                                                 Estimated Costs
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                Cost per      Cost on U.S.
               Action                         Labor cost            Parts cost        product        operators
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Remove and replace the HPT rotor     1,500 work-hours x $85 per         $458,900        $586,400        $586,400
 stage 2 disk.                        hour = $127,500.
Remove and replace the stages 6-10   600 work-hours x $85 per          1,018,600       1,069,600       1,069,600
 compressor rotor spool.              hour = $51,000.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

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.
    The FAA is issuing this rulemaking under the authority described in
Subtitle VII, Part A, Subpart III, Section 44701: ``General
requirements.'' Under that section, Congress charges the FAA with
promoting safe flight of civil aircraft in air commerce by prescribing
regulations for practices, methods, and procedures the Administrator
finds necessary for safety in air commerce. This regulation is within
the scope of that authority because it addresses an unsafe condition
that is likely to exist or develop on products identified in this
rulemaking action.

Regulatory Findings

    The FAA determined that this proposed AD would not have federalism
implications under Executive Order 13132. This proposed AD would 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 this proposed
regulation:
    (1) Is not a ``significant regulatory action'' under Executive
Order 12866,
    (2) Will not affect intrastate aviation in Alaska, and
    (3) 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.

The Proposed Amendment

    Accordingly, under the authority delegated to me by the
Administrator, the FAA proposes to amend 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):

General Electric Company: Docket No. FAA-2020-0555; Project
Identifier AD-2020-00615-E.

(a) Comments Due Date

    The FAA must receive comments by July 23, 2020.

(b) Affected ADs

    None.

(c) Applicability

    This AD applies to all General Electric Company (GE) GEnx-1B64/
P2, -1B67/P2, -1B70/P2, -1B70C/P2, -1B70/75/P2, -1B74/75/P2, -1B76/
P2, -1B76A/P2, and GEnx-2B67/P model turbofan engines with an engine
serial number (S/N) listed in Figure 1 to paragraph (c) of this AD.

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP08JN20.001

(d) Subject

    Joint Aircraft System Component (JASC) Code 7250, Turbine
Section.

(e) Unsafe Condition

    This AD was prompted by the detection of melt-related freckles
in the billet, which may reduce the life limits of certain high-
pressure turbine (HPT) rotor stage 2 disks and a certain stages 6-10
compressor rotor spool. The FAA is issuing this AD to prevent
failure of the HPT rotor stage 2 disk and stages 6-10 compressor
rotor spool. The unsafe condition, if not addressed, could result in
uncontained release of both the HPT rotor stage 2 disk and the
stages 6-10 compressor rotor spool, damage to the engine, and damage
to the aircraft.

(f) Compliance

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

(g) Required Actions

    After the effective date of this AD, before the parts accumulate
the cycles since new (CSN) threshold listed in Table 1 to paragraph
(g) of this AD, remove the affected HPT rotor stage 2 disk and the
stages 6-10 compressor rotor spool from service and replace with
parts eligible for installation.
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP08JN20.002

(h) Installation Prohibition

    After the effective date of this AD, do not install the affected
HPT rotor stage 2 disks or the stages 6-10 compressor rotor spool
identified in Table 1 to paragraph (g) of this AD on an engine.

(i) Alternative Methods of Compliance (AMOCs)

    (1) The Manager, ECO 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 manager of the
certification office, send it to the attention of the person
identified in paragraph (j)(1) of this AD. You may email your
request to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>    (2) 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.

(j) Related Information

    (1) For more information about this AD, contact Mehdi Lamnyi,
Aerospace Engineer, ECO Branch, FAA, 1200 District Avenue,
Burlington, MA 01803; phone:<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>; email:
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>    (2) For service information identified in this AD, contact
General Electric Company, GE Aviation, Room 285, 1 Neumann Way,
Cincinnati, OH 45215; phone:<PHONE_NUMBER>; email:
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>You may view this referenced service
information at the FAA, Airworthiness Products Section, Operational
Safety Branch, 1200 District Avenue, Burlington, MA 01803. For
information on the availability of this material at the FAA, call
781-238-7759.

    Issued on June 1, 2020.
Lance T. Gant,
Director, Compliance & Airworthiness Division, Aircraft Certification
Service.
[FR Doc. 2020-12160 Filed 6-5-20; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


[Federal Register Volume 81, Number 64 (Monday, April 4, 2016)]
[Notices]
[Page 19165]
[FR Doc No: 2016-07530]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Project No. 14748-000]

Energy Resources USA, Inc.; Notice of Preliminary Permit
Application Accepted for Filing and Soliciting Comments and Motions To
Intervene

    On December 22, 2015, Energy Resources USA, Inc. (Energy Resources)
filed an application for a preliminary permit, pursuant to section 4(f)
of the Federal Power Act (FPA), proposing to study the feasibility of
the Cedar Creek Hydroelectric Project (Cedar Creek Project or project)
to be located at the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers' Cedar Creek Dam on
the Cedar Creek River in Franklin County, Alabama. The sole purpose of
a preliminary permit, if issued, is to grant the permit holder priority
to file a license application during the permit term. A preliminary
permit does not authorize the permit holder to perform any land-
disturbing activities or otherwise enter upon lands or waters owned by
others without the owners' express permission.
    The proposed project would consist of the following: (1) A control
structure with three 9.5-foot-wide, 25-foot-long spill gates; (2) one
6-foot-diameter, 49-foot-long penstock with a butterfly valve; (3) a
bifurcation structure; (4) two 4-foot-diameter, 32-foot-long penstocks;
(5) a powerhouse containing two generating units with a total capacity
of 1.5 megawatts; (6) a 1000-foot-long, 220-foot-wide tailrace; (7) a
substation; and (8) a 4.5-mile-long, 69 kV transmission line. The
proposed project would have an estimated average annual generation of
5,500 megawatt-hours, and operate as directed by the Corps.
    Applicant Contact: Mr. Ander Gonzalez, Energy Resources USA Inc.,
2655 Le Jeune Road, Suite 804, Coral Gables, Florida 33134; Phone:
(954) 248-8425; Email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>    FERC Contact: Christiane Casey; phone:<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    Deadline for filing comments and motions to intervene: 60 days from
the issuance of this notice.
    The Commission strongly encourages electronic filing. Please file
comments and motions to intervene using the Commission's eFiling system
at http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/efiling.asp. Commenters can submit
brief comments up to 6,000 characters, without prior registration,
using the eComment system at http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/ecomment.asp. You must include your name and contact information at the
end of your comments. For assistance, please contact FERC Online
Support at<EMAIL_ADDRESS>(866) 208-3676 (toll free), or
(202) 502-8659 (TTY). In lieu of electronic filing, please send a paper
copy to: Secretary, Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First
Street NE., Washington, DC 20426. The first page of any filing should
include docket number P-14748-000.
    More information about this project, including a copy of the
application, can be viewed or printed on the ``eLibrary'' link of the
Commission's Web site at http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/elibrary.asp.
Enter the docket number (P-14748) in the docket number field to access
the document. For assistance, contact FERC Online Support.

    Dated: March 29, 2016.
Nathaniel J. Davis, Sr.,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2016-07530 Filed 4-1-16; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 81, Number 186 (Monday, September 26, 2016)]
[Notices]
[Pages 66012-66013]
[FR Doc No: 2016-23148]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

[EPA-HQ-OPP-2016-0463; FRL-9951-05]

Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposed Renewal of an
Existing Collection (EPA ICR No. 2330.03 and OMB Control No. 2070-0179;
Comment Request

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: In compliance with the Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA), this
document announces that EPA is planning to submit an Information
Collection Request (ICR) to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB).
The ICR, entitled: ``Pesticide Registration Fees Program'' and
identified by EPA ICR No. 2330.03 and OMB Control No. 2070-0179,
represents the renewal of an existing ICR that is scheduled to expire
on June 30, 2017. Before submitting the ICR to OMB for review and
approval, EPA is soliciting comments on specific aspects of the
proposed information collection that is summarized in this document.
The ICR and accompanying material are available in the docket for
public review and comment.

DATES: Comments must be received on or before November 25, 2016.

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by docket identification
(ID) number EPA-HQ-OPP-2016-0463, by one of the following methods:
     Federal eRulemaking Portal: http://www.regulations.gov.
Follow the online instructions for submitting comments. Do not submit
electronically any information you consider to be Confidential Business
Information (CBI) or other information whose disclosure is restricted
by statute.
     Mail: OPP Docket, Environmental Protection Agency Docket
Center (EPA/DC), (28221T), 1200 Pennsylvania Ave. NW., Washington, DC
20460-0001.
     Hand Delivery: To make special arrangements for hand
delivery or delivery of boxed information, please follow the
instructions at http://www.epa.gov/dockets/contacts.html.
    Additional instructions on commenting or visiting the docket, along
with more information about dockets generally, is available at http://www.epa.gov/dockets.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Cameo Smoot, Field and Affairs
Division, (7506P), Office of Pesticide Programs, Environmental
Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave. NW., Washington, DC 20460-
0001; telephone number:<PHONE_NUMBER>; email address:
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. What information is EPA particularly interested in?

    Pursuant to PRA section 3506(c)(2)(A) (44 U.S.C. 3506(c)(2)(A)),
EPA specifically solicits comments and information to enable it to:
    1. Evaluate whether the proposed collection of information is
necessary for the proper performance of the functions of the Agency,
including whether the information will have practical utility.
    2. Evaluate the accuracy of the Agency's estimates of the burden of
the proposed collection of information, including the validity of the
methodology and assumptions used.
    3. Enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to
be collected.
    4. Minimize the burden of the collection of information on those
who are to respond, including through the use of appropriate automated
electronic, mechanical, or other technological collection techniques or
other forms of information technology, e.g., permitting electronic
submission of responses. In particular, EPA is requesting comments from
very small businesses (those that employ less than 25) on examples of
specific additional efforts that EPA could make to reduce the paperwork
burden for very small businesses affected by this collection.

II. What information collection activity or ICR does this action apply
to?

    Title: Pesticide Registration Fees Program.
    ICR number: EPA ICR No. 2330.03.
    OMB control number: OMB Control No. 2070-0179.
    ICR status: This ICR is currently scheduled to expire on June 30,
2017. An Agency may not conduct or sponsor, and a person is not
required to respond to, a collection of information, unless it displays
a currently valid OMB control number. The OMB control numbers for EPA's
regulations in title 40 of the Code of Federal Regulations (CFR), after
appearing in the Federal Register when approved, are listed in 40 CFR
part 9, are displayed either by publication in the Federal Register or
by other appropriate means, such as on the related collection
instrument or form, if applicable. The display of OMB control numbers
for certain EPA regulations is consolidated in 40 CFR part 9.
    Abstract: This ICR covers the paperwork burden hours and costs
associated with the information collection activities under the
pesticide registration fee programs implemented through the Office of
Pesticide Programs, Environmental Protection Agency. Pesticide
registrants are required by statute to pay an annual registration
maintenance fee for all products registered under Section 3 and Section
24(c) of the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide and Rodenticide Act
(FIFRA). In addition, the Pesticide Registration Improvement Act (PRIA)
amended FIFRA in 2004 to create a registration service fee system for
applications for specific pesticide registration, amended registration,
and associated tolerance actions (Section 33). This ICR specifically
covers the activities related to the collection of the annual
registration maintenance fees, the registration service fees and the
burden associated with the submission of requests for fees to be
waived.
    Burden statement: The annual public reporting and recordkeeping
burden for this collection of information is estimated to average 1,681
hours for the Pesticide Registration Maintenance Fee program and 6,840
hours for the Pesticide Registration Service Fee Waiver program. Burden
is defined in 5 CFR 1320.3(b).
    The ICR, which is available in the docket along with other related
materials, provides a detailed explanation of the collection activities
and the burden estimate that is only briefly summarized here:
    Respondents/Affected Entities: Entities potentially affected by
this ICR are identified by the North American Industrial Classification
System (NAICS) codes: 32532--Pesticide and other agricultural chemical
manufacturing; 32518--Other Basic Inorganic Chemical Manufacturing;

32519--Other Basic Organic Chemical Manufacturing; and 9641--Regulation
of Agricultural Marketing and Commodities.
    Estimated total number of potential respondents: 1,471.
    Frequency of response: Annually and on occasion.
    Estimated total average number of responses for each respondent: 1.
    Estimated total annual burden hours: Ranges from 1,681 to 6,840
hours depending on the program.
    Estimated total annual costs for both programs: $631,791.

III. Are there changes in the estimates from the last approval?

    For the Pesticide Registration Maintenance Fee program there is
decrease of 312 hours (from 1993 to 1681) hours in the total annual
estimated respondent burden compared with that identified in the ICR
currently approved by OMB. The reason for the decrease was a reduction
in the number responses from 1,744 to 1,471. The total estimated annual
respondent burden for the pesticide registration service fee waivers
information collection has increased from 5,914 hours in the existing
ICR to 6,840 hours for this renewal, due to the increase of
respondent's usage of the newer waiver provisions allowed under PRIA.
These changes are adjustments.

IV. What is the next step in the process for this ICR?

    EPA will consider the comments received and amend the ICR as
appropriate. The final ICR package will then be submitted to OMB for
review and approval pursuant to 5 CFR 1320.12. EPA will issue another
Federal Register document pursuant to 5 CFR 1320.5(a)(1)(iv) to
announce the submission of the ICR to OMB and the opportunity to submit
additional comments to OMB. If you have any questions about this ICR or
the approval process, please contact the person listed under FOR
FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT.

    Authority: 44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.

    Dated: September 17, 2016.
James Jones,
Assistant Administrator, Office of Chemical Safety and Pollution
Prevention.
[FR Doc. 2016-23148 Filed 9-23-16; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


[Federal Register Volume 79, Number 220 (Friday, November 14, 2014)]
[Notices]
[Pages 68345-68346]
[FR Doc No: 2014-26974]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Global Positioning System Adjacent Band Compatibility Assessment
Workshop II

AGENCY: Office of the Assistant Secretary for Research and Technology,
Department of Transportation.

ACTION: Notice of meeting.

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

SUMMARY: The purpose of this notice is to inform the public that the
U.S. Department of Transportation will host a second workshop to
continue discussions of the Global Positioning System (GPS) Adjacent
Band Compatibility Assessment (the first workshop was held on September
18, 2014, in Cambridge, MA). The workshop will focus on the following
topics: (i) GPS ``use case'' information, with emphasis on non-
Government applications; (ii) identification of current GPS receivers
which are representative of the current categories of GPS applications
and which should be considered for sensitivity testing; and (iii)
feedback on the GPS Adjacent Band Compatibility Assessment program
implementation plan presented during the last workshop. To maximize
participation and discussion, the U.S. Department of Transportation is
requesting that those interested in presenting on one (or all) of the
above topics please contact Stephen Mackey (contact information listed
below) by November 20, 2014.
    This workshop is open to the general public by registration only.
For those who would like to attend the workshop, we request that you
register no later than November 20, 2014. Please use the following link
to register: https://volpecenterevents.webex.com/volpecenterevents/onstage/g.php?d=660350730&t=a

You must include:
 Name
 Organization
 Telephone number
 Mailing and email addresses
 Attendance method (WebEx or on site)
 Country of citizenship
 Intend to present (Yes/No)
[cir] If Yes, topic and title

    The U.S. Department of Transportation is committed to providing
equal access to this workshop

for all participants. If you need alternative formats or services
because of a disability, please contact Stephen Mackey (contact
information listed below) with your request by close of business
November 20, 2014.

DATES: Date/Time: December 4, 2014 10 a.m.-5 p.m. (Pacific Standard
Time).
    Location: Aerospace Corporation, 2310 E. El Segundo Blvd. El
Segundo, CA 90245.
    Identification will be required at the entrance of Aerospace
Corporation facility (Passport, state ID, or Federal ID). Several Days
leading up to the workshop, an email containing the Agenda, Dial-in,
and WebEx information will be provided.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Stephen M. Mackey, U.S. Department of
Transportation, John A. Volpe National Transportation Systems Center,
RVT-75, Cambridge, MA 02142
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Telephone:<PHONE_NUMBER>

    Issued in Washington, DC, on November 4, 2014.
Gregory D. Winfree,
Assistant Secretary for Research and Technology.
[FR Doc. 2014-26974 Filed 11-13-14; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-9X-P


[Federal Register: April 20, 2007 (Volume 72, Number 76)]
[Notices]
[Page 19992-19993]
[DOCID:fr20ap07-126]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-55629; File No. SR-CBOE-2007-34]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; Chicago Board Options Exchange,
Incorporated; Notice of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of Proposed
Rule Change Regarding Subsidy Arrangements with Members That Provide or
Use Certain Order Routing Functionalities

April 13, 2007.
    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 April 5, 2007, the Chicago Board Options Exchange, Incorporated
(``CBOE'' or the ``Exchange'') 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 substantially
prepared by CBOE. CBOE designated this proposal as one establishing or
changing a due, fee, or other charge applicable only to its members
pursuant to Section 19(b)(3)(A)(ii) of the Act \3\ and Rule 19b-4(f)(2)
thereunder,\4\ which renders the proposal effective upon filing with
the Commission. The Commission is publishing this notice to solicit
comments on the proposed rule change from interested parties.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ 15 U.S.C 78s(b)(1).
    \2\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4.
    \3\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A)(ii).
    \4\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

    CBOE proposes to enter into subsidy arrangements with CBOE members
that provide certain order routing functionalities to other CBOE
members and/or use such functionalities themselves. This rule change
does not provide for any modifications to the text of CBOE's rules. The
proposed rule change is available on the Exchange's Web site (http://www.cboe.com
), at the Exchange's Office of the Secretary, and at the

Commission's Public Reference Room.

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

    In its filing with the Commission, CBOE 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. CBOE has prepared summaries, set forth in Sections A, B,
and C below, of the most significant aspects of such statements.

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

1. Purpose
    CBOE proposes to enter into subsidy arrangements with CBOE members
that provide certain order routing functionalities to other CBOE
members and/or use such functionalities themselves.\5\ To qualify for
the subsidy arrangement, a member's order routing functionality would
have to: enable the electronic routing of orders to all of the U.S.
options exchanges, including CBOE; provide current consolidated market
data from the U.S. options exchanges; and be capable of interfacing
with CBOE's API to access current CBOE trade engine functionality. The
routing system would also need to cause CBOE to be the default
destination exchange for individually executed marketable orders if
CBOE is at the national best bid or offer (``NBBO''), regardless of
size or time, but allow any user to manually override CBOE as the
default destination on an order-by-order basis. The order routing
functionality would be required to incorporate a function allowing
orders at a specified price to be sent to multiple exchanges with a
single click (a ``sweep function'') and the sweep function would need
to be configured to cause an order to be sent to CBOE for up to the
full size quoted by CBOE if CBOE is at the NBBO.\6\ Any CBOE member
would be permitted to avail itself of this arrangement, provided that
its order routing functionality incorporates the features described
above and satisfies CBOE that it appears to be robust and reliable. The
member would be solely responsible for implementing and operating its
system.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ CBOE might in the future submit to the Commission a proposed
rule change to include arrangements with third party vendors that
are not CBOE members.
    \6\ For example, if a CBOE member were to enter an order to buy
250 contracts using the sweep function at a time when CBOE is at the
NBBO for 100 contracts, the sweep function would need to be
configured to send an order for 100 contracts to CBOE, with the
balance of the order routed as specified by the member entering the
order from the configurations offered by the routing functionality.
    Nothing would require that a person using the routing
functionality actually use the sweep function, and, in this same
example, if the CBOE member wished to route the entire order for 250
contracts to an exchange other than CBOE using the routing
functionality, it would be free to manually override CBOE as the
default destination for the entire order.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    CBOE is proposing to make payments to participating CBOE members to
subsidize their costs of providing the routing services. The payment
would be $0.05 per contract for orders routed to CBOE through a
participating member's system. The participating member would have to
agree that it would not be entitled to receive any other revenue for
the use of its system specifically with respect to orders routed to
CBOE.\7\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ This requirement would not prevent the participating member
from charging fees (for example, a flat monthly fee) for the general
use of its order routing system. Nor would it prevent the
participating member from charging fees or commissions in accordance
with its general practices with respect to transactions effected
through its system.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    A participating CBOE member could also elect to have CBOE perform
certain additional marketing services on its behalf. These services
would consist of including the member's functionality in the general
marketing activities of CBOE's marketing staff. CBOE would permit a
member electing to have CBOE perform these services place CBOE's
``HyTS'' trademark on its order routing functionality in a manner
satisfactory to CBOE. If a member elects to have CBOE perform these
services, the amount that CBOE pays the member for orders routed to
CBOE through the participating member's system would be reduced from
$0.05 per contract to $0.04 per contract. The minimum term of these
services would be one year, after which a member could terminate the
marketing services effective at the end of a calendar month.
    A participating CBOE member could also elect to have CBOE perform
the service of billing other CBOE members with respect to the use of
the participating CBOE member's router. A participating member that
elects to have CBOE perform this service would pay CBOE a service fee
of one percent of the fees collected by CBOE for that member. A member
could terminate this service at the end of any calendar month.
    Nothing about the subsidy arrangement would relieve any CBOE member
that is using an order routing functionality provided by another member
or its own functionality from complying with its best execution
obligations. Specifically, just as with any customer order and any
other routing functionality, a member would have an obligation to
consider the availability of price improvement at various markets and
whether routing a customer order through a functionality that
incorporates the features described

above would allow for access to such opportunities if readily
available. Moreover, a member would need to conduct best execution
evaluations on a regular basis, at a minimum quarterly, that include
its use of any router incorporating the features described above.
2. Statutory Basis
    The proposed rule change is consistent with Section 6(b) of the Act
\8\ in general and furthers the objectives of Section 6(b)(4) of the
Act \9\ in particular in that it is designed to provide for the
equitable allocation of reasonable dues, fees, and other charges among
CBOE members and other persons using its facilities.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

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

    CBOE does not believe that the proposed rule change will impose any
burden on competition that is not necessary or appropriate in
furtherance of purposes of the Act.

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

    The Exchange neither solicited nor received comments on the
proposal.

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

    Because the foregoing rule change establishes or changes a due,
fee, or other charge imposed by the Exchange, it has become effective
pursuant to Section 19(b)(3)(A) of the Act \10\ and Rule 19b-4(f)(2)
\11\ thereunder. At any time within 60 days of the filing of the
proposed rule change, the Commission may summarily abrogate 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.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \10\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A).
    \11\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(2).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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-CBOE-2007-34 on the subject line.

Paper Comments

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

    All submissions should refer to File Number SR-CBOE-2007-34. 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 inspection
and copying in the Commission's Public Reference Room. Copies of such
filing also will be available for inspection and copying at the
principal office of CBOE. 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-CBOE-2007-34 and should be submitted on or before May 11, 2007.

    For the Commission, by the Division of Market Regulation,
pursuant to delegated authority.\12\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

Florence E. Harmon,
Deputy Secretary.
 [FR Doc. E7-7493 Filed 4-19-07; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 8010-01-P


[Federal Register: September 16, 2008 (Volume 73, Number 180)]
[Notices]
[Page 53422]
[DOCID:fr16se08-46]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Docket Nos. ER08-637-000; ER08-637-001; ER08-637-004; ER08-637-005]

Midwest Independent Transmission System Operator, Inc.; Notice of
Technical Conference

September 9, 2008.
    Take notice that on November 12, 2008, a technical conference will
be convened to consider issues related to the Midwest Independent
Transmission System Operator, Inc.'s proposal to offer Market
Coordination Service (Market Service), as discussed in the order issued
June 13, 2008 in Docket Nos. ER08-637-000 and ER08-637-001.\1\ The
technical conference will be held in the Commission Meeting Room at the
headquarters of the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First
Street NE., Washington, DC, 20426 from 9 a.m. to 4:30 p.m. (ET).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ Midwest Indep. Transmission Sys. Operator, Inc., 123 FERC ]
61,265, at P 155 (2008).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The technical conference will be divided into two sessions. The
morning session will be led by the Commissioners and will address broad
policy issues associated with Market Service. The afternoon session
will be led by Commission staff and will address certain technical
aspects of Market Service. Subsequent notices will be issued regarding
the details of this technical conference.
    FERC conferences are accessible under section 508 of the
Rehabilitation Act of 1973. For accessibility accommodations please
send an e-mail to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or call toll free 1-866-208-
3372 (voice) or<PHONE_NUMBER> (TTY), or send a FAX to<PHONE_NUMBER> with
the required accommodations.

Kimberly D. Bose,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. E8-21540 Filed 9-15-08; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6717-01-P