 GUIDANCE DOCUMENT FOR

LOG HANDLING OPERATIONS

Table of Contents

Introduction

Factors that Contribute to Log Operation Handling-Related

Injuries and Fatalities in Marine Terminals

How to Prevent Log-Operations Injuries and Fatalities

Cargo Gear Check

Ready for Work

Hold Access

Walking on the Cargo

Communication with the Crane Operator

Never place yourself in the bight

Heat Stress

Protecting Unguarded Edges

Equipment selection and maintenance

Gangway safety meetings and toolbox talk

LOG HANDLING SAFETY

Glossary

Boom sticks – logs that surround rafts that keep them stable for load
out

Breast line – securing line that secures the raft against the vessel

Bull rail – curbing around edge of dock 6” - 18”

Catwalk – safe accommodation walkway for pilots

Combing –the elevated Bulkhead which surrounds the open hatch

Dog – device used to secure the raft fitting hammered in the logs to
permit the attachment of lines e.g. breast lines.

Dumper – flat steel device attached to the hoisting slings utilized
for dumping cargo into the wings

Hog wire – wire rigged athwartship, between tiers of logs used for
securing cargo and stabilizing vessels cargo at sea

Peavey – wooden shaft with a metal point and a hinged hook near the
end

Pike pole – long pole with sharpened end utilized for pushing and
pulling cargo and boom sticks

Rafts – floating bundled logs (i.e. cargo)

Sliders – logs that slide out from the sling when being hoisted

Snatch block – pulley device used for hog lashing

Wagner – large lift truck used for log handling (a.k.a. log loader,
stacker)

Walking/boom sticks – platform of logs that form a sidewalk along the
ship to access the raft

Wiggle wire – wire rope pulled by the crane to secure stanchions in
the upright position

Unacceptable PPE see arrow

Introduction

This guidance document for Log Handling Safety provides practical
recommendations to help employers and workers reduce the number and
severity of injuries during log handling operations at Marine Terminals.

Although industry recommendations should be considered in all logging
operations, OSHA requirements must be followed.  Safe work practices
should be reinforced through training and Gangway Safety Talks  prior to
cargo handling and while preparing the cargo stowage or the ship
load/unload sequencing plan.

Log handling is unique based on the cargo, the vessel, and port
practices, because logs differ greatly in size, shape, center of gravity
and weight; therefore, there is no "one size fits all" approach to
handling this type of cargo.  Therefore, the information consolidated in
this document was obtained from log handling experts who have extensive
experience in log handling operations.

Log handling operations are inherently complex operations that employ
large cranes and heavy equipment to handle logs on shore, in the water,
or in the hold of a vessel, which could create a challenging and
dangerous work environment.

Many work-related injuries and fatalities occurring in marine cargo
handling operations are caused by log handling accidents.

Employers are required to ensure compliance with OSHA’s regulations
for log handling operations at marine terminals (29 CFR 1917.18) and on
vessels (29 CFR 1918.88).

To help prevent log handling accidents, it is recommended that employers
raise the awareness of log handling hazards for all marine terminal
workers involved in log handling operations.  Hazard awareness should
focus  on  workers and cargo handling equipment and techniques of
handling this unique cargo, including:

Operators of cargo handling equipment;

Cargo handling equipment, lifting gear, and rigging;

Cargo hold access; and

Load planning and sequencing.

Factors that Contribute to Log Handling-Related Injuries and Fatalities
in Marine Cargo Handling

There are many factors that can contribute to log handling accidents in
marine cargo handling. Often times, accidents are caused by a
combination of factors.  The following points illustrate inadequacies
and/or common contributors to unsafe working conditions during log
handling operations:

Training and Awareness: Accidents can occur when workers do not have
adequate training in the safe operation and maintenance of equipment for
conducting log operations.

Improper and Unsafe Equipment: Damaged, improperly used, improperly
maintained, or missing equipment (e.g., wire rope slings and straps,
chains, lifting hooks and bridles) can lead to accidents and injuries.

Communication: Accidents often occur because of poor communication,
(e.g., failure of workers to alert crane operators of their location as
they move about the vessel, and failure of employers to notify workers
of changes to cargo loading and unloading operations). In addition,
noisy terminal or vessel environments can hinder effective
communications.

Slips trips and falls: Log surfaces are wet, slippery, and uneven. Loose
bark, mud, frost, ice, etc., may contribute to slips, trips, and falls.
Appropriate footwear is required by 29 CFR 1918.88(c).

Rigging and Slinging Practices: Accidents can happen if there are
deviations from the standard work procedures. Standard rigging and
slinging practices should be adhered to at all times.

 Illumination: Poor lighting, particularly at night, can cause shadows
that make it difficult to see persons or objects below deck. Also, the
sun may cause glare on certain types of surfaces.

Shift Changes: Marine terminal employers report that accidents often
occur just before the end of a work shift or while workers are becoming
familiar with equipment or the unique nature of an operation at the
beginning of a shift.

Weather: Ice, fog, and rain can create hazardous conditions (e.g.,
slippery surfaces and poor visibility).  High temperatures and lack of
rest, water, and shade are common heat stress factors.

Best Practices for Preventing Log Operation-Related Injuries and
Fatalities

Safety programs combined with a safety culture can reduce the risk of
log handling-related accidents, which could eliminate or reduce
potential hazards and increase awareness of log handling safety issues
for everyone.

Employers should develop safety program initiatives which include the
following:

Safe work in the hold, on deck, and in the water;

Safe lifting techniques; and

Communication procedures between crane operator and holdmen or
signalman.

The following log handling safety practices and requirements can help
prevent or reduce accidents, fatalities, and injuries.

Ready for Work [29 CFR 1917 Subpart E, 1918 Subpart J, 1918.69, 1918.88
(c)].

Employers should advise workers to notify their supervisors if they feel
they are unable to perform the work safely due to, but not limited to
the following performance factors:

Working with logs is physically demanding. Good vision and depth
perception is important. Hold work may require climbing ladders, walking
over uneven surfaces, standing, kneeling, pushing, pulling and steadying
heavy objects. Work may require the use of basic hand tools such as
wrenches, hammers, peaveys, and pry-bars. It may also require the use of
portable power tools, such as power chain tighteners or speed cinchers,
which are commonly used for lashing logs.

All workers must use the appropriate Personal Protective Equipment
(PPE).  PPE should include but not be limited to: safety toe boots,
caulked boots (“corks or corker”) sandals, gloves, and hard hats.
Face shields and eye protection should be available and worn as
necessary. Other PPE may be required depending on employer requirements
and other work activity. Wearing of reflective safety vests or
equivalent high visibility clothing is required on marine terminals,
however they are not considered PPE in OSHA standards.

2.	Cargo Gear Check (29 CFR 1917.42, 1917.50, 1918.11, 1918.61)

Checking cargo gear is a basic first step prior to any cargo handling
operation especially when using ships cranes. Certification procedures
shall not be construed as a substitute, or cause, for elimination of
normal operational inspection and maintenance throughout the year.
OSHA Directives   HYPERLINK
"http://www.osha.gov/pls/oshaweb/owadisp.show_document?p_table=DIRECTIVE
S&p_id=2975"  (CPL 02-01-39 AND CPL 2-1.39) , Enforcement of Cargo Gear
Regulations and the Requirements for Gear Certification in the Maritime
Program should also be consulted.

Ship Gear (29 CFR 1918.11, 1918.59, 1918.61)

OSHA requires vessel cargo handling gear to be certified as prescribed
in 29 CFR 1918.11. Employers must not use a vessel's cargo handling gear
unless it has been ascertained that the vessel has a current and valid
cargo gear register, and certificates which show that the cargo gear has
been tested and examined by competent persons or organizations.

Sheaves, wires, blocks, hooks, shackles, lufting wires, and hoisting
wires associated with the ships crane should be checked prior to
operations. Safe access to blocks and sheaves should be provided so that
blocks, sheaves and pins can be checked. Hoisting wires should be
thoroughly inspected to insure that there are no broken wires, kinks,
fishhooks or other defects. Employers should train workers to recognize
and report equipment damage and deficiencies to their foreman and if
equipment is not working properly, it should be taken out of service and
tagged until repaired.

Single sheave blocks shall be marked with safe working loads and proof
test loads. Marks relating to testing shall be identifiable on the
related certificates, which shall be available.

Loose Gear (29.CFR 1917.42, 1917.50)

All loose gear (e.g., slings, chains, bridles, blocks, and hooks) shall
be inspected by the employer or his representative before each use and
when necessary at intervals during use to ensure it is safe. Similarly,
cargo gear for marine terminals must have certificates. Loose gear
obtained after October 3, 1983 shall bear a legible mark indicating that
it has been tested. Additionally, all cargo handling gear provided by
the employer with a safe working load greater than 5 net tons (10,000
lbs.) shall have its safe working load plainly marked on it.

Equipment Selection and Maintenance.

Log handling equipment selection and maintenance are critical components
to minimize accidents. Employers should ensure that vehicle safety
equipment such as horns, backup alarms, seatbelts, brakes, mirrors, and
warning devices are maintained in good repair and utilized properly by
the operator. Employers should also ensure that equipment is sized
properly and that operators follow and do not exceed the manufacturer's
design and operating parameters. Equipment should not be modified
without either the manufacturer's prior written approval or the written
approval of a professional engineer experienced with the equipment who
has consulted with the manufacturer, if available.

Work Area (29 CFR 1918.24, 1918.35)

3.	Hold Access and Working in Holds (29 CFR 1918.88 and 1918.94)

Access to ships holds may present multiple hazards, which should be
recognized. Ships access openings often look alike but lead to different
spaces. Be sure to use the correct access entrance. Access to ships
holds may be via exposed vertical ladders in the hold, vertical ladders
in trunks or via stairways. Ladders should be checked for broken,
missing or rusted rungs, side rails or other obvious hazards.    Ladder
ways and stairwells should be well lit and well ventilated (see
1918.94). The hold may have been closed for several days or weeks during
the ship's voyage and should be opened and well ventilated prior to
entry. Inquiry as to current and prior cargoes should be made to ensure
that there is no risk of toxic atmospheres from prior fumigation or
contamination.  All hazards should be brought to the attention of the
ships operator and management, and should be abated prior to commencing
work.

 Remember:

Hatch covers on ladder wells can shut when workers place their weight on
them while climbing into the hold.  Employers should ensure that workers
test the hatch lid to ensure it is secured in the open position and that
the securing pin is properly in place before traveling down the ladder.

Some vertical ladders present fall hazards because workers must cross
from one ladder to another on their way into the hold. Workers should
maintain three points of contact at all times.

There may be a gap between the ladder and stow that can create a fall
hazard.

Some ships have openings in the deck near the base of the ladder.
Workers should always check to make sure of a good footing surface at
the base of the ladder.

If two escape trunks are available, both must be accessible.

When loading logs into the holds of vessels and using dumper devices to
roll logs into the wings, the employer must ensure that employees remain
clear of areas where logs being dumped could strike, roll up on, or pin
employees.

Loading from deck

When loading logs above deck or from the water, workers should follow
the same precautions as in the hold. If a securing chain starts to free
fall over the side of the deck load, let it go - otherwise it could pull
you with it. Stay clear when tightening wiggle wires as there may be a
chance of the wiggle wire parting. Workers should understand deck
lashing procedures and precautions when rigging/setting up ships
stanchions. Always stand away from the direction the crane is pulling.
Crane operators should not strain (increase tension on the wire or
chain) until the all clear signal is given. When lashing down logs, take
precautions when pulling chains or never hold on to lashing wires under
tension.

Due to the nature of dock work and log handling operations in general,
workers are at increased risk of falling into the water.  For this
reason, employers are encouraged to develop and implement Recovery of
Person in the Water (PIW) procedures to help better prepare employees
for response and recovery.  Where implemented, workers should be
familiar with the terminals Recovery of PIW procedures including the
location of all rescue and recovery devices.  Employers must provide,
and direct employees to wear, PFD’s (Personal Floatation Devices)
whenever there is a chance that an employee may fall into the water
(e.g., exposed to going over the side and anytime while working on a
raft).

Loading from Water

When loading from the water while slinging loads, be careful of log
separation when stepping back to the walking sticks (safety sticks).
When cutting bands on bundled logs, workers should be aware of rolling
logs and position themselves free from the bight. When utilizing a pike
pole for pushing logs into proper position for loading be careful not to
overextend so as not to fall into the water. When a load is being
hoisted, always be aware of potential sliders.

When employees are working logs out on the water, walking sticks must be
provided as follows:

They must be planked and be no less than 24 inches (0.61m) wide;

The must extend along the entire length of all rafts on the side(s) of
the vessel being worked, and to the means of access to the log raft(s);
and

They shall be buoyant enough to keep the walking surface above the
waterline when employees are walking on them.  (Ref. 29 CFR 1918.88(h))

When loading from the water, a boom man must secure the raft (dog to
walking stick) and must assure breast lines are secured to the vessel.
In areas where river currents are problematic, a safety boat should be
made available on all log operations and a boatman should be employed to
retrieve a potential fallen person out of the water.

When loading logs from the water or dock, the winch driver must receive
the all clear signal from the signalman prior to hoisting. Holdmen must
have eye contact with the winch driver to ensure proper signals are
being recognized.

Loading from Truck

When loading from a truck operation, always be aware of log trucks
moving to and from the yard. While slinging logs, keep a safe distance
between the truck and bull rail. When slinging a load to the ship, the
truck driver must remain out of his truck until the load clears the
combing. All workers working on docks or wharves should utilize
designated walkways to ensure pedestrian safety.

Workers should consult their foreman or walking boss for the appropriate
action in addressing these hazards and accessing the cargo.

Loading from dock

When loading from the dock, always be aware of Cargo Handling Equipment
(bulldozers, wagners, and lift trucks, front end loaders etc.). Be
mindful of other working gang operations, watch for slings and loads
overhead, and never turn away from loads being lifted from other gangs
working nearby. Workers should be mindful of slings wrapping around the
bunk as the load is being hoisted. Slings must be positioned
strategically to maintain an even load when the load is being hoisted to
prevent sliders and must ensure all logs are slung prior to being
hoisted.

Illumination

When working at night, ensure that there is adequate lighting to perform
tasks. Work with vessel crews to arrange for lighting to prevent
possible injuries.

4.	Walking on the Cargo (29 CFR 1918.32, 1918.81).

Log surfaces may be uneven, slippery, have hidden voids, loose bark or
unguarded edges.. Frequently, logs are shipped without bark, or are
loaded directly out of the water from rafts alongside the vessel. These
wet logs are extremely slippery. Peelers can shoot out from the lift
without warning. Their varying sizes create innumerable voids. Step on
top of the logs. Do not step in between logs or into voids.  Unguarded
edge may develop as the cargo is handled and must be guarded as required
by 29 CFR 1918.32(b). Logs roll and even if dry can be slippery to walk
on.

5.	Protecting Unguarded Edges (29 CFR 1918.2)

A fall hazard is defined by OSHA as hazard that exists whenever workers
are working within 3 feet of an unguarded edge of a work surface where
the next lowest level is 8 feet or more in the vertical direction or
where the gap to the adjacent horizontal surface is more than 12 inches.
 Whenever workers may work within 3 feet of an unguarded edge, employers
must ensure appropriate fall protection is provided to ensure worker
safety.

When working in a hatch, workers should walk to the trunks or wings
before the load is lifted to identify voids so they may be avoided.

6.	Slinging Logs (29 CFR 1918.81) (Replace photo as worker is not
wearing a reflective vest (PPE))

During log loading/discharge operations, there are various designated
hoisting areas that logs are lifted from such as trucks, bunks, water,
etc. While slinging logs, workers must take precautions to ensure that
the loads are properly slung. Workers must make sure that the loads are
evenly spaced and that there is no loose dunnage, (e.g. splitters or
debris hanging or protruding from the loads). Logs are not shipped
pre-slung, so slings must be fed around the logs for each lift, and
taken off the hook when landed. Care must be taken not to sling loads
which exceed gear capacity. Logs have to be "dumped" into the wings and
the dumpers which are attached to the sling wire make the logs roll and
"pop out" wh en the sling is pulled through. Logs can still roll back
after being dumped. Workers should ensure that loads are totally settled
before removing the slings. Let the gear do your work for you. Each
successive landing of a load of logs may cause those already landed
beneath to shift. Workers should be careful of the whip-like motion of
the slings when the winch driver moves out from the hold to retrieve
another load. Workers must utilize hand signals and proper means of
communication with the crane operator/winch driver. After a load has
been hoisted, workers must never turn their back on the load and must
keep constant eye contact with the gear. Workers must also ensure that
their work area is free of debris and obstructions.

7.	Never Work Under a Suspended Load (29 CFR 1918.81)

Workers should stand well clear of any cargo that is lifted or lowered
into a ships hold. Where possible, workers should stand under the edge
of the hatch over hang (wing) on the opposite side and out of the swing
path of the load in a position where the load can be viewed at all
times. This allows workers to maintain visual contact with the load and
prevents workers from walking out from under the wing into a position
under a suspended load. No one should go out into the square of the
hatch until the load has completely landed during loading operations or
has been lifted completely out of the hatch and passes over the coaming
during discharge operations. When working straight sided (box hold)
hatches, persons should stand off shore of the cargo being worked. When
working on the off shore cargo, workers should go into the ladder wells
so as not to be under the load. When preparing the cargo for stowage,
the load should be approached only after it has been lowered below
shoulder height keeping feet out from under the path of the load.
Workers should always be visible to the crane operator or flagman or
hatch tender. Flagmen, holdman or hatch tenders should ensure that cargo
is not lowered until the area underneath is clear. Workers should
constantly be aware of their surroundings and look out for the safety of
their co-workers. Workers should always face the load and never turn
their backs so they can observe the operation. Once holdmen are clear,
then the signalman may give the signal to have the crane operator lift
the load. Workers should exercise caution even when an empty hook, block
or spreader is being lowered into a hatch. Swinging loads of any type
can cause serious bodily injury and even death.

8.	Never Place Yourself in a Bight.

A "bight" or "pinch point" is defined as any point where it is possible
for a person or part of a person's body to be caught between two moving
objects; a moving and fixed object; or in gear or machinery where it
could be crushed, caught, cut or torn off. Workers should keep their
hands, arms or fingers out of the sling as it is tightened up against
the cargo when lifting. Guide the sling openhanded. Workers should
remain a safe distance away from the cargo when it is raised or lowered
into its stowed position, and be mindful of pinch points and escape
routes during the entire operation. If cargo tips or rolls, workers
should get out of the way and not try to stop it. Approach the cargo
only after it is landed and stable.

9.	Communications with the Crane Operator.

In addition to hand signals, it is recommended that two-way radios be
utilized for communication between the crane operator and flagger or
signalman. However, except for emergency situations, the crane operator
should only take signals from one designated person, and should never
lose sight of the flag or signalman.

All personnel involved in the lifting operation should be familiar with
the procedures for stopping in an emergency.

10.	Heat Stress

Heat stress provides a significant health hazard. Workers should ensure
that they are properly hydrated. Proper hydration must start the day
before work occurs, and continue through the end of the cargo
operations. Water provides the best hydration for the body. Caffeinated
beverages consumed in large amounts can dehydrate the body and can make
a worker anxious or jittery. For additional information refer to:
http://www.osha.dov/Publications/osha3154.pdf

11.	Gangway Safety Meetings and Toolbox Talks.

Frequent safety meetings (e.g., at the start of work shifts or just
prior to critical lifts) help reinforce safety awareness and facilitate
the communication that is critical for workers safety.

Recommended Gangway Safety Topics:

Listen/Watch - for instructions from the Hatch-tender or foremen.

Heads up – Be aware of what is taking place above your head – stay
in a safe location.

Do Not Turn - your back on a load or remain in the immediate area of a
load being hoisted up.

Stay Out Of The Bight.

Be Aware - of slippery surfaces on deck or in the hold. Be aware of
loose bark, mud, frost, ice, etc.

Pay Attention – Log bundles may have protruding logs below the
waterline.

Proper Footwear Must Be Worn – Steel-Toed Safety Boots with Caulk
Soles or Steel-Toed-Safety Boots with Caulk Sandals affixed. Beware of
loose bark, frost, mud, ice, etc.

Safety Vests, Personal Flotation Devices (PFDs), and Hard Hats must be
worn.

No Cell Or Personal Electronic Devices Are Allowed While Working.

LSWG 5 - 19 June 2012

Page   PAGE   \* MERGEFORMAT  1


[Federal Register Volume 85, Number 73 (Wednesday, April 15, 2020)]
[Notices]
[Pages 20996-20997]
[FR Doc No: 2020-07901]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Docket No. AD19-16-000]

Commission Information Collection Activities (FERC-922); Comment
Request; Correction

March 18, 2020.
    On January 24, 2020, the Commission issued a notice soliciting
public comment for 30 days on the reinstatement and revision of FERC-
922 (Performance Metrics for ISOs, RTOs, and Regions Outside ISOs and
RTOs; OMB Control No. 1902-0262), in Docket No. AD19-16-000. The notice
was published in the Federal Register on

January 30, 2020 (85 FR 5418), and the comment period ended on March 2,
2020.
    This Errata Notice corrects multiple figures in the table that was
included in the 30-day notice. All of the changes described here stem
from the estimated number of burden hours per response in Column 5 of
the table. In the 30-day notice, the burden hours per response were not
differentiated sufficiently among the categories of respondents.
Despite varying requirements for collecting, analyzing, and reviewing
data, the 30-day notice reports 401 hours per response for each
existing category of respondents, and 427 hours per response for each
potential new respondent.
    We have re-considered these estimates in order to describe with
greater precision the burdens of each category of existing respondents
in this information collection. We now estimate 97 burden hours per
response for Category 1 metrics for all 11 respondents. Additional
estimated burden hours per response apply to some of those respondents,
and affect their burden hours as follows:
     263 burden hours per response for Category 2 respondents
(i.e., the 97 hours per response that apply to all respondents, plus an
additional 166 hours per response); and
     401 burden hours per response for Category 3 respondents
(i.e., the 97 hours per response that apply to all respondents, plus
the 166 hours per response that apply to Category 2 respondents, plus
138 hours per response that apply only to Category 3 respondents).
    These data are included in the following corrected table and in the
submittal to the Office of Management and Budget. Besides showing the
number of burden hours per response for each type of response, the
table shows sub-totals for each existing category of respondents, as
well as for the category identified as ``possible new respondents.''

Correction

    In the Federal Register of January 30, 2020, in FR Doc. 2020-01692,
on page 5420, correct the table to read:
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN15AP20.000

Kimberly D. Bose,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2020-07901 Filed 4-14-20; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 87, Number 110 (Wednesday, June 8, 2022)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 34786-34788]
[FR Doc No: 2022-12344]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Coast Guard

33 CFR Part 165

[Docket Number USCG-2022-0464]
RIN 1625-AA00

Safety Zone; Lake Erie; Sandusky, OH

AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS.

ACTION: Temporary final rule.

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

SUMMARY: The Coast Guard is establishing a temporary safety zone for
navigable waters near Sandusky Bay in Sandusky, OH. The safety zone is
necessary and intended to protect personnel, vessels, and the marine
environment from potential hazards associated with fireworks displays
created by the Downtown Sandusky Fireworks event near Sandusky Bay.
Entry of vessels or persons into this zone is prohibited unless
specifically authorized by the Captain of the Port Detroit, or his
designated representative.

DATES: This rule is effective from 8 p.m. through 10:30 p.m. on June
19, 2022.

ADDRESSES: To view documents mentioned in this preamble as being
available in the docket, go to https://www.regulations.gov, type USCG-
2022-0464 in the ``SEARCH'' box and click ``SEARCH.'' Click on Open
Docket Folder on the line associated with this rule.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: If you have questions on this rule,
call or email MSTC Spencer Ehlers, Waterways Department, Marine Safety
Unit Toledo, Coast Guard; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>, email
[email protected].

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Table of Abbreviations

CFR Code of Federal Regulations
DHS Department of Homeland Security
FR Federal Register
NPRM Notice of proposed rulemaking
Sec.  Section
U.S.C. United States Code

II. Background Information and Regulatory History

    The Coast Guard is issuing this temporary rule without prior notice
and opportunity to comment pursuant to authority under section 4(a) of
the Administrative Procedure Act (APA) (5 U.S.C. 553(b)). This
provision authorizes an agency to issue a rule without prior notice and
opportunity to comment when the agency for good cause finds that those
procedures are ``impracticable, unnecessary, or contrary to the public
interest.'' Under 5 U.S.C. 553(b)(B), the Coast Guard finds that good
cause exists for not publishing a notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM)
with respect to this rule because the event sponsor notified the Coast
Guard with insufficient time to publish an NPRM and immediate action is
necessary to protect personnel, vessels, and the marine environment in
Sandusky Bay. It is impracticable and contrary to the public interest
to publish a NPRM because we must establish this safety zone by June
19, 2022.
    Under 5 U.S.C. 553(d)(3), the Coast Guard finds that good cause
exists for making this rule effective less than 30 days after
publication in the Federal Register. For the same reasons discussed in
the preceding paragraph, delaying the effective date of this rule would
be impracticable because immediate action is needed to respond to the
potential safety hazards associated with a fireworks display.

III. Legal Authority and Need for Rule

    The Coast Guard is issuing this rule under authority in 46 U.S.C.
70034 (previously 33 U.S.C. 1231). The Captain of the Port Detroit
(COTP) has determined that potential hazards associated with fireworks
displays will be a safety concern for anyone within a 300-yard radius
of the launch site. The likely combination of recreational vessels,
darkness punctuated by bright flashes of light, and fireworks debris
falling into the water presents risks of collisions which could result
in serious injuries or fatalities. This rule is necessary to protect
personnel, vessels, and the marine environment in the navigable waters
within the safety zone during the fireworks display.

IV. Discussion of the Rule

    This rule establishes a safety zone that will be enforced from 8
p.m. through 10:30 p.m. on June 19, 2022. The safety zone will
encompass all U.S. navigable waters of Lake Erie within a 300-yard
radius of the fireworks launch site located near Jackson Street Pier,
Sandusky, OH. The duration of the zone is intended to protect
personnel, vessels, and the marine environment in these navigable
waters during the fireworks display. Entry into, transiting, or
anchoring within the safety zone is prohibited unless authorized by the
Captain of the Port Detroit or his designated representative. The
Captain of the Port Detroit or his designated representative may be
contacted via VHF Channel 16.

V. Regulatory Analyses

    We developed this rule after considering numerous statutes and
Executive orders related to rulemaking. Below we summarize our analyses
based on a number of these statutes and Executive orders, and we
discuss First Amendment rights of protestors.

A. Regulatory Planning and Review

    Executive Orders 12866 and 13563 direct agencies to assess the
costs and benefits of available regulatory alternatives and, if
regulation is necessary, to select regulatory approaches that maximize
net benefits. This rule has not been designated a ``significant
regulatory action,'' under Executive Order 12866. Accordingly, this
rule has not been reviewed by the Office of Management and Budget
(OMB).
    This regulatory action determination is based on the size,
location, and duration of the safety zone. Vessel traffic will be able
to safely transit around this safety zone which would impact a small
designated area of Sandusky Bay 2.5 hours during the evening when
vessel traffic is normally low. Moreover, the Coast Guard would issue a
Broadcast Notice to Mariners via VHF-FM Marine Channel 16 about the
zone, and the rule would allow vessels to seek permission to enter the
zone.

B. Impact on Small Entities

    The Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980, 5 U.S.C. 601-612, as
amended, requires Federal agencies to consider the potential impact of
regulations on small entities during rulemaking. The term ``small
entities'' comprises small businesses, not-for-profit organizations
that are independently owned and operated and are not dominant in their
fields, and governmental jurisdictions with populations of less than
50,000.

The Coast Guard certifies under 5 U.S.C. 605(b) that this rule will not
have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small
entities.
    While some owners or operators of vessels intending to transit the
safety zone may be small entities, for the reasons stated in section
V.A above, this rule will not have a significant economic impact on any
vessel owner or operator.
    Under section 213(a) of the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement
Fairness Act of 1996 (Pub. L. 104-121), we want to assist small
entities in understanding this rule. If the rule would affect your
small business, organization, or governmental jurisdiction and you have
questions concerning its provisions or options for compliance, please
call or email the person listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT
section.
    Small businesses may send comments on the actions of Federal
employees who enforce, or otherwise determine compliance with, Federal
regulations to the Small Business and Agriculture Regulatory
Enforcement Ombudsman and the Regional Small Business Regulatory
Fairness Boards. The Ombudsman evaluates these actions annually and
rates each agency's responsiveness to small business. If you wish to
comment on actions by employees of the Coast Guard, call 1-888-REG-FAIR
(1-888-734-3247). The Coast Guard will not retaliate against small
entities that question or complain about this rule or any policy or
action of the Coast Guard.

C. Collection of Information

    This rule will not call for a new collection of information under
the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501-3520).

D. Federalism and Indian Tribal Governments

    A rule has implications for federalism under Executive Order 13132,
Federalism, if it has 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. We have analyzed this rule under that Order and have
determined that it is consistent with the fundamental federalism
principles and preemption requirements described in Executive Order
13132.
    Also, this rule does not have tribal implications under Executive
Order 13175, Consultation and Coordination with Indian Tribal
Governments, because it does not have a substantial direct effect on
one or more Indian tribes, on the relationship between the Federal
Government and Indian tribes, or on the distribution of power and
responsibilities between the Federal Government and Indian tribes. If
you believe this rule has implications for federalism or Indian tribes,
please contact the person listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT
section above.

E. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act

    The Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (2 U.S.C. 1531-1538)
requires Federal agencies to assess the effects of their discretionary
regulatory actions. In particular, the Act addresses actions that may
result in the expenditure by a State, local, or tribal government, in
the aggregate, or by the private sector of $100,000,000 (adjusted for
inflation) or more in any one year. Though this rule will not result in
such an expenditure, we do discuss the effects of this rule elsewhere
in this preamble.

F. Environment

    We have analyzed this rule under Department of Homeland Security
Directive 023-01, Rev. 1, associated implementing instructions, and
Environmental Planning COMDTINST 5090.1 (series), which guide the Coast
Guard in complying with the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969
(42 U.S.C. 4321-4370f), and have determined that this action is one of
a category of actions that do not individually or cumulatively have a
significant effect on the human environment. This rule involves a
safety zone lasting only 2.5 hours that will prohibit entry within 300-
yard radius of where the fireworks display will be conducted. It is
categorically excluded from further review under paragraph L[60] of
Appendix A, Table 1 of DHS Instruction Manual 023-01-001-01, Rev. 1. A
Record of Environmental Consideration supporting this determination is
available in the docket. For instructions on locating the docket, see
the ADDRESSES section of this preamble.

G. Protest Activities

    The Coast Guard respects the First Amendment rights of protesters.
Protesters are asked to call or email the person listed in the FOR
FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section to coordinate protest activities so
that your message can be received without jeopardizing the safety or
security of people, places or vessels.

List of Subjects in 33 CFR Part 165

    Harbors, Marine safety, Navigation (water), Reporting and record
keeping requirements, Security measures, Waterways.

    For the reasons discussed in the preamble, the Coast Guard amends
33 CFR part 165 as follows:

PART 165--REGULATED NAVIGATION AREAS AND LIMITED ACCESS AREAS

0
1. The authority citation for part 165 continues to read as follows:

    Authority:  46 U.S.C. 70034, 70051; 33 CFR 1.05-1, 6.04-1, 6.04-
6, and 160.5; Department of Homeland Security Delegation No.
00170.1, Revision No. 01.2.

0
2. Add Sec.  165.T09-0464 to read as follows:

Sec.  165.T09-0464  Safety Zone; Lake Erie; Sandusky Bay, OH.

    (a) Location. The following area is a temporary safety zone: all
U.S. navigable waters of the Sandusky Bay within a within a 300-yard
radius of the fireworks launch site located at position 41[deg]27'32''
N, 082[deg]42'51'' W. All geographic coordinates are North American
Datum of 1983 (NAD 83).
    (b) Enforcement period. This regulation will be enforced from 8
p.m. through 10:30 p.m. on June 19, 2022. The Captain of the Port
Detroit, or a designated representative may suspend enforcement of the
safety zone at any time.
    (c) Definitions. As used in this section, designated representative
means a Coast Guard Patrol Commander, including a Coast Guard coxswain,
petty officer, or other officer operating a Coast Guard vessel and a
Federal, State, and local officer designated by or assisting the
Captain of the Port Detroit (COTP) in the enforcement of the safety
zone.
    (d) Regulations. (1) In accordance with the general regulations in
Sec.  165.23, entry into, transiting, or anchoring within this safety
zone is prohibited unless authorized by the Captain of the Port Detroit
or his designated representative.
    (2) Vessel operators desiring to enter or operate within the safety
zone shall contact the Captain of the Port Detroit or his designated
representative to obtain permission to do so. Vessel operators given
permission to enter or operate in the safety zone must comply with all
directions given to them by the Captain of the Port Detroit or his
designated representative. The COTP Detroit or his designated
representative may be contacted via VHF Channel 16.

    Dated: June 2, 2022.
Brad W. Kelly,
Captain, U.S. Coast Guard, Captain of the Port Detroit.
[FR Doc. 2022-12344 Filed 6-7-22; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 9110-04-P


[Federal Register Volume 79, Number 138 (Friday, July 18, 2014)]
[Notices]
[Pages 42003-42004]
[FR Doc No: 2014-16849]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

Combined Notice of Filings 1

    (J)Take notice that the Commission received the following exempt
wholesale generator filings:

    Docket Numbers: EG14-71-000.
    Applicants: Dominion Solar Gen-Tie, LLC.
    Description: Self-Certification of EWG status of Dominion Solar
Gen-Tie, LLC.
    Filed Date: 7/10/14.
    Accession Number: 20140710-5019.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 7/31/14.

    Docket Numbers: EG14-72-000.
    Applicants: Desert Green Solar Farm LLC.
    Description: Notice of Self-Certification of Exempt Wholesale
Generator Status of Desert Green Solar Farm LLC.
    Filed Date: 7/10/14.
    Accession Number: 20140710-5028.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 7/31/14.

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

    Docket Numbers: ER14-1713-001.
    Applicants: Midcontinent Independent System Operator, Inc.
    Description: Midcontinent Independent System Operator, Inc. submits
tariff filing per 35: 2014-07-10 Flow Limit (SRBPC) Compliance Filing
to be effective 4/12/2014.
    Filed Date: 7/10/14.
    Accession Number: 20140710-5118.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 7/31/14.

    Docket Numbers: ER14-2245-000.
    Applicants: TriEagle Energy, LP.
    Description: Supplement to June 23, 2014 TriEagle Energy, LP tariff
filing.
    Filed Date: 7/9/14.
    Accession Number: 20140709-5179.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 7/30/14.

    Docket Numbers: ER14-2393-000.
    Applicants: Macho Springs Solar, LLC.
    Description: Macho Springs Amendment Filing to be effective 7/10/
2014.
    Filed Date: 7/9/14.
    Accession Number: 20140709-5165.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 7/30/14.

    Docket Numbers: ER14-2394-000.
    Applicants: New York State Electric & Gas Corporation.
    Description: Notice of Cancellation of Facilities Agreements Rate
Schedule No. 72 and 227 New York State Electric & Gas Corporation.
    Filed Date: 7/9/14.
    Accession Number: 20140709-5178.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 7/30/14.

    Docket Numbers: ER14-2395-000.
    Applicants: Southwest Power Pool, Inc.
    Description: 2827R1 Kansas Power Pool & Westar Meter Agent
Agreement to be effective 6/1/2014.
    Filed Date: 7/10/14.
    Accession Number: 20140710-5032.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 7/31/14.

    Docket Numbers: ER14-2396-000.
    Applicants: Pennsylvania Electric Company, PJM Interconnection,
L.L.C.
    Description: Pennsylvania Electric Company Filing of Original &
Revised Svc Agrmnts to be effective 8/1/2014.
    Filed Date: 7/10/14.
    Accession Number: 20140710-5082.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 7/31/14.

    Docket Numbers: ER14-2397-000.
    Applicants: Public Service Company of New Hampshire.
    Description: Public Service Company of New Hampshire submits Notice
of Cancellation of First Revised Service Agreement No. 93 with
Essential Power Newington, LLC.
    Filed Date: 7/10/14.
    Accession Number: 20140710-5088.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 7/31/14.

    Docket Numbers: ER14-2398-000.
    Applicants: PJM Interconnection, L.L.C.
    Description: Request for Limited Tariff Waiver Request of PJM
Interconnection, L.L.C.
    Filed Date: 7/10/14.
    Accession Number: 20140710-5124.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 7/31/14.

    Take notice that the Commission received the following public
utility holding company filings:

    Docket Numbers: PH14-12-000.
    Applicants: The Northwestern Mutual Life Insurance Company.
    Description: The Northwestern Mutual Life Insurance Company submits
FERC 65-A Exemption Notification.
    Filed Date: 7/10/14.
    Accession Number: 20140710-5061.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 7/31/14.
    The filings are accessible in the Commission's eLibrary system by
clicking on the links or querying the docket number.

    Any person desiring to intervene or protest in any of the above
proceedings must file in accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of the
Commission's Regulations (18 CFR 385.211 and 385.214) on or before 5:00
p.m. Eastern time on the specified comment date. Protests may be
considered, but intervention is necessary to become a party to the
proceeding.
    eFiling is encouraged. More detailed information relating to filing
requirements, interventions, protests, service, and qualifying
facilities filings can be found at: http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/efiling/filing-req.pdf. For other information, call<PHONE_NUMBER>
(toll free). For TTY, call<PHONE_NUMBER>.

    Dated: July 10, 2014.
Nathaniel J. Davis, Sr.,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2014-16849 Filed 7-17-14; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register: July 9, 2010 (Volume 75, Number 131)]
[Notices]
[Page 39614-39615]
[DOCID:fr09jy10-117]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

Approval of Noise Compatibility Program for Modesto City-County
Airport, Modesto, CA

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration, DOT.

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: The Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) announces its
findings on the noise compatibility program submitted by the City of
Modesto under the provisions of Title I of the Aviation Safety and
Noise Abatement Act, as amended, (Pub. L. 96-193) (hereinafter referred
to as ``the Act'') and 14 CFR Part 150. These findings are made in
recognition of the description of Federal and nonfederal
responsibilities in Senate Report No. 96-52 (1980). On January 9, 2009,
the FAA determined that the noise exposure maps submitted by the City
of Modesto under Part 150 were in compliance with applicable
requirements.

DATES: Effective Date: The effective date of the FAA's approval of the
Noise Compatibility Program for Modesto City-County Airport is June 2,
2010.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Camille Garibaldi, Environmental
Protection Specialist, FAA Western-Pacific Region, San Francisco
Airports District Office, 831 Mitten Road, Suite 210, Burlingame,
California, telephone number<PHONE_NUMBER> extension 613. Documents
reflecting this FAA action may be reviewed at this same location.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This notice announces that the FAA has given
its overall approval to the Noise Compatibility Program for Modesto
City-County Airport, effective June 2, 2010. Under section 104(a) of
the Aviation Safety and Noise Abatement Act of 1979, as amended (herein
after referred to as the ``Act'') [recodified as 49 U.S.C. 47504], an
airport operator who has previously submitted a Noise Exposure Map may
submit to the FAA a Noise Compatibility Program which sets forth the
measures taken or proposed by the airport operator for the reduction of
existing non-compatible land uses and prevention of additional non-
compatible land uses within the area covered by the Noise Exposure

Maps. The Act requires such programs to be developed in consultation
with interested and affected parties including local communities,
government agencies, airport users, and FAA personnel.
    Each airport noise compatibility program developed in accordance
with Federal Aviation Regulations (FAR) Part 150 is a local program,
not a Federal program. The FAA does not substitute its judgment for
that of the airport proprietor with respect to which measures should be
recommended for action. The FAA's approval or disapproval of FAR Part
150 program recommendations is measured according to the standards
expressed in Part 150 and the Act, and is limited to the following
determinations:
    a. The Noise Compatibility Program was developed in accordance with
the provisions and procedures of FAR Part 150;
    b. Program measures are reasonably consistent with achieving the
goals of reducing existing non-compatible land uses around the airport
and preventing the introduction of additional non-compatible land uses;
    c. Program measures would not create an undue burden on interstate
or foreign commerce, unjustly discriminate against types or classes of
aeronautical uses, violate the terms of airport grant agreements, or
intrude into areas preempted by the Federal Government; and
    d. Program measures relating to the use of flight procedures can be
implemented within the period covered by the program without derogating
safety, adversely affecting the efficient use and management of the
navigable airspace and air traffic control systems, or adversely
affecting other powers and responsibilities of the Administrator
prescribed by law.
    Specific limitations with respect to FAA's approval of an airport
noise compatibility program are delineated in FAR Part 150, section
150.5. Approval is not a determination concerning the acceptability of
land uses under Federal, State, or local law. Approval does not by
itself constitute an FAA implementing action. A request for Federal
action or approval to implement specific noise compatibility measures
may be required, and an FAA decision on the request may require an
environmental assessment of the proposed action. Approval does not
constitute a commitment by the FAA to financially assist in the
implementation of the program nor a determination that all measures
covered by the program are eligible for grant-in-aid funding from the
FAA under the Airport and Airway Improvement Act of 1982, as amended.
Where Federal funding is sought, requests for project grants must be
submitted to the FAA Western-Pacific Region, San Francisco Airports
District Office in Burlingame, California.
    The City of Modesto submitted to the FAA on October 2, 2008, the
Noise Exposure Maps for evaluation. The FAA determined that the Noise
Exposure Maps were in compliance with applicable requirements on
January 9, 2009. Notice of this determination was published in the
Federal Register on January 26, 2009.
    The Modesto City-County Airport study contains a proposed noise
compatibility program comprised of actions designed for phased
implementation by airport management and adjacent jurisdictions. It was
requested that the FAA evaluate and approve this material as a Noise
Compatibility Program as described in 49 U.S.C. 47504 (formerly Section
104(b) of the Act). The FAA began its review of the program on December
9, 2009 and was required by a provision of the Act to approve or
disapprove the program within 180 days (other than the use of new or
modified flight procedures for noise control). Failure to approve or
disapprove such program within the 180-day period shall be deemed to be
an approval of such program.
    The Noise Compatibility Program recommended two noise abatement
elements, four land use management elements and one program management
element. The FAA completed its review and determined that the
procedural and substantive requirements of the Act and FAR Part 150
have been satisfied. The overall program was approved, by the Manager
of the Airports Division, Western-Pacific Region, effective June 2,
2010.
    Approval was granted for one Noise Abatement Element, four Land Use
Management Elements and one Program Management Element. The approved
measures included: Designate a commercial service hold area near
midfield; Adopt the Modesto City-County Airport Part 150 Noise
Compatibility Program by reference in the cities of Modesto and Ceres,
and Stanislaus County General Plans; Consistently designate the area
northwest of the airport within the City of Modesto and Stanislaus
County General Plan; The City of Modesto should consider adopting an
airport compatibility checklist for discretionary review of projects
within its vicinity; Adopt a Noise Overlay Zone; and Update Noise
Exposure Maps and Noise Compatibility Program.
    The Noise Abatement Element--Pursue a change to the Department of
Defense's Instrument Flight Rule Supplement was disapproved for
purposes of Part 150. The FAA disapproved the element due to lack of
supporting analysis in the Noise Compatibility Plan. However, the
disapproval does not prohibit the City of Modesto from working with the
Department of Defense to revise the recommended operational hours in
the Instrument Flight Rule Supplement on a voluntary basis.
    The FAA determinations are set forth in detail in the Record of
Approval signed by the Manager of the Airports Division, Western-
Pacific Region, on June 2, 2010. The Record of Approval, as well as
other evaluation materials and the documents comprising the submittal,
are available for review at the FAA office listed above and at the
administrative offices of the Modesto City-County Airport. The Record
of Approval also will be available on-line at: http://www.faa.gov/
airports/environmental/airport_noise/part_150/states/.

    Issued in Hawthorne, California, on June 18, 2010.
Brian Q. Armstrong,
Acting Manager, Airports Division, Western-Pacific Region, AWP-600.
[FR Doc. 2010-16751 Filed 7-8-10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


[Federal Register: August 19, 2010 (Volume 75, Number 160)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Page 51173-51174]
[DOCID:fr19au10-4]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 71

[Docket No. FAA-2010-0002; Airspace Docket No. 09-ANM-32]

Amendment of Class E Airspace; Port Angeles, WA

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: This action will amend existing Class E airspace at Port
Angeles, WA. The Ediz Hook Nondirectional Radio Beacon (NDB) has been
decommissioned and removed. This will improve the safety and management
of Instrument Flight Rules (IFR) operations at the airport.

DATES: Effective date, 0901 UTC, November 18, 2010. 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 June 14, 2010, the FAA published in the Federal Register a
notice of proposed rulemaking to amend controlled airspace at Port
Angeles, WA (75 FR 33556). Interested parties were invited to
participate in this rulemaking effort by submitting written comments on
the proposal to the FAA. No comments were received.
    Class E airspace designations are published in paragraph 6002 and
6005, respectively, of FAA Order 7400.9T signed August 27, 2009, and
effective September 15, 2009, which is incorporated by reference in 14
CFR Part 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 surface airspace, and Class E airspace
extending upward from 700 feet above the surface, at William R.
Fairchild International Airport, Port Angeles, WA, due to the
decommissioning of the Ediz Hook NDB. This action is necessary for the
safety and management of IFR operations.
    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 modifies
controlled airspace at William R. Fairchild International Airport, Port
Angeles, WA.

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 71

    Airspace, Incorporation by reference, Navigation (air).

Adoption of the Amendment

0
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 7400.9T, Airspace Designations and
Reporting Points, signed August 27, 2009, and effective September 15,
2009 is amended as follows:

Paragraph 6002 Class E airspace designated as surface areas.

* * * * *

ANM WA, E2 Port Angeles, WA [Amended]

Port Angeles, William R. Fairchild International Airport, WA
    (Lat. 48[deg]07'13'' N., long. 123[deg]29'59'' W.)

    Within a 4.1-mile radius of the William R. Fairchild
International Airport, and within 3 miles north and 2.2 miles south
of the William R. Fairchild International Airport 079[deg] bearing
extending from the 4.1-mile radius to 11.4 miles east of the
airport. This Class E airspace area is effective during specific
dates and times established in advance by a Notice to Airmen. The
effective date and time will thereafter be continuously published in
the Airport/Facility Directory.

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

* * * * *

ANM WA, E5 Port Angeles, WA [Amended]

Port Angeles, William R. Fairchild International Airport, WA
    (Lat. 48[deg]07'13'' N., long. 123[deg]29'59'' W.)
Port Angeles CGAS
    (Lat. 48[deg]08'28'' N., long. 123[deg]24'51'' W.)

    That airspace extending upward from 700 feet above the surface
within a 4.1-mile radius of the William R. Fairchild International
Airport, and within a 4.1-mile radius of Port Angeles CGAS, and
within 2.7 miles north and 4.3 miles south of the William R.
Fairchild International Airport 079[deg] bearing extending from the
4.1-mile radius to 11.4 miles east of the airport, and including the
airspace within 1.8 miles either side of the William R. Fairchild
International Airport 285[deg] bearing extending from the 4.1-mile
radius to 7 miles west of the airport; that airspace extending
upward from 1,200 feet above the surface bounded on the east by the
west edge of V-495, on the south by V-4, on the west by long.
124[deg]02'05''W., and on the north by the United States/Canadian
border.

    Issued in Seattle, Washington, on August 12, 2010.
Robert Henry,
Acting Manager, Operations Support Group, Western Service Center.
[FR Doc. 2010-20521 Filed 8-18-10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


[Federal Register Volume 80, Number 93 (Thursday, May 14, 2015)]
[Notices]
[Page 27798]
[FR Doc No: 2015-11597]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

Proposed Collection; Comment Request

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

Extension:
    Form 12b-25. SEC File No. 270-71, OMB Control No. 3235-0058.

    Notice is hereby given that, pursuant to the Paperwork Reduction
Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.), the Securities and Exchange
Commission (``Commission'') is soliciting comments on the collection of
information summarized below. The Commission plans to submit this
existing collection of information to the Office of Management and
Budget for extension and approval.
    The purpose of Form 12b-25 (17 CFR 240.12b-25) is to provide notice
to the Commission and the marketplace that a public company will be
unable to timely file a required periodic report or transition report
pursuant to the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (15 U.S.C. 78a et
seq.). If all the filing conditions of the form are satisfied, the
company is granted an automatic filing extension. Approximately 4,456
registrants file Form 12b-25 and it takes approximately 2.5 hours per
response for a total of 11,140 burden hours.
    Written comments are invited on: (a) Whether this proposed
collection of information is necessary for the proper performance of
the functions of the agency, including whether the information will
have practical utility; (b) the accuracy of the agency's estimate of
the burden imposed by the collection of information; (c) ways to
enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information collected;
and (d) ways to minimize the burden of the collection of information on
respondents, including through the use of automated collection
techniques or other forms of information technology. Consideration will
be given to comments and suggestions submitted in writing within 60
days of this publication.
    Please direct your written comments to Pamela Dyson, Director/Chief
Information Officer, Securities and Exchange Commission, c/o Remi
Pavlik-Simon, 100 F Street NE., Washington, DC 20549, or send an email
to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
    Dated: May 8, 2015.
Robert W. Errett,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2015-11597 Filed 5-13-15; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 80, Number 20 (Friday, January 30, 2015)]
[Notices]
[Pages 5179-5182]
[FR Doc No: 2015-01747]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-74132; File No. SR-FICC-2014-11]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; Fixed Income Clearing Corporation;
Order Approving Proposed Rule Change To Amend the Government Securities
Division Rulebook and the Mortgage Backed Securities Clearing Rules In
Order To Move the Time of Novation With Respect to Certain Trades,
Include Rules To Reflect Existing Processes, and Clarify Certain Rules
To Reflect Current Practices

January 26, 2015.

I. Introduction

    On December 2, 2014, the Fixed Income Clearing Corporation
(``FICC'') filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission
(``Commission'') proposed rule change SR-FICC-2014-11 pursuant to
Section 19(b)(1) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (``Act'') \1\
and Rule 19b-4 thereunder.\2\ The proposed change was published for
comment in the Federal Register on December 16, 2014.\3\ The Commission
received no comment letters in response to the proposed rule change.
For the reasons discussed below, the Commission is approving the
proposed rule change.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1).
    \2\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4.
    \3\ Securities Exchange Act Release No. 34-73805 (December 10,
2014), 79 FR 74790 (December 16, 2014) (SR-FICC-2014-11).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

 II. Description

    The rule change, as proposed, moves the time of novation applicable
to certain transactions submitted to FICC's Government Securities
Division (``GSD'') and FICC's Mortgage Backed Securities Division
(``MBSD'') to earlier in the clearing process in order to provide
members with additional legal certainty, for purposes of members'
regulatory capital requirements, that FICC will be the legal
counterparty with respect to their guaranteed trades.
    Currently, FICC guarantees the settlement of a trade upon
comparison, which generally occurs when FICC issues initial ``output''
to GSD netting members or MBSD clearing members, as applicable,
indicating that their trades have compared,\4\ provided that the trade
meets the requirements of the GSD Rulebook (``GSD Rules'') or the MBSD
Rulebook (``MBSD Rules''), as applicable.\5\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ In the case of GSD locked-in trades, comparison occurs upon
receipt of the trade data submitted to FICC from the locked-in trade
source. GSD Rule 6C.
    \5\ See GSD Rule 11B and MBSD Rule 5.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Novation, which refers to the termination of delivery, receive and
related payment obligations between the original parties to the
contract and the replacement of such obligations with identical
obligations between each party and FICC, currently does not occur until
later in the clearing and settlement process than comparison. Under the
GSD Rules, novation currently occurs when subsequent ``netting output''
is issued to netting members (usually the day before settlement). Under
the MBSD Rules, novation currently occurs when subsequent ``pool
netting output'' is issued to clearing members (usually the day before
settlement).
    FICC stated in its proposed rule change that it was proposing the
rule change because it understood that, as its members (or their
advisors) analyze their netting rights with respect to transactions
cleared through FICC for purposes of regulatory capital requirements,
it is beneficial for members that FICC become the legal counterparty at
the point its guarantee attaches.

Time of Novation--Rule Changes

    Under the revised GSD Rules and MBSD Rules, as approved, novation
will occur at comparison for netting eligible transactions (for GSD)
and SBO-Destined Trades \6\ (for MBSD). This means that, at the point
of trade comparison, FICC will both guarantee the settlement of the
transactions (as it does today) and novate such transactions, becoming
the legal counterparty to each submitting member with respect to such
transactions.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ The MBSD Rules define a ``SBO-Destined Trade'' as a to-be-
announced (``TBA'') transaction in the clearing system intended for
TBA Netting in accordance with the provisions of the Rules. MBSD
Rule 1. In a TBA transaction, members agree on a sale price,
quantity, and the characteristics of the securities being sold, but
they do not specify which particular securities will be delivered on
the settlement date.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Under the revised GSD Rules, as approved pursuant to this rule
change, all netting eligible transactions that compare in accordance
with the GSD Rules will novate at the point of comparison.
    As amended by this proposal, pursuant to the MBSD Rules, only SBO-
Destined Trades, all of which are

included in the TBA Netting process and must be submitted to the Pool
Netting process,\7\ will novate at the point of comparison. Other types
of transactions, including Trade-for-Trade Transactions \8\ and
Specified Pool Trades,\9\ will continue to be guaranteed at comparison,
as they are today, but FICC will not novate such transactions at
comparison. Instead, such transactions will be treated as they are
today: (1) To the extent Trade-for-Trade Transactions are included in
the Pool Netting process,\10\ FICC will novate such Transactions once
the Pool Netting \11\ process is completed and (2) Specified Pool
Trades, which are not included in the TBA Netting process nor the Pool
Netting process, are not novated today (they settle outside of FICC
between the submitting counterparties) and will continue to not be
novated under the proposal.\12\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ MBSD conducts two separate netting processes to consolidate
settlement obligations and reduce the number of securities and the
amount of cash that must be exchanged to settle transactions. TBA
Netting is the process used to net SBO-Destined Trades that have
compared in accordance with the MBSD Rules. TBA Netting is conducted
before particular securities (``pools'') are identified to the SBO-
Destined Trades. Pool Netting, which occurs after MBSD clearing
members allocate pools to transactions, is the process used to
aggregate and match offsetting pool delivery obligations submitted
by MBSD clearing members to satisfy their settlement obligations.
MBSD Rules 6 and 7. An MBSD clearing member may submit a transaction
to Pool Netting even if such transaction was not submitted for TBA
Netting. The rule change includes the addition of a new Section 7 to
MBSD Rule 8 stating that each clearing member must submit to FICC
for inclusion in Pool Netting each SBOO and SBON Trade to which such
clearing member is a party. The terms ``SBOO Trade'' and ``SBON
Trade'' are defined in MBSD Rule 1, as amended by this rule change.
Section 7 of MBSD Rule 8 has been added to reflect MBSD's existing
requirements and practices.
    \8\ The MBSD Rules define ``Trade-for-Trade Transaction'' as a
TBA transaction submitted to FICC not intended for TBA Netting in
accordance with the provisions of the Rules. MBSD Rule 1.
    \9\ The MBSD Rules define ``Specified Pool Trades'' as a trade
in which all required pool data, including the pool number to be
delivered on the contractual settlement date, are agreed upon by the
clearing member at the time of execution. MBSD Rule 1.
    \10\ Trade-for-Trade Transactions that are not submitted to the
Pool Netting process must be settled outside of FICC between the
submitting counterparties.
    \11\ As noted in SR-FICC-2008-01, a clearing member that has a
trade that was matched with a stipulation (``Stip Trade'') would not
submit such trade for Pool Netting. Pool Netting creates delivery
obligations based off the net position of clearing members without
regard to the original counterparty relationship. With a Stip Trade,
the buyer and seller will want to ensure the receipt or delivery, as
applicable, is maintained between themselves to ensure that the
other party adheres to the stipulated terms. Securities Exchange Act
Release No. 34-66550 (March 9, 2012), 77 FR 15155 (March 14, 2014)
(SR-FICC-2008-01). Therefore, as with the current process, FICC does
not expect to novate Stip Trades.
    \12\ MBSD Rule 10.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In order to effectuate this change in the time of novation as
described above, the rule change adds language to the GSD Rules (new
Section 8 of Rule 5) and the MBSD Rules (new Section 13 of Rule 5) that
states that FICC will guarantee and novate applicable transactions upon
comparison, subject to the parameters set forth in the rule change, as
proposed. Conforming changes also will be made to GSD Rule 3A, GSD Rule
6B, GSD Rule 6C, GSD Rule 11, GSD Rule 14, GSD Rule 20, GSD Rule 21A,
Rule 22B, MBSD Rule 6, MBSD Rule 8, MBSD Rule 10, MBSD Rule 11 and MBSD
Rule 17A. In addition, the definition of ``novation'' in both GSD Rule
1 and MBSD Rule 1 is clarified to reflect that delivery, receive and
related payment obligations between members will be terminated and
replaced with identical obligations to and from FICC at the point in
time that the trade is compared in accordance with the applicable
Rules.
    The rule change, as approved, makes clear that under the MBSD Rules
certain settlement obligations continue to be settled between the
settlement counterparties and not vis-[agrave]-vis FICC; these are the
obligations that are not included in the Pool Netting process pursuant
to MBSD Rule 8 (Pool Netting). The rule change does not change this
existing process. However, because the rule change moves the time of
novation up to the time of comparison for certain MBSD transactions,
the rule change (in MBSD Rule 5, Section 2) makes clear that the
settlement counterparties continue to settle with each other but do so
on behalf of FICC for those transactions that are novated to FICC.
    According to FICC, the proposal to move the time of novation as
noted above does not change FICC's risk exposures. Because FICC
currently guarantees eligible trades upon comparison, FICC already
assumes responsibility for settling such trades at the point of
comparison. According to FICC, adding legal novation at the point of
comparison does not increase FICC's obligations and therefore, does not
require any changes to FICC's risk management processes. In addition,
FICC notes that the rule change does not change FICC's operational
processes.

Formalization of Existing Processes

    In addition, the rule changes formalize the following existing
processes:
     Section 7 of MBSD Rule 8 is added to state that all SBOO
Trades and SBON Trades \13\ must be submitted to Pool Netting.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \13\ The terms ``SBOO Trade'' and ``SBON Trade'' are defined in
MBSD Rule 1, as amended by this proposal.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

     MBSD Rules 15 and 16 are revised to clarify that, upon the
insolvency of a member's original counterparty to a compared trade,
such member cannot unilaterally modify its obligations with respect to
transactions originally entered with such counterparty. In the MBSD
Rules, because certain trades are not novated and will continue to not
be novated under this proposal, the rule change makes clear that upon a
cease to act with respect to a member by FICC, the solvent member to a
compared trade with the defaulting member may not unilaterally act with
respect to such trade.
    These changes are not intended to change FICC's current operations
or processes.

Clarification To Reflect Current Processes

    In addition, the rule change clarifies certain GSD and MBSD Rules
to reflect actual practices and requirements as follows:
     MBSD Rule 17 is revised to clarify that when FICC ceases
to act for a member, FICC may dispose of such member's Trade-for-Trade
Transactions based upon their generic terms. These changes are not
intended to change FICC's current operations or processes.

Specific Changes

    With respect to the GSD Rules, the proposed changes are as follows:
     The term ``Interactive Submission Method'' is revised to
correct a typographical error.
     For clean-up and clarification purposes, the term
``Novation'' is revised to reflect that delivery, receive and related
payment obligations between GSD netting members will be terminated and
replaced with identical obligations to and from FICC at the point in
time that the trade is compared in accordance to the GSD Rules.
     Rule 3A, Sections 2(i), 7(a), 7(d), 14(c), and 16(a) are
revised to reflect that trades submitted by Sponsored Members \14\ will
novate to FICC at the time that such trades receive FICC's guaranty of
settlement.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \14\ The term ``Sponsored Member'' means any Person that has
been approved by FICC to be sponsored into membership by a
Sponsoring Member pursuant to Rule 3A. GSD Rule 1.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

     Rule 5 is revised to include a new Section 8 entitled
``Novation and Guaranty of Compared Trades,'' which provides for the
following: (1) Compared trades that meet the

requirements of the GSD Rules and were entered into in good faith will
novate to FICC and FICC will guarantee the settlement for each such
compared trade; (2) if a compared trade becomes uncompared or
cancelled, FICC's guaranty and novation of such trade will be reversed
and cancelled; (3) if a compared trade is modified after novation and
such modification does not cause the trade to become uncompared, then
the modification will cause a corresponding modification to the
deliver, receive and related payment obligations between the GSD
netting members and FICC; (4) at the time that a compared trade becomes
novated, such trade ceases to be bound by any bilateral agreement
between the parties with respect to the deliver, receive and related
payment obligations, however, if the trade becomes uncompared or is
cancelled, such trade shall be governed by the bilateral agreement that
governed the trade prior to the novation; and (5) if a right of
substitution was established by the parties to a repurchase
transaction, such right will continue and be recognized by FICC after
novation.
     Rule 6B, Section 4 deletes the provision which states that
an uncompared trade will cease to be guaranteed by FICC because this
concept is now covered in Rule 5, Section 8.
     Rule 6C, Section 10 deletes the provision which states
that a locked-in trade that becomes uncompared will cease to be
guaranteed by FICC because this concept is now covered in Rule 5,
Section 8.
     Rule 6C, Section 11 deletes the provision which states
that a netting eligible auction purchase that becomes uncompared will
cease to be guaranteed by FICC because this concept is now covered in
Rule 5, Section 8.
     Rule 6C, Section 12 deletes the provision which states
that a GCF Repo Transaction \15\ that becomes uncompared will cease to
be guaranteed by FICC because this concept is now covered in Rule 5,
Section 8.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \15\ Pursuant to the GSD Rules, the term ``GCF Repo
Transaction'' means a Repo Transaction involving generic CUSIP
numbers the data on which are submitted to FICC on a locked-in-trade
basis pursuant to the provisions of Rule 6C, for netting and
settlement by FICC pursuant to the provisions of Rule 20. GSD Rule
1.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

     Rule 11, Section 6 is revised to reflect that (1) novation
occurs at comparison; and (2) at netting, the previously novated
deliver, receive and related payment obligations between the netting
members and FICC will be terminated and replaced by net deliver,
receive and related payment obligations as listed in the report made
available by FICC to the netting members.
     Rule 11B is revised to correct typographical errors.
     Rule 14, Section 3 is revised to reflect that (1) novation
occurs at comparison; and (2) at netting, the previously novated
deliver, receive and related payment obligations between the netting
members and FICC created by Forward Trades will be terminated and
replaced by net deliver, receive and related payment obligations as
listed in the report made available by FICC to the netting members.
     Rule 20, Section 5 is revised to reflect that with respect
to GCF Repo Transactions, novation will occur at comparison in
accordance with Rule 5, Section 8.
     Rule 21A is revised to incorporate the concept of
novation.
     Rule 22B included a sentence providing that upon FICC's
default, trades that had compared would be deemed novated. Because the
GSD Rules are being revised to reflect that novation occurs at
comparison, this sentence is no longer necessary. As a result, it is
being deleted in connection with this rule change.
    With respect to the MBSD Rules, the changes are as follows:
     For clean-up and clarification purposes, the term
``Novation'' is revised to reflect that delivery, receive and related
payment obligations between MBSD clearing members will be terminated
and replaced with identical obligations to and from FICC in accordance
with the MBSD Rules.
     The term ``SBO Contra-Side Member'' is revised to correct
a typographical error.
     The term ``SBO Net-Out Position'' is revised to clarify
that the term is used in connection with offsetting purchase and sale
SBO-Destined Trades that were originally between different clearing
members (but, once novated at comparison, are between such members and
FICC).
     The term ``SBO Net-Out Unit'' is being deleted because
this term is not used in the MBSD Rules.
     The term ``SBO Netted Position'' is revised to clarify
that the term is used in connection with offsetting purchase and sale
SBO-Destined Trades that were originally between the same clearing
members (but, once novated at comparison, are between such members and
FICC).
     The term ``SBON Trade'' is revised to correct a
typographical error.
     The term ``SBOO Trade'' is revised to correct a
typographical error.
     Rule 5, Section 1 is revised to correct a typographical
error.
     Rule 5, Section 2 is revised to reflect that (1)
transactions that are not novated pursuant to this proposal (pursuant
to new Section 13 of Rule 5 discussed below) and not netted and novated
through the Pool Netting system will be settled directly between the
members; and (2) transactions novated pursuant to new Section 13 of
Rule 5 and not thereafter netted through the Pool Netting system
pursuant to Rule 8 will settle between members on behalf of FICC.
     Rule 5, Section 12 is revised to correct a typographical
error.
     Rule 5 includes a new Section 13 entitled ``Novation''
which states the following: (1) FICC will guarantee and novate SBO-
Destined Trades that meet the requirement of the MBSD Rules and have
been entered into in good faith; (2) FICC will not novate SBO-Destined
Trades that are partially compared; (3) to the extent a partially
compared SBO-Destined Trade becomes fully compared, FICC will novate
such trade; (4) if a trade becomes uncompared or cancelled, the
guaranty and novation of such transaction shall be reversed; (5) at the
time that an SBO-Destined Trade is novated to FICC, such trade shall
cease to be bound by any bilateral agreement between the parties to the
trade with respect to the deliver, receive and related payment
obligations, however, if the trade becomes uncompared or is cancelled,
such trade shall be governed by the bilateral agreement that governs
such trade prior to the novation.
     Rule 6, Sections 1(a), (b) and (c) are revised to take
into account the fact that SBO-Destined Trades are novated upon
comparison and are, therefore, legally between MBSD clearing members
and FICC after comparison.
     Rule 8, Section 6 is revised to take into account the fact
that SBO-Destined Trades are novated upon comparison and are,
therefore, legally between MBSD clearing members and FICC after
comparison.
     Rule 8 includes a new Section 7 which is entitled
``Obligation to Submit SBOO and SBON Trades to Pool Netting.'' This
Section reflects MBSD's current requirement and current practice that
clearing members are required to submit all SBOO Trades and SBON Trades
for inclusion in the Pool Netting system.
     Rule 10, Section 2 is revised to clarify that clearing
members are required to submit a notification of settlement for SBO
Trades that are novated at comparison and processed through the TBA
Netting system but that are not thereafter submitted to the Pool
Netting system.

     Rule 11, Section 1 is revised to take into account the
fact that SBO Trades are novated upon comparison and are, therefore,
legally between MBSD clearing members and FICC after comparison.
     Rule 15 is revised to clarify the current process with
respect to transactions submitted to and compared by FICC, whereby in
the event a member's original counterparty becomes insolvent, such
member cannot unilaterally modify its obligations with respect to
transactions originally entered with such counterparty.
     Rule 16 is revised to clarify the current process with
respect to transactions submitted to and compared by FICC, whereby in
the event a member's original counterparty becomes insolvent, such
member cannot unilaterally modify its obligations with respect to
transactions originally entered with such counterparty.
     Rule 17, Section 2 is revised to clarify the current
process whereby when FICC ceases to act for a clearing member, such
member's Trade-for-Trade Transactions \16\ may be disposed of based
upon their generic terms such as agency, product, coupon rate and
maturity. The other changes are typographical corrections.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \16\ Including ``stip'' trades and any other TBA transactions
not intended for TBA Netting.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

     Rule 17A is revised to clarify that in the event of FICC's
default, novation is deemed to have occurred with respect to all
transactions at the time such transactions are compared, whether or not
such transactions are SBO-Destined Trades that would otherwise have
been novated at comparison. The other changes to this provision are
grammatical corrections.

III. Discussion

    Section 19(b)(2)(C) of the Act \17\ directs the Commission to
approve a proposed rule change of a self-regulatory organization if it
finds that such proposed rule change is consistent with the
requirements of the Act and the rules and regulations thereunder
applicable to such organization. Section 17A(b)(3)(F) of the Act \18\
requires, among other things, that the rules of a clearing agency be
designed to achieve several goals, including promoting the prompt and
accurate clearance and settlement of securities transactions and, to
the extent applicable, derivative agreements, contracts, and
transactions.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \17\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(2)(C).
    \18\ 15 U.S.C. 78q-1(b)(3)(F).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Commission concludes that the proposed rule change is
consistent with the requirements of Section 17A(b)(3)(F) of the Act,
and the rules and regulations thereunder, because by moving novation
for trades that enter GSD's Netting system and MBSD's TBA Netting
system, the rule change, as approved, should clarify FICC's
responsibilities to its members and remove potential uncertainty that
previously existed due to a mismatch between the time of guaranty and
the time of novation. As a result, such clarity should further
facilitate the prompt and accurate clearance and settlement of
securities transactions.

IV. Conclusion

    On the basis of the foregoing, the Commission finds that the
proposed rule change is consistent with the requirements of the Act,
particularly those set forth in Section 17A,\19\ and the rules and
regulations thereunder.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \19\ 15 U.S.C. 78q-1.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED, pursuant to Section 19(b)(2) of the
Act,\20\ that the proposed rule change (SR-FICC-2014-11) be, and hereby
is, APPROVED.\21\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \20\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(2).
    \21\ In approving the proposed rule change, the Commission
considered the proposal's impact on efficiency, competition, and
capital formation. See 15 U.S.C. 78c(f).

    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets,
pursuant to delegated authority.\22\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \22\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Brent J. Fields,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2015-01747 Filed 1-29-15; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 80, Number 157 (Friday, August 14, 2015)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Page 48765]
[FR Doc No: 2015-20046]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration

49 CFR Part 391

Qualifications of Drivers and Longer Combination Vehicle (LCV)
Driver Instructors

CFR Correction

    In Title 49 of the Code of Federal Regulations, Parts 300 to 399,
revised as of October 1, 2014, on pages 394 and 395, in Sec.  391.2, in
paragraphs (a) introductory text, (b), and (c), ``(fg)'' is revised to
read ``(f)''.

[FR Doc. 2015-20046 Filed 8-13-15; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 1505-01-D


[Federal Register Volume 87, Number 135 (Friday, July 15, 2022)]
[Notices]
[Pages 42523-42524]
[FR Doc No: 2022-15129]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[SEC File No. 270-497; OMB Control No. 3235-0555]

Submission for OMB Review; Comment Request Extension: Rule 6h-1

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

    Notice is hereby given that, pursuant to the Paperwork Reduction
Act of 1995 (``PRA'') (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.), the Securities and
Exchange Commission (``Commission'') has submitted to the Office of
Management and Budget (``OMB'') a request for approval of extension of
the previously approved collection of information provided for in Rule
6h-1 (17 CFR 240.6h-1) under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934
(``Act'') (15 U.S.C. 78a et seq.).
    Section 6(h) of the Act (15 U.S.C. 78f(h)) requires national
securities exchanges and national securities associations that trade
security futures products to establish listing standards that, among
other things, require that: (i) trading in such products not be readily
susceptible to price manipulation; and (ii) the market on which the
security futures product trades has in place procedures to coordinate
trading halts with the listing market for the security or securities
underlying the security futures product. Rule 6h-1 implements these
statutory requirements and requires that (1) the final settlement price
for each cash-settled security futures product fairly reflect the
opening price of the underlying security or securities, and (2) the
exchanges and associations trading security futures products halt
trading in any security futures product for as long as trading in the
underlying security for trading of a security futures product based on
a single security, or trading in 50% or more of the underlying
securities for trading of a security futures product based on a narrow-
based security index, is halted on the listing market.
    It is estimated that approximately 1 respondent will incur an
average burden of 10 hours per year to comply with this rule, for a
total burden of 10 hours. At an average internal cost per hour of
approximately $428, the resultant total internal cost of compliance for
the respondents is $4,280 per year (1 respondent x 10 hours/respondent
x $428/hour).
    Compliance with Rule 6h-1 is mandatory. Any listing standards

established pursuant to Rule 6h-1 would be filed with the Commission as
proposed rule changes pursuant to Section 19(b) of the Act and would be
published in the Federal Register.
    An agency may not conduct or sponsor, and a person is not required
to respond to, a collection of information under the PRA unless it
displays a currently valid OMB control number.
    The public may view background documentation for this information
collection at the following website: www.reginfo.gov. Find this
particular information collection by selecting ``Currently under 30-day
Review--Open for Public Comments'' or by using the search function.
    Written comments and recommendations for the proposed information
collection should be sent by August 15, 2022 to (i) www.reginfo.gov/public/do/PRAMain and (ii) David Bottom, Director/Chief Information
Officer, Securities and Exchange Commission, c/o John Pezzullo, 100 F
Street NE, Washington, DC 20549, or by sending an email to:
[email protected].

    Dated: July 11, 2022.
J. Matthew DeLesDernier,
Assistant Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2022-15129 Filed 7-14-22; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011-01-P