[Federal Register Volume 78, Number 160 (Monday, August 19, 2013)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 50326-50328]
[FR Doc No: 2013-19465]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 97

[Docket No. 30915; Amdt. No. 3550]

Standard Instrument Approach Procedures, and Takeoff Minimums and
Obstacle Departure Procedures; Miscellaneous Amendments

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: This rule establishes, amends, suspends, or revokes Standard
Instrument Approach Procedures (SIAPs) and associated Takeoff Minimums
and Obstacle Departure Procedures for operations at certain airports.
These regulatory actions are needed because of the adoption of new or
revised criteria, or because of changes occurring in the National
Airspace System, such as the commissioning of new navigational
facilities, adding new obstacles, or changing air traffic requirements.
These changes are designed to provide safe and efficient use of the
navigable airspace and to promote safe flight operations under
instrument flight rules at the affected airports.

DATES: This rule is effective August 19, 2013. The compliance date for
each SIAP, associated Takeoff Minimums, and ODP is specified in the
amendatory provisions.
    The incorporation by reference of certain publications listed in
the regulations is approved by the Director of the Federal Register as
of August 19, 2013.

ADDRESSES: Availability of matter incorporated by reference in the
amendment is as follows:
    For Examination--
    1. FAA Rules Docket, FAA Headquarters Building, 800 Independence
Avenue SW., Washington, DC 20591;
    2. The FAA Regional Office of the region in which the affected
airport is located;
    3. The National Flight Procedures Office, 6500 South MacArthur
Blvd., Oklahoma City, OK 73169 or,
    4. The National Archives and Records Administration (NARA). For
information on the availability of this material at NARA, call 202-741-
6030, or go to: http://www.archives.gov/federal_register/code_of_federal_regulations/ibr_locations.html.
    Availability_All SIAPs are available online free of charge. Visit
nfdc.faa.gov to register. Additionally, individual SIAP and Takeoff
Minimums and ODP copies may be obtained from:
    1. FAA Public Inquiry Center (APA-200), FAA Headquarters Building,
800 Independence Avenue SW., Washington, DC 20591; or
    2. The FAA Regional Office of the region in which the affected
airport is located.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Richard A. Dunham III, Flight
Procedure Standards Branch (AFS-420) Flight Technologies and Programs
Division, Flight Standards Service, Federal Aviation Administration,
Mike Monroney Aeronautical Center, 6500 South MacArthur Blvd., Oklahoma
City, OK 73169 (Mail Address: P.O. Box 25082, Oklahoma City, OK 73125)
telephone:<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This rule amends Title 14, Code of Federal
Regulations, Part 97 (14 CFR part 97) by amending the referenced SIAPs.
The complete regulatory description of each SIAP is listed on the
appropriate FAA Form 8260, as modified by the National Flight Data
Center (FDC)/Permanent Notice to Airmen (P-NOTAM), and is incorporated
by reference in the amendment under 5 U.S.C. 552(a), 1 CFR part 51, and
Sec.  97.20 of Title 14 of the Code of Federal Regulations.
    The large number of SIAPs, their complex nature, and the need for a
special format make their verbatim publication in the Federal Register
expensive and impractical. Further, airmen do not use the regulatory
text of the SIAPs, but refer to their graphic depiction on charts
printed by publishers of aeronautical materials. Thus, the advantages
of incorporation by reference are realized and publication of the
complete description of each SIAP contained in FAA form documents is
unnecessary. This amendment provides the affected CFR sections and
specifies the types of SIAP and the corresponding effective dates. This
amendment also identifies the airport and its location, the procedure
and the amendment number.

The Rule

    This amendment to 14 CFR part 97 is effective upon publication of
each separate SIAP as amended in the transmittal. For safety and
timeliness of change considerations, this amendment incorporates only
specific changes

contained for each SIAP as modified by FDC/P-NOTAMs.
    The SIAPs, as modified by FDC P-NOTAM, and contained in this
amendment are based on the criteria contained in the U.S. Standard for
Terminal Instrument Procedures (TERPS). In developing these changes to
SIAPs, the TERPS criteria were applied only to specific conditions
existing at the affected airports. All SIAP amendments in this rule
have been previously issued by the FAA in a FDC NOTAM as an emergency
action of immediate flight safety relating directly to published
aeronautical charts. The circumstances which created the need for all
these SIAP amendments requires making them effective in less than 30
days.
    Because of the close and immediate relationship between these SIAPs
and safety in air commerce, I find that notice and public procedure
before adopting these SIAPs are impracticable and contrary to the
public interest and, where applicable, that good cause exists for
making these SIAPs effective in less than 30 days.

Conclusion

    The FAA has determined that this regulation only involves an
established body of technical regulations for which frequent and
routine amendments are necessary to keep them operationally current.
It, therefore-- (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. For the same reason, the FAA
certifies that this amendment will not have a significant economic
impact on a substantial number of small entities under the criteria of
the Regulatory Flexibility Act.

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 97

    Air traffic control, Airports, Incorporation by reference, and
Navigation (Air).

    Issued in Washington, DC, on August 2, 2013.
John Duncan,
Deputy Director, Flight Standards Service.

Adoption of the Amendment

    Accordingly, pursuant to the authority delegated to me, Title 14,
Code of Federal regulations, Part 97, 14 CFR part 97, is amended by
amending Standard Instrument Approach Procedures, effective at 0901 UTC
on the dates specified, as follows:

PART 97--STANDARD INSTRUMENT APPROACH PROCEDURES

0
1. The authority citation for part 97 continues to read as follows:

    Authority: 49 U.S.C. 106(g), 40103, 40106, 40113, 40114, 40120,
44502, 44514, 44701, 44719, 44721-44722.

Sec. Sec.  97.23, 97.25, 97.27, 97.29, 97.31, 97.33, 97.35  [Amended]

0
2. Part 97 is amended to read as follows:
    By amending: Sec.  97.23 VOR, VOR/DME, VOR or TACAN, and VOR/DME or
TACAN; Sec.  97.25 LOC, LOC/DME, LDA, LDA/DME, SDF, SDF/DME; Sec.
97.27 NDB, NDB/DME; Sec.  97.29 ILS, ILS/DME, MLS, MLS/DME, MLS/RNAV;
Sec.  97.31 RADAR SIAPs; Sec.  97.33 RNAV SIAPs; and Sec.  97.35 COPTER
SIAPs, Identified as follows:

* * * Effective Upon Publication

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      AIRAC Date           State              City                 Airport          FDC No.      FDC Date                      Subject
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
8/22/13..............  CO             Kremmling...........  Mc Elroy Airfield...       3/2344      7/15/13  This NOTAM, published in TL 13-18, is hereby
                                                                                rescinded in its entirety.
9/19/13..............  TX             Atlanta.............  Hall-Miller Muni....       3/1732      7/29/13  NDB RWY 5, Amdt 4
9/19/13..............  TX             Atlanta.............  Hall-Miller Muni....       3/1735      7/29/13  RNAV (GPS) RWY 5, Amdt 1
9/19/13..............  NE             Omaha...............  Millard.............       3/1940      7/29/13  NDB RWY 12, Amdt 10C
9/19/13..............  MN             Little Falls........  Little Falls/              3/2226      7/29/13  NDB RWY 31, Amdt 6A
                                                             Morrison County-
                                                             Lindbergh Fld.
9/19/13..............  NM             Clovis..............  Clovis Muni.........       3/2353      7/29/13  Takeoff Minimums and (Obstacle) DP, Orig
9/19/13..............  TX             Houston.............  Ellington...........       3/2964      7/29/13  TACAN RWY 22, Orig
9/19/13..............  TX             Amarillo............  Tradewind...........       3/3484      7/29/13  NDB-A, Amdt 14A
9/19/13..............  WI             Wisconsin Rapids....  Alexander Field            3/3614      7/29/13  RNAV (GPS) RWY 20, Orig
                                                             South Wood County.
9/19/13..............  MI             Ontonagon...........  Ontonagon County--         3/3856      7/29/13  RNAV (GPS) A, Orig
                                                             Schuster Field.
9/19/13..............  TN             Sevierville.........  Gatlinburg--Pigeon         3/4067      7/29/13  RNAV (GPS) RWY 10, Orig
                                                             Forge.
9/19/13..............  OK             Enid................  Enid Woodring Rgnl..       3/4168      7/29/13  ILS OR LOC RWY 35, Amdt 5A
9/19/13..............  OR             La Grande...........  La Grande/Union            3/4716      7/29/13  RNAV (GPS) RWY 16, Orig-A
                                                             County.
9/19/13..............  IN             Bloomington.........  Monroe County.......       3/5107      7/29/13  RNAV (GPS) RWY 24, Orig-A
9/19/13..............  IN             Bloomington.........  Monroe County.......       3/5108      7/29/13  VOR RWY 17, Amdt 12
9/19/13..............  IN             Bloomington.........  Monroe County.......       3/5109      7/29/13  RNAV (GPS) RWY 6, Orig
9/19/13..............  IN             Bloomington.........  Monroe County.......       3/5110      7/29/13  VOR/DME RWY 35, Amdt 15A
9/19/13..............  IN             Bloomington.........  Monroe County.......       3/5111      7/29/13  VOR/DME RWY 6, Amdt 19
9/19/13..............  IN             Bloomington.........  Monroe County.......       3/5115      7/29/13  VOR/DME RWY 24, Amdt 12
9/19/13..............  IN             Bloomington.........  Monroe County.......       3/5117      7/29/13  ILS OR LOC/DME RWY 35, Amdt 6
9/19/13..............  IN             Bloomington.........  Monroe County.......       3/5121      7/29/13  RNAV (GPS) RWY 35, Amdt 1
9/19/13..............  IN             Bloomington.........  Monroe County.......       3/5123      7/29/13  RNAV (GPS) RWY 17, Amdt 1A
9/19/13..............  NY             Syracuse............  Syracuse Hancock           3/5235      7/29/13  RNAV (GPS) Z RWY 10, Amdt 2A
                                                             Intl.
9/19/13..............  KS             Wichita.............  Wichita Mid-               3/5351      7/29/13  ILS OR LOC RWY 19R, Amdt 5D
                                                             Continent.
9/19/13..............  PA             York................  York................       3/5532      7/29/13  RNAV (GPS) RWY 35, Amdt 1
9/19/13..............  PA             York................  York................       3/5533      7/29/13  NDB RWY 17, Amdt 7
9/19/13..............  PA             York................  York................       3/5534      7/29/13  RNAV (GPS) RWY 17, Amdt 2
9/19/13..............  IA             Waterloo............  Waterloo Rgnl.......       3/5797      7/29/13  VOR RWY 24, Amdt 16

9/19/13..............  IA             Waterloo............  Waterloo Rgnl.......       3/5798      7/29/13  RNAV (GPS) RWY 6, Orig
9/19/13..............  NJ             Teterboro...........  Teterboro...........       3/6313      7/29/13  VOR RWY 24, Orig-C
9/19/13..............  SC             Moncks Corner.......  Berkeley County.....       3/6939      7/29/13  RNAV (GPS) RWY 23, Orig
9/19/13..............  IL             Chicago/Aurora......  Aurora Muni.........       3/7234      7/29/13  ILS OR LOC RWY 9, Amdt 3
9/19/13..............  IL             Chicago/Aurora......  Aurora Muni.........       3/7238      7/29/13  RNAV (GPS) RWY 9, Amdt 1B
9/19/13..............  MN             Minneapolis.........  Anoka County--Blaine       3/7330      7/29/13  VOR RWY 9, Amdt 12A
                                                             Arpt (Janes Field).
9/19/13..............  MN             Minneapolis.........  Anoka County--Blaine       3/7332      7/29/13  RNAV (GPS) RWY 18, Orig-C
                                                             Arpt (Janes Field).
9/19/13..............  MN             Minneapolis.........  Anoka County--Blaine       3/7333      7/29/13  RNAV (GPS) RWY 9, Orig-C
                                                             Arpt (Janes Field).
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

[FR Doc. 2013-19465 Filed 8-16-13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


[Federal Register Volume 86, Number 103 (Tuesday, June 1, 2021)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 29195-29196]
[FR Doc No: 2021-11282]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

17 CFR Part 242

[Release No. 34-90610A, File No. S7-03-20]
RIN 3235-AM61

Market Data Infrastructure

AGENCY: Securities and Exchange Commission.

ACTION: Final rule; correction.

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

SUMMARY: This document makes technical corrections to amendments to
modernize the national market system for the collection, consolidation,
and dissemination of information with respect to quotations for and
transactions in national market system stocks adopted in Release No.
34-90610 (December 9, 2020) (``Adopting Release''), which was published
in the Federal Register on April 9, 2021.

DATES: Effective June 8, 2021.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Kelly Riley, Senior Special Counsel,
at<PHONE_NUMBER>; Ted Uliassi, Senior Special Counsel, at (202) 551-
6095, Division of Trading and Markets, Securities and Exchange
Commission, 100 F Street NE, Washington, DC 20549.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: We are making technical amendments to
correct Sec.  242.600(b)(5). Specifically, this document amends
Instruction 8 published in the Adopting Release by adding new
Instruction 8.w. to revise a cross-reference to current Sec.
242.600(b)(4) in current Sec.  242.600(b)(5).
    In document FR doc. 2020-28370, which was published in the Federal
Register on Friday, April 9, 2021, at 86 FR 18596, the following
correction is made:

Sec.  242.600   [Corrected]

0
On page 18810, in the first column, Instruction 8.w. is added to read
as follows: ``w. Amending newly redesignated paragraph (b)(7)(i) by
removing the text ``paragraph (b)(4) of this section'' and adding in
its place ``paragraph (b)(6) of this section''.''

    Dated: May 24, 2021.
Vanessa A. Countryman,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2021-11282 Filed 5-28-21; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 77, Number 11 (Wednesday, January 18, 2012)]
[Notices]
[Page 2555]
[FR Doc No: 2012-847]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES

Food and Drug Administration

[Docket No. FDA-2011-P-0756]

Determination That PREZISTA (darunavir) Tablets, 300 Milligrams
Was Not Withdrawn From Sale for Reasons of Safety or Effectiveness

AGENCY: Food and Drug Administration, HHS.

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has determined that
PREZISTA (darunavir) Tablets, 300 milligrams (mg), was not withdrawn
from sale for reasons of safety or effectiveness. This determination
will allow FDA to approve abbreviated new drug applications (ANDAs) for
darunavir tablets, 300 mg, if all other legal and regulatory
requirements are met.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Nam Kim, Center for Drug Evaluation
and Research, Food and Drug Administration, 10903 New Hampshire Ave.,
Bldg. 51, rm. 6320, Silver Spring, MD 20993-0002,<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: In 1984, Congress enacted the Drug Price
Competition and Patent Term Restoration Act of 1984 (Pub. L. 98-417)
(the 1984 amendments), which authorized the approval of duplicate
versions of drug products under an ANDA procedure. ANDA applicants
must, with certain exceptions, show that the drug for which they are
seeking approval contains the same active ingredient in the same
strength and dosage form as the ``listed drug,'' which is a version of
the drug that was previously approved. ANDA applicants do not have to
repeat the extensive clinical testing otherwise necessary to gain
approval of a new drug application (NDA). The only clinical data
required in an ANDA are data to show that the drug that is the subject
of the ANDA is bioequivalent to the listed drug.
    The 1984 amendments include what is now section 505(j)(7) of the
Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (21 U.S.C. 355(j)(7)), which
requires FDA to publish a list of all approved drugs. FDA publishes
this list as part of the ``Approved Drug Products With Therapeutic
Equivalence Evaluations,'' which is known generally as the ``Orange
Book.'' Under FDA regulations, drugs are removed from the list if the
Agency withdraws or suspends approval of the drug's NDA or ANDA for
reasons of safety or effectiveness or if FDA determines that the listed
drug was withdrawn from sale for reasons of safety or effectiveness (21
CFR 314.162).
    A person may petition the Agency to determine, or the Agency may
determine on its own initiative, whether a listed drug was withdrawn
from sale for reasons of safety or effectiveness. This determination
may be made at any time after the drug has been withdrawn from sale,
but must be made prior to approving an ANDA that refers to the listed
drug (Sec.  314.161 (21 CFR 314.161)). FDA may not approve an ANDA that
does not refer to a listed drug.
    PREZISTA (darunavir) Tablets, 300 mg, is the subject of NDA 21-976,
held by Tibotec, Inc., and initially approved on June 23, 2006.
PREZISTA is a human immunodeficiency virus (HIV-1) protease inhibitor
indicated for the treatment of HIV-1 infection in adult patients.
PREZISTA is also indicated for the treatment of HIV-1 infection in
pediatric patients 6 years of age and older. PREZISTA must be
coadministered with ritonavir (PREZISTA/ritonavir) and with other
antiretroviral agents.
    PREZISTA (darunavir) Tablets, 300 mg, is currently listed in the
``Discontinued Drug Product List'' section of the Orange Book.
    Lupin Pharmaceuticals, Inc. (Lupin), submitted a citizen petition
dated October 14, 2011 (Docket No. FDA-2011-P-0756), under 21 CFR
10.30, requesting that the Agency determine whether PREZISTA
(darunavir) Tablets, 300 mg, was withdrawn from sale for reasons of
safety or effectiveness. After considering the citizen petition and
reviewing Agency records and based on the information we have at this
time, FDA has determined under Sec.  314.161 that PREZISTA (darunavir)
Tablets, 300 mg, was not withdrawn for reasons of safety or
effectiveness. The petitioner Lupin has identified no data or other
information suggesting that PREZISTA (darunavir) Tablets, 300 mg, was
withdrawn for reasons of safety or effectiveness. We have carefully
reviewed our files for records concerning the withdrawal of PREZISTA
(darunavir) Tablets, 300 mg, from sale. We have also independently
evaluated relevant literature and data for possible postmarketing
adverse events. We have found no information that would indicate that
this product was withdrawn from sale for reasons of safety or
effectiveness.
    Accordingly, the Agency will continue to list PREZISTA (darunavir)
Tablets, 300 mg, in the ``Discontinued Drug Product List'' section of
the Orange Book. The ``Discontinued Drug Product List'' delineates,
among other items, drug products that have been discontinued from
marketing for reasons other than safety or effectiveness. ANDAs that
refer to PREZISTA (darunavir) Tablets, 300 mg, may be approved by the
Agency as long as they meet all other legal and regulatory requirements
for the approval of ANDAs. If FDA determines that labeling for this
drug product should be revised to meet current standards, the Agency
will advise ANDA applicants to submit such labeling.

    Dated: January 11, 2012.
Leslie Kux,
Acting Assistant Commissioner for Policy.
[FR Doc. 2012-847 Filed 1-17-12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4160-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 80, Number 147 (Friday, July 31, 2015)]
[Notices]
[Pages 45671-45673]
[FR Doc No: 2015-18856]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Coast Guard

[USCG-2015-0630; OMB Control Number 1625-0035]

Information Collection Request to Office of Management and Budget

AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS.

ACTION: Sixty-day notice requesting comments.

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

SUMMARY:  In compliance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, the
U.S. Coast Guard intends to submit an Information Collection Request
(ICRs) to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB), Office of
Information and Regulatory Affairs (OIRA), requesting approval of a
revision of a currently approved collection: Lifesaving, Electrical,
Engineering and Navigation Equipment, Construction and Materials &
Marine Sanitation Devices. Our ICR describes the information we seek to
collect from the public. Before submitting this ICR to OIRA, the Coast

Guard is inviting comments as described below.

DATES: Comments must reach the Coast Guard on or before September 29,
2015.

ADDRESSES: You may submit comments identified by Coast Guard docket
number [USCG-2015-0630] to the Docket Management Facility (DMF) at the
U.S. Department of Transportation (DOT). To avoid duplicate
submissions, please use only one of the following means:
    (1) Online: http://www.regulations.gov.
    (2) Mail: DMF (M-30), DOT, West Building Ground Floor, Room W12-
140, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., Washington, DC 20590-0001.
    (3) Hand delivery: Same as mail address above, between 9 a.m. and 5
p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays. The telephone
number is<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    (4) Fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>. To ensure your comments are received in a
timely manner, mark the fax, to attention Desk Officer for the Coast
Guard.
    The DMF maintains the public docket for this Notice. Comments and
material received from the public, as well as documents mentioned in
this Notice as being available in the docket, will become part of the
docket and will be available for inspection or copying at room W12-140
on the West Building Ground Floor, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE.,
Washington, DC, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday,
except Federal holidays. You may also find the docket on the Internet
at http://www.regulations.gov.
    Copies of the ICR(s) are available through the docket on the
Internet at http://www.regulations.gov. Additionally, copies are
available from: Commandant (CG-612), ATTN: Paperwork Reduction Act
Manager, U.S. Coast Guard, 2703 Martin Luther King Jr. Ave. SE., Stop
7710, Washington, DC 20593-7710.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr. Anthony Smith, Office of
Information Management, telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>, or fax<PHONE_NUMBER>,
for questions on these documents. Contact Ms. Cheryl Collins, Program
Manager, Docket Operations,<PHONE_NUMBER>, for questions on the docket.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: In compliance with the Paperwork Reduction
Act of 1995, the U.S. Coast Guard intends to submit an Information
Collection Request (ICRs) to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB),
Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs (OIRA), requesting
approval of a revision of a currently approved collection: 1625-0035,
Title 46 CFR Subchapter Q: Lifesaving, Electrical, Engineering and
Navigation Equipment, Construction and Materials & Marine Sanitation
Devices (33 CFR part 159). Our ICR describes the information we seek to
collect from the public. Before submitting this ICR to OIRA, the Coast
Guard is inviting comments as described below.

Public Participation and Request for Comments

    This Notice relies on the authority of the Paperwork Reduction Act
of 1995; 44 U.S.C. Chapter 35, as amended. An ICR is an application to
OIRA seeking the approval, extension, or renewal of a Coast Guard
collection of information (Collection). The ICR contains information
describing the Collection's purpose, the Collection's likely burden on
the affected public, an explanation of the necessity of the Collection,
and other important information describing the Collection. There is one
ICR for each Collection.
    The Coast Guard invites comments on whether these ICRs should be
granted based on the Collections being necessary for the proper
performance of Departmental functions. In particular, the Coast Guard
would appreciate comments addressing: (1) The practical utility of the
Collection; (2) the accuracy of the estimated burden of the Collection;
(3) ways to enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of information
subject to the Collection; and (4) ways to minimize the burden of the
Collection on respondents, including the use of automated collection
techniques or other forms of information technology. In response to
your comments, we may revise these ICRs or decide not to seek approval
of revisions of the Collection. We will consider all comments and
material received during the comment period.
    We encourage you to respond to this request by submitting comments
and related materials. Comments must contain the OMB Control Number of
the ICR and the docket number of this request, [USCG-2015-0630], and
must be received by September 29, 2015. We will post all comments
received, without change, to http://www.regulations.gov. They will
include any personal information you provide. We have an agreement with
DOT to use their DMF. Please see the ``Privacy Act'' paragraph below.

Submitting Comments

    If you submit a comment, please include the docket number [USCG-
2015-0630], indicate the specific section of the document to which each
comment applies, providing a reason for each comment. You may submit
your comments and material online (via http://www.regulations.gov), by
fax, mail, or hand delivery, but please use only one of these means. If
you submit a comment online via www.regulations.gov, it will be
considered received by the Coast Guard when you successfully transmit
the comment. If you fax, hand deliver, or mail your comment, it will be
considered as having been received by the Coast Guard when it is
received at the DMF. We recommend you include your name, mailing
address, an email address, or other contact information in the body of
your document so that we can contact you if we have questions regarding
your submission.
    You may submit your comments and material by electronic means,
mail, fax, or delivery to the DMF at the address under ADDRESSES; but
please submit them by only one means. To submit your comment online, go
to http://www.regulations.gov, and type ``USCG-2015-0630'' in the
``Search'' box. If you submit your comments by mail or hand delivery,
submit them in an unbound format, no larger than 8\1/2\ by 11 inches,
suitable for copying and electronic filing. If you submit comments by
mail and would like to know that they reached the Facility, please
enclose a stamped, self-addressed postcard or envelope. We will
consider all comments and material received during the comment period
and will address them accordingly.
    Viewing comments and documents: To view comments, as well as
documents mentioned in this Notice as being available in the docket, go
to http://www.regulations.gov, click on the ``read comments'' box,
which will then become highlighted in blue. In the ``Search'' box
insert ``USCG-2015-0630'' and click ``Search.'' Click the ``Open Docket
Folder'' in the ``Actions'' column. You may also visit the DMF in Room
W12-140 on the ground floor of the DOT West Building, 1200 New Jersey
Avenue SE., Washington, DC 20590, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday
through Friday, except Federal holidays.

Privacy Act

    Anyone can search the electronic form of comments received in
dockets by the name of the individual submitting the comment (or
signing the comment, if submitted on behalf of an association,
business, labor union, etc.). You may review a Privacy Act statement
regarding Coast Guard public dockets in the January 17, 2008, issue of
the Federal Register (73 FR 3316).

Information Collection Request

    1. Title: Title 46 CFR Subchapter Q: Lifesaving, Electrical,
Engineering and Navigation Equipment, Construction and Materials &
Marine Sanitation Devices (33 CFR part 159).
    OMB Control Number: 1625-0035.
    Summary: This information is used by the Coast Guard to ensure that
regulations governing specific types of safety equipment, materials and
Marine Sanitation Devices (MSDs) installed on commercial vessels and
pleasure craft are met. Manufacturers are required to submit drawings,
specifications, and laboratory test reports to the CG before any
approval is given.
    Need: Title 46 U.S.C. 2103, 3306, 3703, and 4302 authorize the
Coast Guard to establish safety equipment and material regulations.
Title 46 CFR parts 159 to 164 prescribe these requirements. Title 33
U.S.C.1322 authorizes the Coast Guard to establish MSD regulations.
Title 33 CFR part 159 prescribes these rules. NVIC 8-01 (Chg 2)
prescribes the standards for navigation equipment. This information is
used to determine whether manufacturers are in compliance with Coast
Guard regulations. When the Coast Guard approves any safety equipment,
material, or MSD for use on a commercial vessel or pleasure craft, the
manufacturer is issued a Certificate of Approval.
    Forms: CGHQ-10030.
    Respondents: Manufacturers of safety equipment, materials and
marine sanitation devices.
    Frequency: On occasion.
    Burden Estimate: The estimated burden has increased from 58,414
hours to 118,594 hours a year due to an increase in the estimated
annual number of responses.

    Authority:  The Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995; 44 U.S.C.
Chapter 35, as amended.

    Dated: July 24, 2015.
Thomas P. Michelli,
U.S. Coast Guard, Deputy Chief Information Officer.
[FR Doc. 2015-18856 Filed 7-30-15; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 9110-04-P


[Federal Register Volume 74, Number 127 (Monday, July 6, 2009)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Page 31844]
[FR Doc No: E9-15697]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 71

[Docket No. FAA-2009-0188; Airspace Docket No. 09-AGL-5]

Amendment of Class E Airspace; Port Clinton, OH

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: This action amends Class E airspace at Port Clinton, OH.
Additional controlled airspace is necessary to accommodate Area
Navigation (RNAV) Standard Instrument Approach Procedures (SIAP) at
Carl R. Keller Field Airport, Port Clinton, OH. The FAA is taking this
action to enhance the safety and management of Instrument Flight Rule
(IFR) operations at Carl R. Keller Field Airport.

DATES: 0901 UTC, October 22, 2009. 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: Scott Enander, Central Service Center,
Operations Support Group, Federal Aviation Administration, Southwest
Region, 2601 Meacham Blvd., Fort Worth, TX 76137; telephone (817) 321-
7716.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

History

    On April 21, 2009, the FAA published in the Federal Register a
notice of proposed rulemaking to amend Class E airspace at Port
Clinton, OH, adding additional controlled airspace at Carl R. Keller
Field Airport, Port Clinton, OH. (74 FR 18166, Docket No. FAA-2009-
0188). 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 6005 of FAA Order 7400.9S signed October 3,
2008, and effective October 31, 2008, 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 the Order.

The Rule

    This action amends Title 14 Code of Federal Regulations (14 CFR)
Part 71 by amending Class E airspace extending upward from 700 feet
above the surface at Port Clinton, OH, adding additional controlled
airspace at Carl R. Keller Field Airport, Port Clinton, OH, for the
safety and management of IFR operations.
    The FAA has determined that 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 that 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, describes
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 adds additional controlled airspace at Carl R. Keller Field
Airport, Port Clinton, OH.

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 7400.9S, Airspace Designations and
Reporting Points, signed October 3, 2008, and effective October 31,
2008, is amended as follows:

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

* * * * *

AGL OH E5 Port Clinton, OH [Amended]

Port Clinton, Carl R. Keller Field Airport, OH
    (Lat. 41[deg]30'59'' N., long. 82[deg]52'07'' W.)
Magruder Memorial Hospital, OH--Point in Space Coordinates
    (Lat. 41[deg]29'43'' N., long. 82[deg]55'50'' W.)

    That airspace extending upward from 700 feet above the surface
within a 7-mile radius of Carl R. Keller Field Airport and within 4
miles each side of the 083[deg] bearing from the airport extending
from the 7-mile radius to 9.4 miles east of the airport and within a
6-mile radius of the Point in Space serving Magruder Memorial
Hospital.
* * * * *

    Issued in Fort Worth, Texas, on June 24, 2009.
Roger M. Trevino,
Acting Manager, Operations Support Group, ATO Central Service Center.
[FR Doc. E9-15697 Filed 7-2-09; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


[Federal Register Volume 82, Number 126 (Monday, July 3, 2017)]
[Notices]
[Page 30882]
[FR Doc No: 2017-13845]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Federal Emergency Management Agency

[Internal Agency Docket No. FEMA-4313-DR; Docket ID FEMA-2017-0001]

Idaho; Amendment No. 1 to Notice of a Major Disaster Declaration

AGENCY: Federal Emergency Management Agency, DHS.

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: This notice amends the notice of a major disaster declaration
for the State of Idaho (FEMA-4313-DR), dated May 18, 2017, and related
determinations.

DATES: Effective Date: June 22, 2017.

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

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The notice of a major disaster declaration
for the State of Idaho is hereby amended to include the following area
among those areas determined to have been adversely affected by the
event declared a major disaster by the President in his declaration of
May 18, 2017.

    Benewah County for Public Assistance.

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

Robert J. Fenton,
Acting Administrator, Federal Emergency Management Agency.
[FR Doc. 2017-13845 Filed 6-30-17; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 9111-23-P


[Federal Register Volume 76, Number 160 (Thursday, August 18, 2011)]
[Notices]
[Pages 51449-51453]
[FR Doc No: 2011-21035]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-65127; File No. SR-NYSE-2011-20]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; New York Stock Exchange LLC; Order
Granting Approval of Proposed Rule Change To Add New Section 907.00 to
the Listed Company Manual that Sets Forth Certain Complimentary
Products and Services That Are Offered to Currently and Newly Listed
Issuers

August 12, 2011.

I. Introduction

    On May 5, 2011, the New York Stock Exchange LLC (``NYSE'' or
``Exchange'') filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission
(``Commission''), pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the Securities
Exchange Act of 1934 (``Act'') \1\ and Rule 19b-4 thereunder,\2\ a
proposed rule change to amend the Listed Company Manual (``Manual'')
setting forth certain complimentary products and services offered to
currently and newly listed issuers. The proposed rule change was
published in the Federal Register on May 23, 2011.\3\ The Commission
received seventeen comments from 14 commenters on the proposal.\4\ NYSE
submitted a letter in response to the
    comments.\5\ On July 5, 2011, the Commission extended the time
period

in which to either approve the proposed rule change, disapprove the
proposed rule change, or institute proceedings to determine whether to
disapprove the proposed rule change, to August 21, 2011.\6\ This order
grants approval of the proposed rule change.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1).
    \2\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4.
    \3\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 64506 (May 17,
2011), 76 FR 29806 (``Notice'').
    \4\ See Letters to the Commission, from Ronald Russo, GLX, Inc.,
dated May 18, 2011 (``GLX Letter''); Bryan Degnan, Taylor Rafferty
Associates, dated May 19, 2011 (``Rafferty Letter''); Jennifer
Kaminsky, dated May 19, 2011; Anonymous, dated May 19, 2011
(``Anonymous Letter''); Todd Allen, dated May 19, 2011 (``Allen
Letter''); Brian Rivel, President, Rivel Research Group, dated May
20, 2011 (``Rivel Letter''); Jerry Falkner, May 22, 2011 (``Falkner
Letter''); Enzo Villani, President, MZ North America, dated June 6,
2011 (``MZ Letter''); John Fairir, dated June 7, 2011 (``Fairir
Letter''); Michael Pepe, CEO, PrecisionIR Group, dated June 7, 2011
(``PrecisionIR Letter''); Michael O'Connell, Director IR Solutions,
SNL Financial, dated June 10, 2011 (``SNL Letter''); Dominic Jones,
President, IR Web Reporting International, Inc., dated June 15, 2011
(``IR Web Reporting Letter''); Darrell Heaps, CEO, Q4 Web System,
dated June 16, 2011 (``Q4 Letter''); Dominic Jones, President, IR
Web Reporting International, Inc., dated June 29, 2011 (``IR Web
Reporting Letter 2''); e-mails to Robert Cook, Director, Division of
Trading and Markets and David Shillman, Associate Director, Division
of Trading and Markets, from Patrick Healy, CEO, Issuer Advisory
Group, LLC, dated June 26, 2011 and June 28, 2011 (both e-mails
indicating that the Issuer Advisory Group would be filing a comment
letter to the proposed rule change); and letter from Patrick Healy,
CEO, Issuer Advisory Group, LLC, dated June 30, 2011 (``Issuer
Advisory Letter'').
    \5\ See Letter to Elizabeth M. Murphy, Secretary, Commission,
from Janet L. McGinness, Senior Vice President--Legal and Corporate
Secretary, NYSE, dated June 27, 2011 (``NYSE Response Letter'').
NYSE's Response Letter is in response to those comments submitted
prior to June 27, 2011. See note 4, supra for a list of those
letters.
    \6\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 64809 (July 5,
2011), 76 FR 40758 (July 11, 2011).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

II. Description of the Proposal

    In its filing, NYSE is proposing to amend the Manual by adding a
new Section 907.00 that sets forth a practice of offering certain
complimentary products and services to currently and newly listed
issuers. NYSE offers the complimentary products and services as
described below to respond to competitive pressures in the market for
listings to attract new listings and retain existing listings.\7\ These
products and services are developed or delivered by NYSE or by a third-
party for use by NYSE listed companies. Some of these products are
commercially available by such third-party vendors. According to NYSE,
all listed issuers receive the same complimentary products and services
through the NYSE Market Access Center, while certain tiers of listed
issuers receive additional products and services. As discussed in more
detail below, the additional services an issuer receives is based, for
currently listed issuers, on total shares of common stock or American
Depository Receipts (``ADRs'') issued and outstanding and, for newly
listed issuers, on total global market value based on a public offering
price.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ See e-mail from Theodore Lazo, General Counsel, NYSE to
Sharon Lawson, Senior Special Counsel, Division of Trading and
Markets and Arisa Tinaves, Special Counsel, Division of Trading and
Markets on August 2, 2011.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

A. NYSE Market Access Center

    NYSE developed a market information analytics platform that is
available for free to all NYSE listed issuers, called the NYSE Market
Access Center. In the rule filing, NYSE states that the NYSE's Market
Access Center was created to ``provide issuers with better market
insight and information across all exchange and trading venues.'' \8\
The NYSE Market Access Center includes products and services that were
either a) developed by NYSE using proprietary data and/or intellectual
property or b) built by a third-party expressly for NYSE-listed
companies. According to NYSE, within this platform, all issuers have
access to tools and information related to market intelligence,
education, investor outreach, media visibility, corporate governance,
and advocacy initiatives.\9\ Additionally, the NYSE Market Access
Center provides all issuers with access to discounted products and
services from the same third-party vendors. All issuers listed on the
Exchange have access to the NYSE Market Access Center on the same
basis. At the time of its filing with the Commission, NYSE noted that
the products and services currently available through the NYSE Market
Access Center have a commercial value of approximately $50,000
annually.\10\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \8\ See Notice, supra note 3.
    \9\ In the Notice, the Exchange provided examples of the
products and services offered by the NYSE Market Access Center and
noted that a description of all offerings is available on the
Exchange's Web site. See Notice, supra note 3.
    \10\ See supra note 7.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

B. Tiered Products and Services Offered to Certain Companies

    In addition to the NYSE Market Access Center, NYSE offers products
and services to certain currently listed and newly listed issuers on a
tiered basis. Currently listed issuers are categorized into two tiers,
Tier One and Tier Two. Under NYSE's proposal, Tier One issuers are U.S.
issuers that have 270 million or more total shares of common stock
issued and outstanding in all share classes, including and in addition
to Treasury shares, and Foreign Private Issuers that have 270 million
or more in ADRs issued and outstanding, each calculated annually as of
December 31 of the preceding year.\11\ Tier Two issuers are categorized
as those U.S. issuers that have 160 million to 269,999,999 total shares
of common stock issued and outstanding in all share classes, including
and in addition to Treasury shares, and Foreign Private Issuers that
have 160 million to 269,999,999 in ADRs issued and outstanding, each
calculated annually as of December 31 of the preceding year.\12\ In
addition to the NYSE Market Access Center products and services, Tier
One issuers receive market surveillance products and services, which
NYSE states have a commercial value of $45,000 annually, and web-
hosting products and services, which NYSE states have a commercial
value of approximately $12,000 to $16,000 annually. Tier Two issuers
can choose to receive either web-hosting products and services at the
values noted above, or market analytics products and services, with a
commercial value according to NYSE of $20,000 annually.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \11\ All share classes issued include, for example, where a
company has two classes of common stock, such as Class A and Class B
common shares.
    \12\ See Notice, supra note 3.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Newly listed issuers similarly are categorized into two tiers, Tier
A and Tier B.\13\ Tier A includes issuers with a global market value of
$400 million or more based on the public offering price. Tier B
includes issuers with a global market value of less than $400 million
based on the public offering price. In addition to the NYSE Market
Access Center products and services, Tier A issuers receive either
market surveillance products and services for a period of 12 calendar
months from the date of listing or market analytics products and
services for a period of 24 calendar months from the date of listing,
at the issuer's election. The commercial value for these services is
the same as those described above for Tier One or Tier Two issuers.
Additionally, Tier A companies receive web-hosting, the value of which
is noted above, and news distribution products and services, with a
commercial value of $10,000 annually, for a period of 24 calendar
months from the date of listing. Tier B companies receive web-hosting
and news distribution products and services for a period of 24 calendar
months from the date of listing. At the expiration of the 24-month
period, Tier A or Tier B issuers that meet the qualifications of Tier
One or Tier Two based on total shares or total ADRs issued and
outstanding receive either Tier One or Tier Two products and
services.\14\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \13\ ``Newly listed issuers'' means U.S. issuers conducting an
initial public offering (``IPO''), issuers emerging from bankruptcy,
spinoffs (where a company lists new shares in the absence of a
public offering), and carve-outs (where a company carves out a
business line or division, which then conducts a separate IPO).
Newly listed issuers do not include issuers that transfer their
listings from another national securities exchange; rather,
transferring issuers are eligible for the services available to
currently listed issuers. See proposed Rule 907.00 in the Manual.
    \14\ The Exchange provided a description of all products and
services offered to the Tiers. See Notice, supra note 3.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

III. Summary of Comments and NYSE Response to Comments

    Fourteen commenters raised objections to the proposal.\15\
Generally, commenters expressed concern that the NYSE's practice of
offering complimentary services harms competing suppliers of those
services or adversely affects competition in affected markets.\16\
Specifically, several commenters expressed concern about

adverse effects arising from the ``strategic partnership'' with
Thomson-Reuters and Ipreo. The concern is that offering complimentary
services disadvantages smaller businesses providing investor relations
services.\17\ One commenter noted that the NYSE's complimentary
offering of these services makes it ``too difficult to compete'' with
Thomson-Reuters and Ipreo.'' \18\ Commenters also believed that the
proposal, by endorsing certain vendors, would discourage new vendors
from entering markets for vendor services or stifle innovation.\19\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \15\ See supra note 4.
    \16\ See Rafferty Letter, Allen Letter, Rivel Letter, Falkner
Letter, MZ Letter, Fairir Letter, PrecisionIR Letter, SNL Letter,
and IR Web Reporting Letter. See also, Issuer Advisory Letter
(stating that the proposed rule change restricts competition for
listings).
    \17\ See Allen Letter, Falkner Letter, Fairir Letter, and Rivel
Letter. See also, Anonymous Letter (noting that there are already
obstacles for smaller businesses).
    \18\ See Fairir Letter (arguing that NYSE is trying to justify
its high listing cost).
    \19\ See GLX Letter, MZ Letter, Fairir Letter, PrecisionIR
Letter, IR Web Reporting Letter, and Q4 Letter. See also, Falkner
Letter (noting the smaller providers provide innovative and often
times better value).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Commenters believed that the proposal would require issuers to use
the specific vendor offered by NYSE or create the impression that
listed companies must use the preferred vendor.\20\ Additionally, three
commenters believed that although issuers are not required to use the
services and providers offered by NYSE, providers of competing products
are still disadvantaged because they would have to convince issuers to
pay for a similar service that the issuers are able to receive for no
cost from the Exchange.\21\ However, one vendor who commented stated
that in the last several months, its service has replaced an NYSE
complimentary service, specifically web-hosting, for a number of NYSE
issuers.\22\ Additionally, another commenter stated that numerous
issuers have continued to use their existing preferred service
providers at an additional cost to the issuers, instead of taking
advantage of the complimentary products and services provided by
NYSE.\23\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \20\ See Rafferty Letter, Rivel Letter, Fairir Letter,
PrecisionIR Letter, and IR Web Reporting Letter. See also, SNL
Letter (noting that the proposal could reasonably be viewed as an
endorsement by the NYSE and Commission of specific vendors) and IR
Web Reporting Letter 2 (noting that issuers may conclude that
certain vendors will enable issuers to comply with the Exchange's
listing requirement given the NYSE's endorsement).
    \21\ See Fairir Letter, Precision IR Letter, and IR Web
Reporting Letter.
    \22\ See Q4 Letter.
    \23\ See Issuer Advisory Letter.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Four commenters suggested that instead of offering complimentary
products and services of certain vendors, NYSE should instead offer
issuers a subsidy or credit, which would allow them to use any service
provider.\24\ One commenter argued that such credit would benefit the
Exchange by allowing it to continue to provide such products and
services to issuers, but through a vendor of the issuers' own
choosing.\25\ This commenter believed that such an approach would
ultimately benefit competition by leveling the playing field and
allowing all vendors, both large and small to compete.\26\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \24\ See MZ Letter, Fairir Letter, IR Web Reporting Letter, Q4
Letter, and IR Web Reporting Letter 2. See also, Issuer Advisory
Letter (noting that the NYSE's proposal restricts issuers by forcing
them to select from a narrow list of providers).
    \25\ See MZ Letter. See also, IR Web Reporting Letter (noting
that a subsidy or credit would serve the NYSE's objective of
attracting listings).
    \26\ See MZ Letter.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Another commenter recommended disapproving the proposed rule change
and having the exchanges consider free listings or alternatively,
having the Commission require increased disclosure regarding listing
benefit packages provided to issuers, which would address transparency
concerns.\27\ Additionally, the commenter suggested that the Commission
appoint an independent task force comprised of issuers to recommend a
model that would permit the exchanges to provide services while not
limiting value-added service offerings.\28\ The commenter argued that
NYSE's proposal would result in the equivalent of a maximum service cap
and that the Commission's approval of the proposal will be used by the
Exchange as a justification for limiting their service offerings.\29\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \27\ See Issuer Advisory Letter.
    \28\ Id.
    \29\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    One commenter noted that the proposal is not clear on the fee
arrangements between the Exchange and the product and service vendors
and questioned whether issuers pay for services over and above the
services provided by NYSE and if the vendors share revenues with the
Exchange or if the services are competitively priced.\30\ The commenter
also asked if NYSE receives payment from its preferred providers.\31\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \30\ See IR Web Reporting Letter.
    \31\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Lastly, this commenter raised the issue of whether a for-profit
exchange should be in the investor relations services business at
all.\32\ According to the commenter, there is a conflict of interest
between the exchange's role as a service provider or endorser of
service providers and its role as a self-regulatory organization that
sets and enforces disclosure requirements for its listed companies.\33\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \32\ Id.
    \33\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In the NYSE Response Letter, NYSE responded to the issues raised by
the commenters.\34\ The NYSE Response Letter clarified that no issuer
is forced or required to utilize the complimentary products or services
as a condition of listing and consequently, can continue to use
alternative products and services of their choice.\35\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \34\ See supra note 5.
    \35\ See NYSE Response Letter.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Further, the Exchange represented that it provides the third-party
products and services to listed companies through non-exclusive
arrangements with vendors. Accordingly, the Exchange is willing to
consider entering into such arrangements with other third-party vendors
that provide ``high-quality'' products and services. NYSE further
stated that it does not endorse, nor require the use of, any particular
vendor or any particular products and services.\36\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \36\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In response to the NYSE Response Letter, one commenter questioned
the Exchange's willingness to enter into arrangements with other third-
party vendors, stating that upon performing its own research, the
commenter was unable to ``find any information provided by NYSE
outlining the process that vendors must follow to have their services
added or reviewed.'' \37\ Further, the commenter questioned whether the
Exchange's current vendor that offers web-hosting and wire services is
of ``high quality'', asserting that the vendor lacked distribution to a
popular website for investors to which all of its competitors provide
distribution services.\38\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \37\ See IR Web Reporting Letter 2.
    \38\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Finally, in response to the conflict of interest issue that was
raised, the Exchange disagreed that there is any conflict of interest
with respect to its offerings of products and services because such
product and services are offered on a complimentary basis and the
arrangements with the vendors are non-exclusive. NYSE also reiterated
that issuers are not required to accept or use the products or services
to satisfy their obligations under the Exchange's listing
standards.\39\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \39\ See NYSE Response Letter.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

IV. Discussion and Commission's Findings

    The Commission has carefully reviewed the proposed rule change and
finds that it is consistent with the requirements of Section 6 of the
Act.\40\

Specifically, the Commission finds that the proposal is consistent with
Sections 6(b)(4),\41\ 6(b)(5),\42\ and 6(b)(8)\43\ in that the proposal
is designed to provide for the equitable allocation of reasonable dues,
fees, and other charges among exchange members and issuers and other
persons using its facilities and among other things, that the
Exchange's rule is designed to promote just and equitable principles of
trade, and is not designed to permit unfair discrimination between
issuers, and that the rules of the Exchange do not impose any burden on
competition not necessary or appropriate in furtherance of the purposes
of the Act.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \40\ 15 U.S.C. 78f. In approving this proposed rule change, the
Commission has considered the proposed rule's impact on efficiency,
competition, and capital formation. See 15 U.S.C. 78c(f).
    \41\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(4).
    \42\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5).
    \43\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(8).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Commission believes that the proposed rule change, which would
permit the NYSE to provide complimentary products and services to all
listed companies and additional products and services to certain
companies based on (i) total shares or total ADRs issued and
outstanding for currently listed issuers or (ii) global market value
based on a public offering price for newly listed issuers, is
appropriate and consistent with the Act. The Commission also believes
that by describing in the Manual the products and services available to
issuers and the values of the products and services, the Exchange is
adding greater transparency to its rules and the fees applicable to
issuers.
    The Commission notes that the NYSE has represented that the various
tiers are designed so that qualifying issuers with increased trading
volumes and market activity have enhanced access to products and
services that the listed companies would use in the absence of the
complimentary services arrangement. The NYSE has further represented
that all issuers receive some level of free services and that the
requirements to qualify for a higher level of free services and
products are transparent and set forth clearly in the language being
adopted in new Section 907.00 of the Manual. This language also
includes the commercial value of the free services in each tier. While
not all issuers receive the same level of services, NYSE has stated
that trading volume and market activity are related to the level of
services that the listed companies would use in the absence of the
complimentary services arrangements.\44\ Further, the criteria for
satisfying the tiers are the same for all issuers. Accordingly, based
on the factors noted above, the Commission believes that the proposed
rule changes to the Manual are consistent with the requirements of the
Act and, in particular, that the products and services and their
commercial value are equitably allocated among issuers consistent with
Section 6(b)(4) of the Act, and the rule does not unfairly discriminate
between issuers consistent with Section 6(b)(5) of the Act.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \44\ See Notice, supra note 3.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The NYSE Response Letter clarified and responded to many of the
questions and concerns raised by commenters. Specifically, NYSE
represented that issuers are not forced or required to utilize the
complimentary products and services as a condition of listing.
Furthermore, the third-party products and services are provided through
non-exclusive arrangements with vendors and the Exchange does not
expressly endorse any particular vendor or any product or services
provided by any particular vendor. In fact, one vendor noted that it
has replaced the NYSE's complimentary web-hosting vendor with its web
system for a number of NYSE listed issuers.\45\ Another commenter
stated that issuers use other service providers despite incurring
additional costs.\46\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \45\ See Q4 Letter.
    \46\ See Issuer Advisory Letter.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Commission recognizes, however, that the proposed rule change
may affect the purchase decisions of some listed issuers. The effect of
offering the services of some vendors on a complimentary basis is to
provide issuers with the services of those vendors at a price that is
lower in relative terms than what other vendors charge. A reduction in
a vendor's relative price will generally cause some issuers to
substitute their business toward that vendor. Accordingly, the
Commission believes that the NYSE's offering of selected vendors'
products and services on a complimentary basis will, by lowering their
relative price, likely cause some listed issuers to substitute their
business away from other vendors and toward the selected vendors. The
Commission believes, however, that the impact of this substitution
would be mitigated for the reasons discussed below.
    The Commission believes that the NYSE is responding to competitive
pressures in the market for listing in making this proposal.
Specifically, the NYSE is offering complimentary products and services
to attract new listings, retain currently-listed issuers, and respond
to competitive pressures.\47\ The Commission understands that the NYSE
faces competition in the market for listing services, and that it
competes in part by improving the quality of the services that it
offers listed companies. By offering products and services on a
complimentary basis and ensuring that it is offering the services most
valued by its listed issuers, the NYSE will improve the quality of the
services that listed companies receive. Accordingly, the Commission
believes that NYSE's proposal reflects the current competitive
environment for exchange listings among national securities exchanges,
and is appropriate and consistent with Section 6(b)(8) in furtherance
of the purposes of the Act.\48\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \47\ See supra note 7.
    \48\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(8).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Commission also recognizes that to ensure quality to its listed
issuers, the NYSE represented that it selects only vendors with the
capacity to service all their eligible listed companies without
sacrificing quality.\49\ Thus, some small service vendors may be placed
at a disadvantage. Nonetheless, the Commission does not believe that
the proposal harms the market for the complimentary products and
services in a way that constitutes an inappropriate burden on
competition or an inequitable allocation of fees, or fails to promote
just and equitable principles of trade, in a manner inconsistent with
the Act. As noted above, issuers are not forced or required to utilize
the complimentary products and services and some issuers have selected
competing products and services. The NYSE's consideration of quality
and the needs of its listed issuers in selecting the vendors and its
willingness to change vendors is consistent with competition for vendor
services. The Commission also understands that the NYSE selected its
current service providers substantially based on the service providers
that many NYSE listed issuers were using at the time of the
selection.\50\ The approval of the rule proposal, will, however, help
ensure that individual issuers are not given specially negotiated
packages for products and services to list or remain

listed which would raise unfair discrimination issues under the Act.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \49\ See e-mail from Theodore Lazo, General Counsel, NYSE
Regulation to Sharon Lawson, Senior Special Counsel, Division of
Trading and Markets on August 5, 2011. See also, telephone
conversation between Joseph Mecane, Executive Vice President, NYSE,
Theresa Molloy, Vice President, NYSE, Holly Kulka, Senior Vice
President, NYSE, Theodore Lazo, General Counsel, NYSE Regulation and
Sharon Lawson, Senior Special Counsel and Arisa Tinaves, Special
Counsel, Division of Trading and Markets, Commission and Amy K.
Edwards, Assistant Director and Cindy Alexander, Assistant Chief
Economist, Division of Risk, Strategy, and Financial Information,
Commission.
    \50\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    While some commenters have argued that the Commission's approval of
the NYSE's proposal will mean the Commission has implicitly approved
the particular service providers NYSE currently uses, the Commission
disagrees. The Commission, in approving the Exchange's proposal, is not
endorsing, specifically or implicitly, any party with which the NYSE
has chosen to do business.
    The Commission has carefully considered the comment letters.
Although some of the alternative proposals by the commenters might also
satisfy the standards under Sections 6(b) and 19(b) of the Act\51\
depending on the facts and circumstances, those proposals are not
before us, and the Commission believes that the NYSE's proposal is
consistent with these standards and, therefore, should be approved.
Other commenters raised certain issues beyond the scope of the
Commission's review of this rule proposal, such as the fee arrangements
between the NYSE and the providers of the services described in this
order. The Commission has carefully considered these comments but
believes that the proposal before the Commission satisfies the
requirements for approval under Sections 6(b) and 19(b) of the Act\52\
for the reasons discussed above.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \51\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b) and 15 U.S.C. 78s(b).
    \52\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

V. Conclusion

    It is therefore ordered, pursuant to Section 19(b)(2) of the
Act,\53\ that the proposed rule change (SR-NYSE-2011-20) be, and it
hereby is, approved.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \53\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(2).

    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets,
pursuant to delegated authority.\54\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \54\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Elizabeth M. Murphy,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2011-21035 Filed 8-17-11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 84, Number 210 (Wednesday, October 30, 2019)]
[Notices]
[Pages 58153-58154]
[FR Doc No: 2019-23621]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

[EPA-HQ-OW-2016-0178; FRL-9999-99-OMS]

Information Collection Request Submitted to OMB for Review and
Approval; Comment Request; EPA Application Materials for the Water
Infrastructure Finance and Innovation Act (Renewal)

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has submitted an
information collection request (ICR), EPA Application Materials for the
Water Infrastructure Finance and Innovation Act (EPA ICR Number
2549.02, OMB Control Number 2040-0292) to the Office of Management and
Budget (OMB) for review and approval in accordance with the Paperwork
Reduction Act. This is a proposed extension of the ICR, which is
currently approved through December 31, 2019. Public comments were
previously requested via the Federal Register on April 23, 2019 during
a 60-day comment period. This notice allows for an additional 30 days
for public comments. A fuller description of the ICR is given below,
including its estimated burden and cost to the public. An agency may
not conduct or sponsor and a person is not required to respond to a
collection of information unless it displays a currently valid OMB
control number.

DATES: Additional comments may be submitted on or before November 29,
2019.

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, referencing Docket ID Number EPA-HQ-
OW-2016-0178, to (1) EPA online using www.regulations.gov (our
preferred method), or by mail to: EPA Docket Center, Environmental

Protection Agency, Mail Code 28221T, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave. NW,
Washington, DC 20460, and (2) OMB via email to
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Address comments to OMB Desk Officer for
EPA.
    EPA's policy is that all comments received will be included in the
public docket without change including any personal information
provided, unless the comment includes profanity, threats, information
claimed to be Confidential Business Information (CBI) or other
information whose disclosure is restricted by statute.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Arielle Gerstein, Water Infrastructure
Division, Office of Wastewater Management, 4201-T, Environmental
Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave. NW, Washington, DC 20460;
telephone number:<PHONE_NUMBER>; email address:
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Supporting documents, which explain in
detail the information that the EPA will be collecting, are available
in the public docket for this ICR. The docket can be viewed online at
www.regulations.gov or in person at the EPA Docket Center, WJC West,
Room 3334, 1301 Constitution Ave. NW, Washington, DC. The telephone
number for the Docket Center is<PHONE_NUMBER>. For additional
information about EPA's public docket, visit http://www.epa.gov/dockets.
    Abstract: The collection of information is necessary in order to
receive applications for credit assistance pursuant to section 5024 of
the Water Infrastructure Finance and Innovation Act (WIFIA) of 2014, 33
U.S.C. 3903. The purpose of the WIFIA program is to provide Federal
credit assistance in the form of direct loans and loan guarantees to
eligible water infrastructure projects.
    WIFIA requires that an eligible entity submit to the Administrator
an application at such time, in such manner, and containing such
information, as the Secretary or the Administrator may require to
receive assistance under WIFIA. In order to satisfy these requirements,
EPA must collect an application from prospective borrowers seeking
funding. The Letters of Interest and Applications collected from
prospective borrowers through this solicitation will be used by the
EPA, WIFIA program staff, and reviewers to evaluate applications for
credit assistance under the WIFIA eligibility requirements and
selection criteria.
    Form Numbers: SWIFIA Application--6100-030; SWIFIA Letter of
Interest--6100-031; WIFIA Application--6100-032; WIFIA Letter of
Interest--6100-033.
    Respondents/affected entities: Corporations, partnerships, joint
ventures, trusts, federal, state, or local government entities, tribal
governments or a consortium of tribal governments, and state
infrastructure finance authorities.
    Respondent's obligation to respond: The collection is required to
obtain credit assistance pursuant to section 5024 of WIFIA, 33 U.S.C.
3903.
    Estimated number of respondents: 100 per year (total).
    Frequency of response: Once.
    Total estimated burden: 10,825 hours (per year). Burden is defined
at 5 CFR 1320.03(b).
    Total estimated cost: $14,946,754 (per year), which includes
14,500,000 annualized capital or operation & maintenance costs.
    Changes in the Estimates: There is an increase of 9,325 hours in
the total estimated respondent burden compared with the ICR currently
approved by OMB. This increase is due to EPA receiving more Letters of
Interest and applications than it originally estimated during program
inception. Initially, EPA estimated the program would receive 20 LOIs
and 5 applications. This was based on the amount of budget authority
initially authorized for WIFIA. However, in 2017, the program received
43 LOIs and invited 12 prospective borrowers to apply. In 2018, the
program received 62 LOIs and invited 39 prospective borrowers to apply.
In addition, EPA is including the newly authorized State Revolving Fund
WIFIA (SWIFIA) program as part of this ICR renewal. EPA estimates that
WIFIA will receive 5 LOIs and 5 applications through SWIFIA.

Courtney Kerwin,
Director, Regulatory Support Division.
[FR Doc. 2019-23621 Filed 10-29-19; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


[Federal Register Volume 82, Number 55 (Thursday, March 23, 2017)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 14837-14839]
[FR Doc No: 2017-05520]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. FAA-2016-9387; Directorate Identifier 2016-NM-182-AD]
RIN 2120-AA64

Airworthiness Directives; Bombardier, Inc. Airplanes

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM).

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

SUMMARY: We propose to adopt a new airworthiness directive (AD) for
certain Bombardier, Inc. Model BD-100-1A10 airplanes. This proposed AD
was prompted by a report that the equipment racks were not designed to
support the weight of all the equipment and the secondary direct
current power centers. This proposed AD would require modifying the
equipment racks. We are proposing this AD to address the unsafe
condition on these products.

DATES: We must receive comments on this proposed AD by May 8, 2017.

ADDRESSES: You may send comments, using the procedures found in 14 CFR
11.43 and 11.45, by any of the following methods:
     Federal eRulemaking Portal: Go to http://www.regulations.gov. Follow the instructions for submitting comments.
     Fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>.
     Mail: U.S. Department of Transportation, Docket
Operations, M-30, West Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140, 1200 New
Jersey Avenue SE., Washington, DC 20590.
     Hand Delivery: Deliver to Mail address above between 9
a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays.
    For service information identified in this NPRM, contact
Bombardier, Inc., 400 C[ocirc]te-Vertu Road West, Dorval, Qu[eacute]bec
H4S 1Y9, Canada; telephone:<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>; email:
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Internet http://www.bombardier.com. You
may view this referenced service information at the FAA, Transport
Airplane Directorate, 1601 Lind Avenue SW., Renton, WA. For information
on the availability of this material at the FAA, call<PHONE_NUMBER>.

Examining the AD Docket

    You may examine the AD docket on the Internet at http://www.regulations.gov by searching for and locating Docket No. FAA-2016-
9387; or in person at the Docket Management Facility between 9 a.m. and
5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays. The AD docket
contains this proposed AD, the regulatory evaluation, any comments
received, and other information. The street address for the Docket
Operations office (telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>) is in the ADDRESSES section.
Comments will be available in the AD docket shortly after receipt.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Aziz Ahmed, Aerospace Engineer,
Airframe and Mechanical Systems Branch, ANE-171, FAA, New York Aircraft
Certification Office (ACO), 1600 Stewart Avenue, Suite 410, Westbury,
NY

11590; telephone:<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Comments Invited

    We invite you to send any written relevant data, views, or
arguments about this proposal. Send your comments to an address listed
under the ADDRESSES section. Include ``Docket No. FAA-2016-9387;
Directorate Identifier 2016-NM-182-AD'' at the beginning of your
comments. We specifically invite comments on the overall regulatory,
economic, environmental, and energy aspects of this proposed AD. We
will consider all comments received by the closing date and may amend
this proposed AD based on those comments.
    We will post all comments we receive, without change, to http://www.regulations.gov, including any personal information you provide. We
will also post a report summarizing each substantive verbal contact we
receive about this proposed AD.

Discussion

    Transport Canada Civil Aviation (TCCA), which is the aviation
authority for Canada, has issued Canadian Airworthiness Directive CF-
2016-26, dated September 14, 2016 (referred to after this as the
Mandatory Continuing Airworthiness Information, or ``the MCAI''), to
correct an unsafe condition for certain Bombardier, Inc. Model BD-100-
1A10 airplanes. The MCAI states:

    During a recent design review, a Bombardier equipment supplier
discovered that the weight of the Secondary Direct Current (DC)
Power Center was incorrectly reported to the structural partner(s)
via their equipment interface drawing. Consequently, the left-hand
side (LHS) and right-hand side (RHS) equipment racks were not
designed to support the actual weight of all the equipment and the
Secondary DC Power Centers under all loading conditions. In the
event of a high energy emergency landing or runway excursion, the
structural failure of the LHS or RHS equipment racks may result in
the blockage of the emergency escape route for the pilot(s) and crew
if this condition is not corrected.

    Required actions include modifying the equipment racks. You may
examine the MCAI in the AD docket on the Internet at http://www.regulations.gov by searching for and locating Docket No. FAA-2016-
9387.

Related Service Information Under 1 CFR Part 51

    We reviewed Bombardier Service Bulletin 100-25-39, dated October
26, 2015; and Bombardier Service Bulletin 350-25-002, dated October 26,
2015. This service information describes procedures for modifying the
equipment racks. These documents are distinct since they apply to
airplanes having different serial numbers. This service information is
reasonably available because the interested parties have access to it
through their normal course of business or by the means identified in
the ADDRESSES section.

FAA's Determination and Requirements of This Proposed AD

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

Costs of Compliance

    We estimate that this proposed AD affects 161 airplanes of U.S.
registry.
    We estimate the following costs to comply with this proposed AD:

                                                 Estimated Costs
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                Cost on U.S.
             Action                    Labor cost          Parts cost      Cost per product        operators
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Modify equipment racks.........  Up to 10 work-hours x           $1,755  Up to $2,605........  Up to $419,405.
                                  $85 per hour = $850.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    According to the manufacturer, some of the costs of this proposed
AD may be covered under warranty, thereby reducing the cost impact on
affected individuals. We do not control warranty coverage for affected
individuals. As a result, we have included all costs in our cost
estimate.

Authority for This Rulemaking

    Title 49 of the United States Code specifies the FAA's authority to
issue rules on aviation safety. Subtitle I, section 106, describes the
authority of the FAA Administrator. ``Subtitle VII: Aviation
Programs,'' describes in more detail the scope of the Agency's
authority.
    We are issuing this rulemaking under the authority described in
``Subtitle VII, Part A, Subpart III, Section 44701: General
requirements.'' Under that section, Congress charges the FAA with
promoting safe flight of civil aircraft in air commerce by prescribing
regulations for practices, methods, and procedures the Administrator
finds necessary for safety in air commerce. This regulation is within
the scope of that authority because it addresses an unsafe condition
that is likely to exist or develop on products identified in this
rulemaking action.

Regulatory Findings

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

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39

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

The Proposed Amendment

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

PART 39--AIRWORTHINESS DIRECTIVES

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

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

Sec.  39.13  [Amended]

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

Bombardier, Inc.: Docket No. FAA-2016-9387; Directorate Identifier
2016-NM-182-AD.

(a) Comments Due Date

    We must receive comments by May 8, 2017.

(b) Affected ADs

    None.

(c) Applicability

    This AD applies to Bombardier, Inc. Model BD-100-1A10 airplanes,
certificated in any category, serial numbers (S/Ns) 20003 through
20532 inclusive.

(d) Subject

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

(e) Reason

    This AD was prompted by a recent design review of the equipment
racks which revealed that the left-hand side (LHS) and right-hand
side (RHS) equipment racks were not designed to support the actual
weight of all the equipment and the secondary direct current power
centers under all loading conditions. We are issuing this AD to
prevent structural failure of the LHS or RHS equipment racks in the
event of a high energy emergency landing or runway excursion, which
could result in blockage of the emergency exit for the flightcrew.

(f) Compliance

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

(g) Modification of the Equipment Racks

    Within 90 months after the effective date of this AD, do the
modification required by paragraph (g)(1) or (g)(2) of this AD, as
applicable.
    (1) For airplanes having S/Ns 20003 through 20500 inclusive:
Modify the equipment racks having part numbers (P/Ns) K1000070316-
003 (LHS) and K1000070316-004 (RHS), in accordance with the
Accomplishment Instructions of Bombardier Service Bulletin 100-25-
39, dated October 26, 2015.
    (2) For airplanes having S/Ns 20501 through 20532 inclusive:
Modify the equipment rack having P/N K1000070316-004 (RHS only), in
accordance with the Accomplishment Instructions of Bombardier
Service Bulletin 350-25-002, dated October 26, 2015.

(h) Other FAA AD Provisions

    The following provisions also apply to this AD:
    (1) Alternative Methods of Compliance (AMOCs): The Manager, New
York Aircraft Certification Office (ACO), ANE-170, FAA, has the
authority to approve AMOCs for this AD, if requested using the
procedures found in 14 CFR 39.19. In accordance with 14 CFR 39.19,
send your request to your principal inspector or local Flight
Standards District Office, as appropriate. If sending information
directly to the New York ACO, send it to ATTN: Program Manager,
Continuing Operational Safety, FAA, New York ACO, 1600 Stewart
Avenue, Suite 410, Westbury, NY 11590; telephone:<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax:
516-794-5531. Before using any approved AMOC, notify your
appropriate principal inspector, or lacking a principal inspector,
the manager of the local flight standards district office/
certificate holding district office.
    (2) Contacting the Manufacturer: For any requirement in this AD
to obtain corrective actions from a manufacturer, the action must be
accomplished using a method approved by the Manager, New York ACO,
ANE-170, FAA; or Transport Canada Civil Aviation (TCCA); or
Bombardier, Inc.'s TCCA Design Approval Organization (DAO). If
approved by the DAO, the approval must include the DAO-authorized
signature.

(i) Related Information

    (1) Refer to Mandatory Continuing Airworthiness Information
(MCAI) Canadian Airworthiness Directive CF-2016-26, dated September
14, 2016, for related information. This MCAI may be found in the AD
docket on the Internet at http://www.regulations.gov by searching
for and locating Docket No. FAA-2016-9387.
    (2) For service information identified in this AD, contact
Bombardier, Inc., 400 C[ocirc]te-Vertu Road West, Dorval,
Qu[eacute]bec H4S 1Y9, Canada; telephone:<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax: 514-
855-7401; email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Internet http://www.bombardier.com. You may view this service information at the
FAA, Transport Airplane Directorate, 1601 Lind Avenue SW., Renton,
WA. For information on the availability of this material at the FAA,
call<PHONE_NUMBER>.

    Issued in Renton, Washington, on March 14, 2017.
Dionne Palermo,
Acting Manager, Transport Airplane Directorate, Aircraft Certification
Service.
[FR Doc. 2017-05520 Filed 3-22-17; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


[Federal Register Volume 82, Number 164 (Friday, August 25, 2017)]
[Notices]
[Pages 40612-40613]
[FR Doc No: 2017-18073]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

Submission for OMB Review; Comment Request

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

Extension:
    Rule 15c2-5, SEC File No. 270-195; OMB Control No. 3235-0198

    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
15c2-5 (17 CFR 240.15c2-5), under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934
(15 U.S.C. 78 et seq.) (``Exchange Act'').
    Rule 15c2-5 prohibits a broker-dealer from arranging or extending
certain loans to persons in connection with the offer or sale of
securities unless, before any element of the transaction is entered
into, the broker-dealer: (1) Delivers to the person a written statement
containing the exact nature and extent of the person's obligations
under the loan arrangement; the risks and disadvantages of the loan
arrangement; and all commissions, discounts, and other remuneration
received and to be received in connection with the

transaction by the broker-dealer or certain related persons (unless the
person receives certain materials from the lender or broker-dealer
which contain the required information); and (2) obtains from the
person information on the person's financial situation and needs,
reasonably determines that the transaction is suitable for the person,
and retains on file and makes available to the person on request a
written statement setting forth the broker-dealer's basis for
determining that the transaction was suitable. The collection of
information required by Rule 15c2-5 is necessary to execute the
Commission's mandate under the Exchange Act to prevent fraudulent,
manipulative, and deceptive acts and practices by broker-dealers.
    The Commission estimates that there are approximately 50
respondents that require an aggregate total of 600 hours to comply with
Rule 15c2-5.\1\ Each of these approximately 50 registered broker-
dealers makes an estimated six annual responses, for an aggregate total
of 300 responses per year.\2\ Each response takes approximately two
hours to complete. Thus, the total compliance burden per year is 600
burden hours.\3\ The approximate internal compliance cost per hour is
$57.00 for clerical labor,\4\ resulting in a total internal compliance
cost of $34,200.\5\ These reflect internal labor costs; there are no
external labor, capital, or start-up costs.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ 50 respondents x 6 responses per year x 2 hours per response
= 600 hours per year.
    \2\ 50 respondents x 6 responses per year = 300 responses per
year.
    \3\ 300 responses per year x 2 hours per response = 600 hours
per year.
    \4\ Cost per hour for a clerk is from SIFMA's Office Salaries in
the Securities Industry 2013, modified by Commission staff to
account for an 1800-hour work-year and multiplied by 2.93 to account
for bonuses, firm size, employee benefits and overhead.
    \5\ 600 hours per year x $57.00 per hour = $34,200 per year.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Although Rule 15c2-5 does not specify a retention period or record-
keeping requirement under the rule, broker-dealers are required to
preserve the records for a period no less than six years pursuant to
Rule 17a-4(c). The information required under Rule 15c2-5 is necessary
for broker-dealers to engage in the lending activities prescribed in
the Rule. Rule 15c2-5 does not assure confidentiality for the
information retained under the rule.\6\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ The records required by Rule 15c2-5 would be available only
for examination purposes of the Commission staff, state securities
authorities, and the self-regulatory organizations. Subject to the
provisions of the Freedom of Information Act, 5 U.S.C. 552, and the
Commission's rules thereunder (17 CFR 200.80(b)(4)(iii)), the
Commission does not generally publish or make available information
contained in any reports, summaries, analyses, letters, or memoranda
arising out of, in anticipation of, or in connection with an
examination or inspection of the books and records of any person or
any other investigation.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    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 Web site: www.reginfo.gov. Comments should
be directed to: (i) Desk Officer for the Securities and Exchange
Commission, Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, Office of
Management and Budget, Room 10102, New Executive Office Building,
Washington, DC 20503, or by sending an email to:
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>and (ii) Pamela Dyson, Director/Chief
Information Officer, Securities and Exchange Commission, c/o Remi
Pavlik-Simon, 100 F Street NE., Washington, DC 20549, or by sending an
email to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Comments must be submitted to OMB within
30 days of this notice.

    Dated: August 22, 2017.
Eduardo A. Aleman,
Assistant Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2017-18073 Filed 8-24-17; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 8011-01-P