[Federal Register Volume 87, Number 23 (Thursday, February 3, 2022)]
[Notices]
[Page 6187]
[FR Doc No: 2022-02238]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Federal Emergency Management Agency

[Internal Agency Docket No. FEMA-4630-DR; Docket ID FEMA-2022-0001]

Kentucky; Amendment No. 6 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 Commonwealth of Kentucky (FEMA-4630-DR), dated December 12,
2021, and related determinations.

DATES: This amendment was issued January 6, 2022.

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 Commonwealth of Kentucky is hereby amended to include permanent
work under the Public Assistance program for those areas determined to
have been adversely affected by the event declared a major disaster by
the President in his declaration of December 12, 2021.

    Caldwell, Christian, Fulton, Graves, Hart, Hickman, Hopkins,
Logan, Lyon, Marion, Marshall, Muhlenberg, Ohio, Taylor, and Warren
Counties for permanent work [Categories C-G] (already designated for
Individual Assistance and assistance for debris removal and
emergency protective measures [Categories A and B], including direct
federal assistance, under the Public Assistance program).
    Breckinridge, Bullitt, Grayson, Meade, Shelby, and Spencer
Counties for emergency protective measures (Category B), including
direct federal assistance, under the Public Assistance program.
    Todd 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.

Deanne Criswell,
Administrator, Federal Emergency Management Agency.
[FR Doc. 2022-02238 Filed 2-2-22; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 9111-23-P


sampling system is disassembled or the EC cell calibration is
adjusted, repeat the calibration check before conducting the next
analyzer sampling run.

11.0 Analytical Procedure

    The analytical procedure is fully discussed in Section 8.

12.0 Calculations and Data Analysis

    Determine the CO and O2 concentrations for each stack
gas sampling run by calculating the mean gas concentrations of the
data recorded during the ``measurement data phase''.

13.0 Protocol Performance

    Use the following protocols to verify consistent analyzer
performance during each field sampling day.
    13.1 Measurement Data Phase Performance Check. Calculate the
mean of the readings from the ``measurement data phase''. The
maximum allowable deviation from the mean for each of the individual
readings is  2 percent, or  1 ppm, whichever
is less restrictive. Record the mean value and maximum deviation for
each gas monitored. Data must conform to Section 10.1.4. The EC cell
flow rate must conform to the specification in Section 8.3.

    Example: A measurement data phase is invalid if the maximum
deviation of any single reading comprising that mean is greater than
 2 percent or  1 ppm (the default criteria).
For example, if the mean = 30 ppm, single readings of below 29 ppm
and above 31 ppm are disallowed).

    13.2 Interference Check. Before the initial use of the EC cell
and interference gas scrubber in the field, and semi-annually
thereafter, challenge the interference gas scrubber with NO and
NO2 gas standards that are generally recognized as
representative of diesel-fueled engine NO and NO2
emission values. Record the responses displayed by the CO EC cell
and other pertinent data on Figure 1 or a similar form.
    13.2.1 Interference Response. The combined NO and NO2
interference response should be less than or equal to  5
percent of the up-scale CO calibration gas concentration.
    13.3 Repeatability Check. Conduct the following check once for
each nominal range that is to be used on the CO EC cell within 5
days prior to each field sampling program. If a field sampling
program lasts longer than 5 days, repeat this check every 5 days.
Immediately repeat the check if the EC cell is replaced or if the EC
cell is exposed to gas concentrations greater than 150 percent of
the highest up-scale gas concentration.
    13.3.1 Repeatability Check Procedure. Perform a complete EC cell
sampling run (all three phases) by introducing the CO calibration
gas to the measurement system and record the response. Follow
Section 10.1.3. Use Figure 1 to record all data. Repeat the run
three times for a total of four complete runs. During the four
repeatability check runs, do not adjust the system except where
necessary to achieve the correct calibration gas flow rate at the
analyzer.
    13.3.2 Repeatability Check Calculations. Determine the highest
and lowest average ``measurement data phase'' CO concentrations from
the four repeatability check runs and record the results on Figure 1
or a similar form. The absolute value of the difference between the
maximum and minimum average values recorded must not vary more than
 3 percent or  1 ppm of the up-scale gas
value, whichever is less restrictive.

14.0 Pollution Prevention (Reserved)

15.0 Waste Management (Reserved)

16.0 Alternative Procedures (Reserved)

17.0 References

    (1) ``Development of an Electrochemical Cell Emission Analyzer
Test Protocol'', Topical Report, Phil Juneau, Emission Monitoring,
Inc., July 1997.
    (2) ``Determination of Nitrogen Oxides, Carbon Monoxide, and
Oxygen Emissions from Natural Gas-Fired Engines, Boilers, and
Process Heaters Using Portable Analyzers'', EMC Conditional Test
Protocol 30 (CTM-30), Gas Research Institute Protocol GRI-96/0008,
Revision 7, October 13, 1997.
    (3) ``ICAC Test Protocol for Periodic Monitoring'', EMC
Conditional Test Protocol 34 (CTM-034), The Institute of Clean Air
Companies, September 8, 1999.
    (4) ``Code of Federal Regulations'', Protection of Environment,
40 CFR, Part 60, Appendix A, Methods 1-4; 10.

                                                         Table 1: Appendix A--Sampling Run Data.
                                      Facility-------------------- Engine I.D.-------------------- Date------------
Run Type:.......................................                     (--)                      (--)                      (--)                      (--)
(X).............................................              Pre-Sample CalibratioStack Gas Sample              Post-Sample Cal. Check  Repeatability Check

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

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Run ................................................        1         1         2         2         3         3         4         4             Time        Scrub. OK       Flow- Rate
Gas..........................................................       O2          CO      O2          CO      O2          CO      O2          CO ...............  ...............  ...............
                                                               ........  ........  ........  ........  ........  ........  ........  ........  ...............  ...............  ...............
Sample Cond..................................................  ........  ........  ........  ........  ........  ........  ........  ........  ...............  ...............  ...............
Phase........................................................
''...........................................................  ........  ........  ........  ........  ........  ........  ........  ........  ...............  ...............  ...............
''...........................................................  ........  ........  ........  ........  ........  ........  ........  ........  ...............  ...............  ...............
''...........................................................  ........  ........  ........  ........  ........  ........  ........  ........  ...............  ...............  ...............
''...........................................................  ........  ........  ........  ........  ........  ........  ........  ........  ...............  ...............  ...............
                                                               ........  ........  ........  ........  ........  ........  ........  ........  ...............  ...............  ...............
Measurement..................................................  ........  ........  ........  ........  ........  ........  ........  ........  ...............  ...............  ...............
Data Phase...................................................
''...........................................................  ........  ........  ........  ........  ........  ........  ........  ........  ...............  ...............  ...............
''...........................................................  ........  ........  ........  ........  ........  ........  ........  ........  ...............  ...............  ...............
''...........................................................  ........  ........  ........  ........  ........  ........  ........  ........  ...............  ...............  ...............
''...........................................................  ........  ........  ........  ........  ........  ........  ........  ........  ...............  ...............  ...............
''...........................................................  ........  ........  ........  ........  ........  ........  ........  ........  ...............  ...............  ...............

''...........................................................  ........  ........  ........  ........  ........  ........  ........  ........  ...............  ...............  ...............
''...........................................................  ........  ........  ........  ........  ........  ........  ........  ........  ...............  ...............  ...............
''...........................................................  ........  ........  ........  ........  ........  ........  ........  ........  ...............  ...............  ...............
''...........................................................  ........  ........  ........  ........  ........  ........  ........  ........  ...............  ...............  ...............
''...........................................................  ........  ........  ........  ........  ........  ........  ........  ........  ...............  ...............  ...............
                                                               ........  ........  ........  ........  ........  ........  ........  ........  ...............  ...............  ...............
Mean.........................................................  ........  ........  ........  ........  ........  ........  ........  ........  ...............  ...............  ...............
                                                               ........  ........  ........  ........  ........  ........  ........  ........  ...............  ...............  ...............
Refresh......................................................  ........  ........  ........  ........  ........  ........  ........  ........  ...............  ...............  ...............
Phase........................................................
''...........................................................  ........  ........  ........  ........  ........  ........  ........  ........  ...............  ...............  ...............
''...........................................................  ........  ........  ........  ........  ........  ........  ........  ........  ...............  ...............  ...............
''...........................................................  ........  ........  ........  ........  ........  ........  ........  ........  ...............  ...............  ...............
''...........................................................  ........  ........  ........  ........  ........  ........  ........  ........  ...............  ...............  ...............
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

[FR Doc. 2013-01288 Filed 1-29-13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


[Federal Register Volume 88, Number 127 (Wednesday, July 5, 2023)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 42907-42908]
[FR Doc No: 2023-14179]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Railroad Administration

49 CFR Part 246

[Docket No. FRA-2022-0020, Notice No. 2]
RIN 2130-AC92

Certification of Signal Employees

AGENCY: Federal Railroad Administration (FRA), Department of
Transportation (DOT).

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM); extension of comment
period.

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

SUMMARY: On May 31, 2023, FRA published an NPRM proposing to require
railroads to develop written programs for certifying individuals who
work as signal employees on their networks and to submit those written
certification programs to FRA for approval prior to implementation. By
this notice, FRA is extending the NPRM's comment period by 30 days.

DATES: The comment period for the NPRM, published May 31, 2023, at 88
FR 35632, scheduled to close on July 31, 2023, is extended until August
30, 2023.

ADDRESSES:
    Comments: Comments related to Docket No. FRA-2022-0020, Notice No.
1, may be submitted by going to https://www.regulations.gov and
following the online instructions for submitting comments.
    Instructions: All submissions must include the agency name, docket
name, and docket number or Regulatory Identification Number (RIN) for
this rulemaking (2130-AC92). Note that all comments received will be
posted without change to https://www.regulations.gov, including any
personal information provided. Please see the Privacy Act heading in
the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section of this document for Privacy Act
information related to any submitted comments or materials.
    Docket: For access to the docket to read background documents or
comments received, go to https://www.regulations.gov and follow the
online instructions for accessing the docket.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Gabe Neal, Staff Director, Signal,
Train Control, and Crossings Division, telephone:<PHONE_NUMBER> or
email: [email protected]; or Kathryn Gresham, Attorney Adviser, Office
of the Chief Counsel, telephone:<PHONE_NUMBER> or email:
[email protected].

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: In a June 16, 2023, petition, the American
Short

Line and Regional Railroad Association (ASLRRA) requested a 60-day
extension of the NPRM's comment period.\1\ ASLRRA stated it needs
additional time to thoroughly obtain and review feedback from its
member railroads and provide FRA with data for the NPRM's regulatory
flexibility analysis.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ 88 FR 35632 (May 31, 2023).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The comment period for this NPRM is scheduled to close on July 31,
2023. As FRA is partially granting ASLRRA's request, the comment period
is now extended to August 30, 2023, which is a total of 30 days.

Privacy Act

    In accordance with 5 U.S.C. 553(c), DOT solicits comments from the
public to better inform its rulemaking process. DOT posts these
comments, without edit, to https://www.regulations.gov, as described in
the system of records notice, DOT/ALL-14 FDMS, accessible through
www.dot.gov/privacy. To facilitate comment tracking and response, we
encourage commenters to provide their name, or the name of their
organization; however, submission of names is completely optional.
Whether or not commenters identify themselves, all timely comments will
be fully considered. If you wish to provide comments containing
proprietary or confidential information, please contact the agency for
alternate submission instructions.

    Authority: 49 U.S.C. 20103, 20107, 20162, 21301, 21304, 21311;
28 U.S.C. 2461 note; 49 CFR 1.89; and Pub. L. 110-432, sec. 402, 122
Stat. 4884.

    Issued in Washington, DC.
Carolyn R. Hayward-Williams,
Director, Office of Railroad Systems and Technology.
[FR Doc. 2023-14179 Filed 7-3-23; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-06-P


[Federal Register Volume 77, Number 94 (Tuesday, May 15, 2012)]
[Notices]
[Pages 28647-28649]
[FR Doc No: 2012-11699]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-66951; File No. SR-NASDAQ-2012-055]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; The NASDAQ Stock Market LLC;
Notice of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of Proposed Rule Change To
Institute an Excess Order Fee

May 9, 2012.
    Pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934
(``Act''),\1\ and Rule 19b-4 thereunder,\2\ notice is hereby given that
on April 30, 2012, The NASDAQ Stock Market LLC (``NASDAQ'' or the
``Exchange'') filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission
(``Commission'') a proposed rule change as described in Items I, II and
III below, which Items have been prepared by the Exchange. The
Commission is publishing this notice to solicit comments on the
proposed rule change from interested persons.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

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

    NASDAQ proposes to institute an excess order fee. NASDAQ will
implement the proposed change on June 1, 2012. The text of the proposed
rule change is available at http://nasdaq.cchwallstreet.com, at
NASDAQ's principal office, and at the Commission's Public Reference
Room.

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

    In its filing with the Commission, the self-regulatory organization
included statements concerning the purpose of, and basis for, the
proposed rule change and discussed any comments it received on the
proposed rule change. The text of those statements may be examined at
the places specified in Item III below. The Exchange has prepared
summaries, set forth in sections A, B, and C below, of the most
significant parts of such statements.

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

1. Purpose
    NASDAQ is concerned that the inefficient order entry practices of
certain market participants may be placing excessive burdens on the
systems of NASDAQ and its members and may negatively impact the
usefulness and life cycle cost of market data.\3\ Market participants
that flood the market with orders that are rapidly cancelled or that
are priced away from the inside market do little to support meaningful
price discovery, and in fact may create investor confusion about the
extent of trading interest in a stock. In extreme instances,
inefficient order entry may constitute ``layering,'' the manipulative
practice of using multiple orders at different price levels to move the
price of a stock. While NASDAQ has an active program to detect and
prosecute manipulative schemes, including layering,\4\ it also believes
that market quality can be improved through the imposition of a fee on
market participants that engage in extremely inefficient order entry
practices. Because NASDAQ believes that inefficient order entry is a
problem associated with a relatively small number of market
participants, and is therefore not a pervasive characteristic of
today's markets, the impact of the fee will be narrow. In fact, it is
NASDAQ's expectation that the fee will encourage potentially affected
market participants to modify their order entry practices in order to
avoid the fee, thereby improving the market for all participants.
Accordingly, NASDAQ does not expect to earn significant revenues from
the fee.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ See generally Recommendations Regarding Regulatory Reponses
to the Market Events of May 6, 2010, Joint CFTC-SEC Advisory
Committee on Emerging Regulatory Issues, at 11 (February 18, 2011)
(``The SEC and CFTC should also consider addressing the
disproportionate impact that [high frequency trading] has on
Exchange message traffic and market surveillance costs * * *. The
Committee recognizes that there are valid reasons for algorithmic
strategies to drive high cancellation rates, but we believe that
this is an area that deserves further study. At a minimum, we
believe that the participants of those strategies should properly
absorb the externalized costs of their activity.'').
    \4\ See, e.g., FINRA Sanctions Trillium Brokerage Services, LLC,
Director of Trading, Chief Compliance Officer, and Nine Traders
$2.26 Million for Illicit Equities Trading Strategy (September 13,
2010) (available at http://www.finra.org/Newsroom/NewsReleases/2010/P121951). The fee proposed in this filing will not in any way
substitute for, or result in a diminution of, NASDAQ's surveillance
program for market manipulation.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The fee will be imposed on market participant identifiers
(``MPID'') that have characteristics indicative of inefficient order
entry practices. In general, the determination of whether to impose the
fee on a particular MPID will be made by calculating the ratio between
(i) entered orders, weighted by the distance of the order from the
national best bid or offer (``NBBO''), and (ii) orders that execute in
whole or in part. The fee is imposed on MPIDs with an ``Order Entry
Ratio'' of more than 100. The Order Entry Ratio is calculated, and the
Excess Order Fee imposed, on a monthly basis.
    For each MPID, the Order Entry Ratio is the ratio of (i) the MPID's
``Weighted Order Total'' to (ii) the greater of one (1) or the number
of displayed, non-marketable orders \5\ sent to NASDAQ through the MPID
that execute in full or in part.\6\ The Weighted Order Total is the
number of displayed, non-marketable orders sent to NASDAQ through the
MPID, as adjusted by a ``Weighting Factor.'' The applicable Weighting
Factor is applied to each order based on its price in comparison to the
NBBO at the time of order entry:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ The fee focuses on displayed orders since they have the most
significant impact on investor confusion and the quality of market
data.
    \6\ Thus, in an extreme case where no orders entered through the
MPID executed, this component of the ratio would be assumed to be 1,
so as to avoid the impossibility of dividing by zero.

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                               Weighting
             Order's price versus NBBO at entry                 factor
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Less than 0.20% away........................................          0x
0.20% to 0.99% away.........................................          1x
1.00% to 1.99% away.........................................          2x
2.00% or more away..........................................          3x
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Thus, in calculating the Weighted Order Total, an order that was
more than 2.0% away from the NBBO would be equivalent to three orders
that were 0.50% away. Due to the applicable Weighting Factor of 0x,
orders entered less than 0.20% away from the NBBO would not be included
in the Weighted Order Total, but would be included in the ``executed''
orders component of the Order Entry Ratio if they execute in full or
part. Orders sent by market makers in securities in which they are
registered, through the MPID applicable to the registration, are
excluded from both components of the ratio.\7\ In addition, MPIDs with
a daily average Weighted Order Total of less than 100,000 during the
month will not be subject to the Excess Order Fee.\8\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ This is the case because market makers are already subject
to rule-based standards designed to promote the efficiency and
quality of their order entry practices. See Rule 4613. Although Rule
4613 allows market makers to quote at spreads much wider than 2%,
NASDAQ's assessment of market maker performance has led it to
conclude that market makers do not generally engage in the
inefficient practices at which the new fee is aimed. NASDAQ will
continually assess this data and revisit the applicability of the
fee to market makers and/or the requirements of Rule 4613 as needed
to promote efficient quotation practices by market makers.
    \8\ NASDAQ believes that this exclusion is reasonable because an
MPID with an extremely low volume of entered orders has only a de
minimis impact on the market.

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

    The following example illustrates the calculation of the Order
Entry Ratio:
     A member enters 35,000,000 displayed, liquidity-providing
orders:
    o The member is registered as a market maker with respect to
20,000,000 of the orders. These orders are excluded from the
calculation.
    o 10,000,000 orders are entered at the NBBO. The Weighting Factor
for these orders is 0x.
    [cir] 5,000,000 orders are entered at a price that is 1.50% away
from the NBBO. The Weighting Factor for these orders is 2x.
     Of the 15,000,000 orders included in the calculation,
90,000 are executed.
     The Weighted Order Total is (10,000,000 x 0) + (5,000,000
x 2) = 10,000,000. The Order Entry Ratio is 10,000,000/90,000 = 111
    If an MPID has an Order Entry Ratio of more than 100, the amount of
the Order Entry Fee will be calculated by determining the MPID's
``Excess Weighted Orders.'' Excess Weighted Orders are calculated by
subtracting (i) the Weighted Order Total that would result in the MPID
having an Order Entry Ratio of 100 from (ii) the MPID's actual Weighted
Order Total. In the example above, the Weighted Order Total that would
result in an Order Entry Ratio of 100 is 9,000,000, since 9,000,000/
90,000 = 100. Accordingly, the Excess Weighted Orders would be
10,000,000 - 9,000,000 = 1,000,000.
    The Excess Order Fee charged to the member will then be determined
by multiplying the ``Applicable Rate'' by the number of Excess Weighted
Orders. The Applicable Rate is determined based on the MPID's Order
Entry Ratio:

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                             Applicable
                     Order entry ratio                          rate
------------------------------------------------------------------------
101-1,000.................................................        $0.005
More than 1,000...........................................         0.01
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In the example above, the Applicable Rate would be $0.005, based on
the MPID's Order Entry Ratio of 111. Accordingly, the monthly Excess
Order Fee would be 1,000,000 x $0.005 = $5,000.
2. Statutory Basis
    NASDAQ believes that the proposed rule change is consistent with
the provisions of Section 6 of the Act,\9\ in general, and with
Sections 6(b)(4) and 6(b)(5) of the Act,\10\ in particular, in that it
provides for the equitable allocation of reasonable dues, fees and
other charges among members and issuers and other persons using any
facility or system which NASDAQ operates or controls, is not designed
to permit unfair discrimination between customers, issuers, brokers, or
dealers.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \9\ 15 U.S.C. 78f.
    \10\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(4) and (5).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    NASDAQ believes that the Order Entry Fee is reasonable because it
is designed to achieve improvements in the quality of displayed
liquidity and market data that will benefit all market participants. In
addition, although the level of the fee may theoretically be very high,
the fee is reasonable because market participants may readily avoid the
fee by making improvements in their order entry practices that reduce
the number of orders they enter, bring the prices of their orders
closer to the NBBO, and/or increase the percentage of their orders that
execute. For similar reasons, the fee is consistent with an equitable
allocation of fees, because although the fee may apply to only a small
number of market participants, the fee would be applied to them in
order to encourage better order entry practices that will benefit all
market participants. Ideally, the fee will be applied to no one,
because market participants will adjust their behavior in order to
avoid the fee. Finally, NASDAQ believes that the fee is not unfairly
discriminatory. Although the fee may apply to only a small number of
market participants, it will be imposed because of the negative
externalities that such market participants impose on others through
inefficient order entry practices. Accordingly, NASDAQ believes that it
is fair to impose the fee on these market participants in order to
incentivize them to modify their behavior and thereby benefit the
market.
    Finally, NASDAQ believes that the fee will help to prevent
fraudulent and manipulative acts and practices, to promote just and
equitable principles of trade, to foster cooperation and coordination
with persons engaged in regulating, clearing, settling, processing
information with respect to, and facilitating transactions in
securities, to remove impediments to and perfect the mechanism of a
free and open market and a national market system, and, in general, to
protect investors and the public interest, because the fee is designed
to reduce the extent of non-actionable orders in the market, thereby
promoting greater order interaction, increasing the quality of market
data, and inhibiting potentially abusive trading practices.

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

    NASDAQ does not believe that the proposed rule change will result
in any burden on competition that is not necessary or appropriate in
furtherance of the purposes of the Act, as amended. Specifically,
NASDAQ believes that the fee will constrain market participants from
pursuing certain inefficient and potentially abusive trading
strategies. To the extent that this change may be construed as a burden
on competition, NASDAQ believes that it is appropriate in order to
further the purposes of Section 6(b)(5) of the Act.\11\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \11\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

    Written comments were neither solicited nor received.

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

    The foregoing rule change has become effective pursuant to Section
19(b)(3)(A)(ii) of the Act.\12\ At any time within 60 days of the
filing of the proposed rule change, the Commission summarily may
temporarily suspend such rule change if it appears to the Commission
that such action is necessary or appropriate in the public interest,
for the protection of investors, or otherwise in furtherance of the
purposes of the Act. If the Commission takes such action, the
Commission shall institute proceedings to determine whether the
proposed rule should be approved or disapproved.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \12\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(a)(ii) [sic].
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

IV. Solicitation of Comments

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

Electronic Comments

     Use the Commission's Internet comment form (http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml); or
     Send an email to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Please include
File Number SR-NASDAQ-2012-055 on the subject line.

Paper Comments

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

All submissions should refer to File Number SR-NASDAQ-2012-055. This
file number should be included on the subject line if email is used.

    To help the Commission process and review your comments more
efficiently, please use only one method. The Commission will post all
comments on the Commission's Internet Web site (http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml). Copies of the submission, all subsequent amendments,
all written statements with respect to the proposed rule change that
are filed with the Commission, and all written communications relating
to the proposed rule change between the Commission and any person,
other than those that may be withheld from the public in accordance
with the provisions of 5 U.S.C. 552, will be available for Web site
viewing and printing in the Commission's Public Reference Room on
official business days between the hours of 10 a.m. and 3 p.m. Copies
of such filing also will be available for inspection and copying at the
principal offices of the Exchange. All comments received will be posted
without change; the Commission does not edit personal identifying
information from submissions. You should submit only information that
you wish to make available publicly. All submissions should refer to
File Number SR-NASDAQ-2012-055, and should be submitted on or before
June 5, 2012.

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

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

Kevin M. O'Neill,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2012-11699 Filed 5-14-12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 79, Number 124 (Friday, June 27, 2014)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 36387-36389]
[FR Doc No: 2014-14807]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. FAA-2014-0281; Directorate Identifier 2014-NE-05-AD;
Amendment 39-17878; AD 2014-13-03]
RIN 2120-AA64

Airworthiness Directives; Rolls-Royce plc Turbofan Engines

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Final rule; request for comments.

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

SUMMARY: We are adopting a new airworthiness directive (AD) for all
Rolls-Royce plc (RR) RB211 Trent 553-61, 553A2-61, 556-61, 556A2-61,
556B-61, 556B2-61, 560-61, and 560A2-61 turbofan engines. We are
issuing this AD to address, through an update to the electronic engine
control (EEC) software, multiple risks of uncontained engine failure
and damage to the airplane.

DATES: This AD becomes effective July 14, 2014.

    We must receive comments on this AD by August 11, 2014.

ADDRESSES: You may send comments by any of the following methods:
     Federal eRulemaking Portal: Go to http://www.regulations.gov and follow the instructions for sending your
comments electronically.
     Mail: U.S. Department of Transportation, 1200 New Jersey
Avenue SE., West Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140, Washington, DC
20590-0001.
     Hand Delivery: Deliver to Mail address above between 9
a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays.
     Fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    For service information identified in this AD, contact Rolls-Royce
plc, Corporate Communications, P.O. Box 31, Derby, England, DE248BJ;
phone: 011-44-1332-242424; fax: 011-44-1332-249936; email: http://www.rolls-royce.com/contact/civil_team.jsp; Internet: https://www.aeromanager.com. You may view this service information at the FAA,
Engine & Propeller Directorate, 12 New England Executive Park,
Burlington, MA. 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-2014-
0281; or in person at the Docket Operations office between 9 a.m. and 5
p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays. The AD docket
contains this AD, the mandatory continuing airworthiness information
(MCAI), the regulatory evaluation, any comments received, and other
information. The address for the Docket Office (phone:<PHONE_NUMBER>) is
in ADDRESSES section. Comments will be available in the AD docket
shortly after receipt.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mark Riley, Aerospace Engineer, Engine
Certification Office, FAA, Engine & Propeller Directorate, 12 New
England Executive Park, Burlington, MA 01803; phone:<PHONE_NUMBER>;
fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>; email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Comments Invited

    This AD is a final rule that involves requirements affecting flight
safety, and we did not precede it by notice and opportunity for public
comment. We invite you to send any written relevant data, views, or
arguments about this AD. Send your comments to an address listed under
the ADDRESSES section. Include ``Docket No. FAA-2014-0281; Directorate
Identifier 2014-NE-05-AD'' at the beginning of your comments. We
specifically invite comments on the overall regulatory, economic,
environmental, and energy aspects of this AD. We will consider all
comments received by the closing date and may amend this AD because of
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
with FAA personnel concerning this AD.

Discussion

    The European Aviation Safety Agency (EASA), which is the Technical
Agent for the Member States of the European Community, has issued EASA
AD 2014-0086, dated April 11, 2014 (referred to hereinafter as ``the
MCAI''), to correct an unsafe condition for the specified products. The
MCAI states:

    Investigation carried out by RR has identified the risk of fan
flutter during ground maintenance running, which indicated the need
to introduce a fan flutter Keep Out Zone (KOZ). In addition,
following Intermediate Pressure (IP) turbine overspeed events
experienced on other Trent series engines, the need to introduce a
protection against IP shaft failures in the event of an internal
engine fire was identified.
    Fan flutter may result in multiple fan blade failures and
consequent release of uncontained high energy debris. An unprotected
IP shaft failure may result in IP turbine overspeed, IP turbine
burst and, ultimately, release of uncontained high energy debris.
These conditions, if not corrected, could result in damage to, and
reduced control of, the aeroplane.

    You may obtain further information by examining the MCAI in the AD
docket on the Internet at http://www.regulations.gov by searching for
and locating Docket No. FAA-2014-0281.

Relevant Service Information

    RR has issued Alert Service Bulletin (ASB) No. RB.211-73-AH531,
Revision 1, dated March 7, 2014. The ASB describes procedures for
modifying affected RB211 Trent 500 turbofan engines by installing new
EEC software Version L6.1.2.

FAA's Determination and Requirements of This AD

    This product has been approved by the aviation authority of the
United Kingdom, and is approved for operation in the United States.
Pursuant to our bilateral agreement with the European Community, EASA
has notified us of the unsafe condition described in the MCAI and
service information referenced above. We are proposing this AD because
we evaluated all information provided by EASA and determined the unsafe
condition exists and is likely to exist or develop on other products of
the same type design. This AD requires removal of EEC software, Version
L5.6.1 or earlier, and installation of a software version eligible for
installation.

FAA's Determination of the Effective Date

    No domestic operators use this product. Therefore, we find that
notice and opportunity for prior public comment are unnecessary and
that good cause exists for making this amendment effective in less than
30 days.

Costs of Compliance

    We estimate that this AD affects no engines installed on airplanes
of U.S. registry. We also estimate that it will take about 1 hour per
engine to comply with this AD. The average labor rate is $85 per hour.
Required parts cost is about $0 per engine. Based on these figures, we
estimate the cost of this AD on U.S. operators to be $0.

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 AD will not have federalism implications
under Executive Order 13132. This AD will not have a substantial direct
effect on the States, on the relationship between the national
government and the States, or on the distribution of power and
responsibilities among the various levels of government.

    For the reasons discussed above, I certify this AD:
    (1) Is not a ``significant regulatory action'' under Executive
Order 12866,
    (2) Is not a ``significant rule'' under the DOT Regulatory Policies
and Procedures (44 FR 11034, February 26, 1979),
    (3) Will not affect intrastate aviation in Alaska to the extent
that it justifies making a regulatory distinction, and
    (4) Will not have a significant economic impact, positive or
negative, on a substantial number of small entities under the criteria
of the Regulatory Flexibility Act.

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39

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

Adoption of the Amendment

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

PART 39--AIRWORTHINESS DIRECTIVES

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

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

Sec.  39.13  [Amended]

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

2014-13-03 Rolls-Royce plc: Amendment 39-17878; Docket No. FAA-2014-
0281; Directorate Identifier 2014-NE-05-AD.

(a) Effective Date

    This AD is effective July 14, 2014.

(b) Affected ADs

    None.

(c) Applicability

    This AD applies to all Rolls-Royce plc (RR) RB211 Trent 553-61,
553A2-61, 556-61, 556A2-61, 556B-61, 556B2-61, 560-61, and 560A2-61
turbofan engines.

(d) Reason

    This AD was prompted by the risk of fan flutter occurring during
ground maintenance running, and the risk of intermediate-pressure
(IP) shaft failure which may result in IP turbine overspeed and disk
burst. We are issuing this AD to address, through an update to the
electronic engine control (EEC) software, multiple risks of
uncontained engine failure and damage to the airplane.

(e) Actions and Compliance

    Comply with this AD within the compliance times specified,
unless already done.
    (1) After the effective date of this AD, within 3 months or 200
flight cycles, whichever occurs first, modify the engine by removing
EEC software, Version L5.6.1 or earlier.
    (2) Install EEC software eligible for installation.

(f) Installation Prohibition

    After modification of an engine as required by paragraph (e) of
this AD, do not install any EEC with a software Version L5.6.1 or
earlier into any engine.

(g) Alternative Methods of Compliance (AMOCs)

    The Manager, Engine Certification Office, FAA, may approve AMOCs
to this AD. Use the procedures found in 14 CFR 39.19 to make your
request.

(h) Related Information

    (1) For more information about this AD, contact Mark Riley,
Aerospace Engineer, Engine Certification Office, FAA, Engine &
Propeller Directorate, 12 New England Executive Park, Burlington, MA
01803; phone:<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>; email:
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>    (2) Refer to MCAI European Aviation Safety Agency AD 2014-0086,
dated April 11, 2014, for more information. You may examine the MCAI
in the AD docket on the Internet at http://www.regulations.gov by
searching for and locating it in Docket No. FAA-2014-0281.
    (3) RR Alert Service Bulletin No. RB.211-73-AH531, Revision 1,
dated March 7, 2014, which is not incorporated by reference in this
AD, can be obtained from RR using the contact information in
paragraph (h)(4) of this AD.
    (4) Rolls-Royce plc, Corporate Communications, P.O. Box 31,
Derby, England, DE248BJ; phone: 011-44-1332-242424; fax: 011-44-
1332-249936; email: http://www.rolls-royce.com/contact/civil_team.jsp; Internet: https://www.aeromanager.com.
    (5) You may view this service information at the FAA, Engine &
Propeller Directorate, 12 New England Executive Park, Burlington,
MA. For information on the availability of this material at the FAA,
call<PHONE_NUMBER>.

(i) Material Incorporated by Reference

    None.

    Issued in Burlington, Massachusetts, on June 13, 2014.
Ann C. Mollica,
Acting Assistant Directorate Manager, Engine & Propeller Directorate,
Aircraft Certification Service.
[FR Doc. 2014-14807 Filed 6-26-14; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


[Federal Register Volume 82, Number 216 (Thursday, November 9, 2017)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Page 52005]
[FR Doc No: 2017-24378]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Coast Guard

33 CFR Part 117

[Docket No. USCG-2017-0983]

Drawbridge Operation Regulation; Hutchinson River, Mount Vernon,
NY

AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS.

ACTION: Notice of deviation from drawbridge regulation.

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

SUMMARY: The Coast Guard has issued a temporary deviation from the
operating schedule that governs the South Fulton Avenue Bridge across
the Hutchinson River, mile 2.9, at Mount Vernon, New York. This
deviation is necessary to facilitate bridge rehabilitation allowing the
owner to temporarily close the draw for ten days.

DATES: This deviation is effective from 12:01 a.m. on November 13, 2017
until 11:59 p.m. on November 22, 2017.

ADDRESSES: The docket for this deviation, USCG-2017-0983, is available
at http://www.regulations.gov. Type the docket number in the ``SEARCH''
box and click ``SEARCH''. Click on Open Docket Folder on the line
associated with this deviation.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: If you have questions on this
temporary deviation, call or email Judy K. Leung-Yee, Bridge Management
Specialist, First District Bridge Branch, U.S. Coast Guard; telephone
212-514-4336, email [email protected].

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The owner of the bridge, the Westchester
County Department of Public Works and Transportation, requested a
temporary deviation in order to facilitate bridge rehabilitation
including placement of the concrete deck for the counterweight spans,
installation of concrete on the movable spans, installation of sidewalk
deck panels, control/mechanical equipment wiring and testing, and
bridge testing.
    The South Fulton Avenue Bridge across the Hutchinson River, mile
2.9, at Mount Vernon, New York is a bascule bridge with a vertical
clearance of 6 feet at mean high water and 13 feet at mean low water in
the closed position. The existing drawbridge operating regulations are
listed at 33 CFR 117.793(c).
    This temporary deviation will allow the South Fulton Avenue Bridge
to remain in the closed position from 12:01 a.m. on November 13, 2017
to 11:59 p.m. on November 22, 2017. The waterway is transited by
recreational vessels and commercial vessels. There is only one facility
upstream of this bridge. Coordination with waterway user has indicated
no objection to the proposed closure of the draw. Vessels that can pass
under the bridge without an opening may do so at all times. The bridge
will not be able to open for emergencies. There is no alternate route
for vessels to pass.
    The Coast Guard will also inform the users of the waterways through
our Local and Broadcast Notices to Mariners of the change in operating
schedule for the bridge so vessel operators may arrange their transits
to minimize any impact caused by the temporary deviation.
    In accordance with 33 CFR 117.35(e), the drawbridge must return to
its regular operating schedule immediately at the end of the effective
period of this temporary deviation. This deviation from the operating
regulations is authorized under 33 CFR 117.35.

    Dated: November 3, 2017.
Christopher J. Bisignano,
Supervisory Bridge Management Specialist, First Coast Guard District.
[FR Doc. 2017-24378 Filed 11-8-17; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 9110-04-P


[Federal Register: February 13, 2007 (Volume 72, Number 29)]
[Notices]
[Page 6797-6799]
[DOCID:fr13fe07-79]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-55239; File No. SR-DTC-2006-15]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; The Depository Trust Company;
Order Granting Approval of a Proposed Rule Change Relating to the
Canadian Link Service

February 5, 2007.

I. Introduction

    On October 10, 2006, The Depository Trust Company (``DTC'') filed
with the Securities and Exchange Commission (``Commission'') proposed
rule change SR-DTC-2006-15 pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (``Act''). \1\ Notice of the proposal
was published in the Federal Register on December 8, 2006.\2\ No
comment letters were received. For the reasons discussed below, the
Commission is granting approval of the proposed rule change.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1).
    \2\ Securities Exchange Act Release No. 54855, (December 1,
2006), 71 FR 71206.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

II. Description

    The proposed rule change amends DTC's Rule 30, Canadian-Link
Service, to allow certain Canadian-Link transactions to settle in U.S.
dollars. DTC's Canadian-Link Service currently allows participants of
DTC (``DTC Participants'') to clear and settle two categories of
securities transactions in Canadian dollars: (1) transactions with
participants of The Canadian Depository for Securities Limited CDS
(``CDS Participants'') and (2) transactions with other DTC
Participants. The Canadian-Link Service also allows DTC Participants to
transfer Canadian dollar funds to CDS Participants through the
facilities of CDS and to other DTC Participants through Canadian
settlement banks acting for DTC and

such DTC Participants. The proposed rule change would add an additional
functionality to the Canadian-Link Service to allow DTC Participants to
settle certain securities transactions with CDS Participants in U.S.
dollars (``cross border U.S. dollar securities transactions''). Set
forth below is a description of the current Canadian-Link Service and a
description of the proposed change.

Current Functionality of the Canadian-Link Service

    The Canadian-Link Service currently allows DTC Participants to
clear and settle valued securities transactions in Canadian dollars
with CDS Participants through the link between DTC and CDS. The
securities that may be the subject of these transactions are securities
that are eligible for book-entry transfer through the facilities of CDS
and DTC (``Full-Service Canadian-Link Securities'') and securities that
are eligible for book-entry transfer through the facilities of CDS but
not through DTC (``Limited Service Canadian-Link Securities''). The
securities are delivered to and from CDS Participants through the
facilities of CDS. Money settlement between DTC and CDS is included in
Canadian dollar money settlement at CDS. Money settlement between DTC
and DTC Participants takes place between Canadian settlement banks
acting for DTC and such DTC Participants.
    The Canadian-Link Service allows DTC Participants to clear and
settle valued transactions in Canadian dollars with other DTC
Participants through the facilities of DTC. The securities that may be
the subject of these transactions are Full-Service Canadian-Link
Securities. The securities are delivered to and from DTC Participants
through the facilities of DTC. Money settlement between DTC and DTC
Participants takes place through Canadian settlement banks acting for
DTC and such DTC Participants.
    The Canadian-Link Service allows DTC Participants to transfer
Canadian dollar funds without any corresponding delivery or receipt of
securities to CDS Participants or other DTC Participants. Transactions
between DTC Participants and CDS Participants are processed through the
facilities of CDS. Transactions between DTC Participants and other DTC
Participants are processed through Canadian settlement banks acting for
such DTC Participants.
    The proposed rule change would not change any of the existing
components of the Canadian-Link Service and except for cross border
U.S. dollar securities transactions, as set forth below, would not
change how securities transactions are currently processed through the
Canadian-Link Service.

Enhancement to the Canadian-Link Service

    The proposed rule change enhances the Canadian-Link Service to
allow DTC Participants to clear and settle certain valued securities
transactions in U.S. dollars with CDS Participants through the link
between DTC and CDS.\3\ The securities that will be the subject of U.S.
dollar settlement are Limited-Service Canadian-Link Securities (i.e.,
securities that are eligible for book-entry transfer through the
facilities of CDS but not DTC). The securities will be delivered to and
from CDS Participants through the facilities of CDS. Money settlement
between DTC and CDS will be included in U.S. dollar money settlement at
DTC. Money settlement between DTC and DTC Participants will also be
included in U.S. dollar money settlement at DTC together with the
settlement of DTC Participants' other transactions at DTC. As the
foregoing indicates, these cross border U.S. dollar securities
transactions will be processed in substantially the same way that
transactions are now processed except that these transactions would
settle in U.S. dollars rather than in Canadian dollars and the place of
money settlement will be at DTC rather than at CDS or through Canadian
settlement banks.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ DTC has represented to the Commission that some transactions
executed in Canadian markets, either on a stock exchange or over-
the-counter, are settled in U.S. dollars. Transactions that settle
in U.S. dollars are reported to DTC in U.S. dollar amounts. DTC does
not convert settlement amounts from Canadian to U.S. dollars.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The proposed rule change also adds new definitions to DTC Rule 30
to distinguish between transactions between DTC Participants and CDS
Participants (``Cross-Border Securities Transactions'') and
transactions between only DTC Participants (``Intra-DTC Securities
Transactions''). The proposed rule change also adds new definitions to
distinguish between transactions that settle in U.S. dollars and
transactions that settle in Canadian dollars (for example, ``Cross-
Border CAD Securities Transactions'' and ``Intra-DTC USD Securities
Transactions'').

Risk Management Controls

    Set forth below is a description of DTC's risk management controls
with respect to the Canadian-Link Service and how these risk management
controls will be affected as a result of the proposed rule change.
    1. Canadian-Link Required Participants Fund Deposit. A DTC
Participant that uses the Canadian-Link Service is currently required
to make an additional required deposit to the DTC participants fund
that is determined in accordance with a formula that takes into account
the volume of cross-border Canadian dollar securities transactions
processed by DTC for such DTC Participant. Under the proposed rule
change, such formula will also take into account the volume of cross-
border U.S. dollar securities transactions processed by DTC for such
DTC Participant.
    2. Security for Canadian-Link Transactions. A DTC Participant that
uses the Canadian-Link Service is currently required to pledge to DTC
its interest in the securities subject to cross-border Canadian dollar
securities transactions that are held by DTC for such DTC Participant
at CDS. Under the proposed rule change, such DTC Participant will also
be required to pledge to DTC its interest in the securities subject to
cross-border U.S. dollar securities transactions that are held by DTC
for such DTC Participant at CDS.
    3. Canadian-Link Service Net Debit Caps of Canadian-Link
Participants. A DTC Participant that uses the Canadian-Link Service is
currently subject to a net debit cap on the negative Canadian dollar
balance that may, from time to time, be incurred by such DTC
Participant with respect to its use of the Canadian-Link Service. Under
the proposed rule change, a DTC Participant will also be subject to a
net debit cap on the negative U.S. dollar balance that may from time to
time be incurred by such DTC Participant with respect to its cross-
border U.S. dollar securities transactions. The proposed rule change
will add new definitions to DTC Rule 30 to take into account that there
will be separate Net Debit Caps for U.S. and for Canadian dollar
transactions.
    4. Collateral Monitor of Canadian-Link Participants. A DTC
Participant that uses the Canadian-Link Service is currently subject to
the DTC collateral monitor with respect to its use of the Canadian-Link
Service. Under the proposed rule change, a DTC Participant will also be
subject to the DTC collateral monitor with respect to its cross-border
U.S. dollar securities transactions.
    As the foregoing indicates, cross-border U.S. dollar securities
transactions will be subject to essentially the same risk management
controls that are already applicable to the other securities
transactions currently processed through the Canadian-Link Service.

III. Discussion

    Section 17A(b)(3)(F) of the Act requires that the rules of a
clearing agency be designed to assure the safeguarding of securities
and funds which are in the custody or control of the clearing agency or
for which it is responsible. The Commission first approved Rule 30 to
permit DTC to provide the Canadian-Link Service in 2005.\4\ In its
order granting approval of Rule 30, the Commission found that rule
satisfies the requirements of Section 17A of the Act because while
streamlining the clearance and settlement of Canadian Dollar
transactions at DTC, it includes sufficient procedures to assure the
safeguarding of securities and funds which are in DTC's custody or
control or for which it is responsible.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ Securities Exchange Act Release No. 52784 (November 16,
2005), 71 FR 70902 (November 23, 2005) (File No. SR-DTC-2005-08).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The proposed rule change, by adding to the transactions that are
eligible to be cleared and settled through the Canadian-Link Service,
is designed to encourage more CDS-Link Participants to use and to
benefit from the operational and cost efficiencies of the Canadian-Link
Service. We are satisfied with DTC's description of the rule change as
an enhancement that does not otherwise affect the operation of the
Canadian-Link Service as it was previously approved by the Commission.
In addition, the corresponding changes made to DTC's risk management
procedures and the clarifying amendments made to the terminology in
Rule 30 should assure that DTC can offer U.S. Dollar settlement for the
Canadian-Link Service without affecting DTC's ability to safeguard
securities and funds which are in its custody or control or for which
it is responsible.

IV. Conclusion

    On the basis of the foregoing, the Commission finds that the
proposed rule change is consistent with the requirements of the Act and
in particular Section 17A of the Act and the rules and regulations
thereunder.\5\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ In approving the proposed rule change, the Commission
considered the proposal's impact on efficiency, competition and
capital formation. 15 U.S.C. 78c(f).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    It is therefore ordered, pursuant to Section 19(b)(2) of the Act,
that the proposed rule change (File No. SR-DTC-2006-15) be and hereby
is approved.

    For the Commission by the Division of Market Regulation,
pursuant to delegated authority.\6\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Florence E. Harmon,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. E7-2419 Filed 2-12-07; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 8010-01-P


[Federal Register: March 12, 2007 (Volume 72, Number 47)]
[Notices]
[Page 11004-11005]
[DOCID:fr12mr07-55]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Docket Nos. ER07-110-000, ER07-110-001, ER07-110-002 and ER07-110-003]

BTEC New Albany LLC; Notice of Issuance of Order

March 5, 2007.
    BTEC New Albany LLC (New Albany) filed an application for market-
based rate authority, with an accompanying rate schedule. The proposed
market-based rate schedule provides for the sale of energy, capacity
and ancillary services at market-based rates. New Albany also requested
waivers of various Commission regulations. In particular, New Albany
requested that the Commission grant blanket approval under 18 CFR Part
34 of all future issuances of securities and assumptions of liability
by New Albany.
    On March 2, 2007, pursuant to delegated authority, the Director,
Division of Tariffs and Market Development--West, granted the requests
for blanket approval under Part 34. The Director's order also stated
that the Commission would publish a separate notice in the Federal
Register establishing a period of time for the filing of protests.
Accordingly, any person desiring to be heard or to protest the blanket
approvals of issuances of securities or assumptions of liability by New
Albany should file a motion to intervene or protest with the Federal
Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street, NE., Washington, DC
20426, in accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of the Commission's Rules
of Practice and Procedure. 18 CFR 385.211, 385.214 (2004).
    Notice is hereby given that the deadline for filing motions to
intervene or protest is April 2, 2007.
    Absent a request to be heard in opposition by the deadline above,
New Albany is authorized to issue securities and assume obligations or
liabilities as a guarantor, indorser, surety, or otherwise in respect
of any security of another person; provided that such issuance or
assumption is for some lawful object within the corporate purposes of
New Albany, compatible with the public interest, and is reasonably
necessary or appropriate for such purposes.
    The Commission reserves the right to require a further showing that
neither public nor private interests will be adversely affected by
continued approvals of New Albany's issuance of securities or
assumptions of liability.
    Copies of the full text of the Director's Order are available from
the Commission's Public Reference Room, 888 First Street, NE.,
Washington, DC 20426. The Order may also be viewed on the Commission's
Web site at http://www.ferc.gov, using the eLibrary link. Enter the

docket number excluding the last three digits in the docket number
filed to access the document. Comments, protests, and interventions may
be filed electronically via the internet in lieu of paper. See, 18 CFR
385.2001(a)(1)(iii) and the instructions on the Commission's Web site
under the

``e-Filing'' link. The Commission strongly encourages electronic
filings.

Philis J. Posey,
Acting Secretary.
[FR Doc. E7-4338 Filed 3-9-07; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


The reporting burden is estimated to be about 30 hours per facility for a State agency to distribute the Hazardous Waste Report Instructions and Forms, assist respondents, key entry report submissions, and perform quality assurance.  There are no recordkeeping requirements associated with this requirement, and as such, there is no recordkeeping burden.

(2)	Notification of Regulated Waste Activity

      The reporting burden associated with notification requirements is estimated to be about 1 hour for a facility.  There are no recordkeeping requirements associated with this requirement, and as such, there is no recordkeeping burden.

      The recordkeeping burden associated with notification requirements (initial and subsequent) is estimated to be 2 hours for State agencies to review and enter notification information into RCRAInfo.  There are no reporting requirements associated with this requirement, and as such, there is no reporting burden.

 Part A Hazardous Waste Permit Application and Modification

      The reporting burden associated with the Part A Permit Application requirements is estimated to be about 24 hours for a facility to prepare and submit a Part A Permit Application.  The recordkeeping burden is estimated to be about 7 hours to read the regulations.

      The reporting burden associated with the Part A Permit Application requirements is estimated to be about 12 minutes for a State agency to notify an applicant of a deficiency in the Part A Permit Application.  The recordkeeping burden is estimated to be about 5 hours to review an application and signatories to the permit applications and reports, and enter the Part A Permit Application information into RCRAInfo.

      The recordkeeping burden associated with revising a Part A Permit Applications is estimated to be 5 hours for State agencies to review a Part A Permit Application, justification, and Subpart H compliance demonstration, and enter the Part A Permit Application information into RCRAInfo.  There are no reporting requirements associated with this requirement, and as such, there is no reporting burden.

      Burden means the total time, effort, or financial resources expended by persons to generate, maintain, retain, or disclose or provide information to or for a Federal agency.  This includes the time needed to review instructions; develop, acquire, install, and utilize technology and systems for the purposes of collecting, validating, and verifying information, processing and maintaining information, and disclosing and providing information; adjust the existing ways to comply with any previously applicable instructions and requirements; train personnel to be able to respond to a collection of information; search data sources; complete and review the collection of information; and transmit or otherwise disclose the information.  An agency may not conduct or sponsor, and a person is not required to respond to, a collection of information unless it displays a currently valid OMB control number.  The OMB control numbers for EPA's regulations are listed in 40 CFR Part 9 and 48 CFR Chapter 15.

      To comment on EPA 's need for this information, the accuracy of the provided burden estimates, and any suggested methods for minimizing respondent burden, including the use of automated collection techniques, EPA has established a public docket for this ICR under Docket ID Number EPA-HQ-OLEM-2019-0558, which is available for online viewing at www.regulations.gov, or in person viewing at the RCRA Docket in the EPA Docket Center (EPA/DC), EPA West Building, Room 3334, 1301 Constitution Avenue, NW, Washington, D.C.  The EPA Docket Center Public Reading Room is open from 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., Monday through Friday, excluding legal holidays.  The telephone number for the RCRA Docket is<PHONE_NUMBER>, and the fax number is<PHONE_NUMBER>.  An electronic version of the public docket is available at www.regulations.gov.  This site can be used to submit or view public comments, access the index listing of the contents of the public docket, and to access those documents in the public docket that are available electronically.  When in the system, select "search," then key in the Docket ID Number identified above.  Also, you can send comments to the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, Office of Management and Budget, 725 17th Street, NW, Washington, D.C. 20503, Attention: Desk Officer for EPA.  Please include the EPA Docket ID Number EPA-HQ-OLEM-2019-0558 and OMB Control Number 2050-0024 in any correspondence.


[Federal Register: March 19, 2010 (Volume 75, Number 53)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Page 13225]
[DOCID:fr19mr10-4]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES

Food and Drug Administration

21 CFR Part 522

[Docket No. FDA-2010-N-0002]

Implantation or Injectable Dosage Form New Animal Drugs; Flunixin

AGENCY: Food and Drug Administration, HHS.

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) is amending the animal
drug regulations to reflect approval of an original abbreviated new
animal drug application (ANADA) filed by Cross Vetpharm Group Ltd. The
ANADA provides for the use of flunixin meglumine injectable solution in
swine.

DATES: This rule is effective March 19, 2010.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: John K. Harshman, Center for
Veterinary Medicine (HFV-170), Food and Drug Administration, 7500
Standish Pl., Rockville, MD 20855,<PHONE_NUMBER>, e-mail:
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Cross Vetpharm Group Ltd., Broomhill Rd.,
Tallaght, Dublin 24, Ireland, filed ANADA 200-489 that provides for use
of FLUNAZINE-S (flunixin meglumine) Injectable Solution in swine for
control of pyrexia associated with swine respiratory disease. Cross
Vetpharm Group Ltd.'s FLUNAZINE-S is approved as a generic copy of
BANAMINE-S, sponsored by Schering-Plough Animal Health Corp. under NADA
101-479. The ANADA is approved as of March 1, 2010, and the regulations
are amended in 21 CFR 522.970 to reflect the approval.
    In accordance with the freedom of information provisions of 21 CFR
part 20 and 21 CFR 514.11(e)(2)(ii), a summary of safety and
effectiveness data and information submitted to support approval of
this application may be seen in the Division of Dockets Management
(HFA-305), Food and Drug Administration, 5630 Fishers Lane, rm. 1061,
Rockville, MD 20852, between 9 a.m. and 4 p.m., Monday through Friday.
    The agency has determined under 21 CFR 25.33 that this action is of
a type that does not individually or cumulatively have a significant
effect on the human environment. Therefore, neither an environmental
assessment nor an environmental impact statement is required.
    This rule does not meet the definition of ``rule'' in 5 U.S.C.
804(3)(A) because it is a rule of ``particular applicability.''
Therefore, it is not subject to the congressional review requirements
in 5 U.S.C. 801-808.

List of Subjects in 21 CFR Part 522

    Animal drugs.

0
Therefore, under the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act and under
authority delegated to the Commissioner of Food and Drugs and
redelegated to the Center for Veterinary Medicine, 21 CFR part 522 is
amended as follows:

PART 522--IMPLANTATION OR INJECTABLE DOSAGE FORM NEW ANIMAL DRUGS

0
1. The authority citation for 21 CFR part 522 continues to read as
follows:

    Authority: 21 U.S.C. 360b.

0
2. In Sec.  522.970, revise paragraphs (b)(1) and (b)(4) to read as
follows:

Sec.  522.970  Flunixin.

* * * * *
    (b) * * *
    (1) See Nos. 000061, 055529, and 061623 for use as in paragraph (e)
of this section.
* * * * *
    (4) See No. 059130 for use as in paragraphs (e)(1) and (e)(2) of
this section.
* * * * *

    Dated: March 12, 2010.
Bernadette Dunham,
Director, Center for Veterinary Medicine.
[FR Doc. 2010-6038 Filed 3-18-10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4160-01-S