[Federal Register: October 4, 2006 (Volume 71, Number 192)]
[Notices]
[Page 58640-58644]
[DOCID:fr04oc06-97]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Investment Company Act Release No. 27506; 812-12799]

RiverSource Diversified Income Series, Inc., et al.; Notice of
Application

September 28, 2006.
AGENCY: Securities and Exchange Commission (``Commission'').

ACTION: Notice of an application for an order under (a) section 6(c) of
the Investment Company Act of 1940 (``Act'') granting an exemption from
sections 18(f) and 21(b) of the Act; (b) section 12(d)(1)(J) of the Act
granting an exemption from section 12(d)(1) of the Act; (c) sections
6(c) and 17(b) of the Act granting an exemption from sections 17(a)(1)
and 17(a)(3) of the Act; and (d) section 17(d) of the Act and rule 17d-
1 under the Act to permit certain joint transactions.

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

    Summary of the Application: Applicants request an order that would
permit certain registered open-end management investment companies to
participate in a joint lending and borrowing facility.
    Applicants: RiverSource Diversified Income Series, Inc.,
RiverSource California Tax-Exempt Trust, RiverSource Bond Series, Inc.,
RiverSource Equity Series, Inc., RiverSource High Yield Income Series,
Inc., RiverSource Government Income Series, Inc., RiverSource Global
Series, Inc., RiverSource Large Cap Series, Inc., RiverSource Tax-
Exempt Income Series, Inc., RiverSource International Series, Inc.,
RiverSource Investment Series, Inc., RiverSource Strategic Allocation
Series, Inc., RiverSource Market Advantage Series, Inc., RiverSource
Money Market Series, Inc., RiverSource Dimensions Series, Inc.,
RiverSource International Managers Series, Inc., RiverSource Managers
Series, Inc., RiverSource Selected Series, Inc., RiverSource Short Term
Investments Series, Inc., RiverSource Income Series, Inc., RiverSource
Strategy Series, Inc., RiverSource Special Tax-Exempt Series Trust,
RiverSource Tax-Exempt Series, Inc., RiverSource Tax-Exempt Money
Market Series, Inc., RiverSource Sector Series, Inc., RiverSource
Variable Portfolio-Income Series, Inc., RiverSource Variable Portfolio-
Investment Series, Inc., RiverSource Variable Portfolio-Managed Series,
Inc., RiverSource Variable Portfolio-Money Market Series, Inc.,
RiverSource Variable Portfolio-Managers Series, Inc., RiverSource
Variable Portfolio-Select Series, Inc., RiverSource Retirement Series
Trust (collectively, the ``Companies''), RiverSource Investments, LLC
(``RiverSource''), and Ameriprise Financial, Inc. (``Ameriprise'').
    Filing Dates: The application was filed on March 26, 2002, and
amended on September 27, 2006.
    Hearing or Notification of Hearing: An order granting the
application will be issued unless the Commission orders a hearing.
Interested persons may request a hearing by writing to the Commission's
Secretary and serving applicants with a copy of the request, personally
or by mail. Hearing requests should be received by the Commission by
5:30 p.m. on October 23, 2006, and should be accompanied by proof of
service on applicants, in the form of an affidavit or, for lawyers, a
certificate of service. Hearing requests should state the nature of the
writer's interest, the reason for the request, and the issues
contested. Persons who wish to be notified of a hearing may request
notification by writing to the Commission's Secretary.

ADDRESSES: Secretary, Commission, U.S. Securities and Exchange
Commission, 100 F Street, NE., Washington, DC 20549-1090. Applicants:
Companies, 901 Marquette Avenue South, Suite 2810, Minneapolis, MN
55402-3268; and RiverSource and Ameriprise, 200 Ameriprise Financial
Center, Minneapolis, MN 55474.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Laura J. Riegel, Senior Counsel at
(202) 551-6873 or Nadya B. Roytblat, Assistant Director, at (202) 551-
6821 (Division of Investment Management, Office of Investment Company
Regulation).

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The following is a summary of the
application. The complete application

may be obtained for a fee at the Commission's Public Reference Desk,
100 F Street, NE., Washington, DC 20549-0102 (tel.<PHONE_NUMBER>).

Applicants' Representations

    1. The Companies are organized as Minnesota corporations or
Massachusetts business trusts and are registered under the Act as open-
end management investment companies.\1\ Most Companies offer one or
more series, each with a different investment objective and different
investment policies. RiverSource is registered as an investment adviser
under the Investment Advisers Act of 1940. RiverSource has entered into
an investment management services agreement with each Fund. Ameriprise
serves as the administrator to each Fund under the terms of its
administrative services agreement with the Fund. RiverSource is a
wholly-owned subsidiary of Ameriprise.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ Applicants request that the order also apply to any existing
or future series of the Companies and to any other registered open-
end management investment company or its series for which
RiverSource or a person controlling, controlled by, or under common
control with RiverSource serves as investment adviser (collectively,
together with the Companies, the ``Funds''). All existing registered
investment companies that currently intend to rely on the requested
order have been named as applicants. Any other existing or future
Fund that relies on the requested order in the future will comply
with the terms and conditions of the application.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    2. The Funds may lend cash to banks or other entities by entering
into repurchase agreements either directly or through the ``Joint
Accounts'' (as defined below), purchasing short-term investments or
under arrangements whereby custodian fees are reduced. Each Fund may
deposit uninvested daily balances into one or more joint trading
accounts administered by RiverSource and its affiliates (``Joint
Accounts'') and invest the daily balance of the Joint Accounts in
repurchase agreements. An existing Commission order also permits each
Fund to invest uninvested cash and cash collateral in one or more money
market Funds that comply with rule 2a-7 under the Act.
    3. Currently, the Funds have a committed line of credit from a
bank. Each Fund can borrow money from the bank to complete security
transactions suspended by the closing of the electronic money transfer
systems or to meet redemptions on a timely basis regardless of whether
sale transactions are awaiting settlement. The amount of each Fund's
borrowing under the committed line of credit is limited to the amount
permitted by the Fund's fundamental investment policies.
    4. If the Funds were to borrow money from the bank under their
committed line of credit, the Funds would pay interest on the borrowed
cash at a rate which would likely be significantly higher than the rate
that would be earned by other non-borrowing Funds on investments in
repurchase agreements and other short-term instruments of the same
maturity as the bank loan. Applicants believe this differential
represents the bank's profit for serving as the middleman between a
borrower and a lender. The Funds pay an annual commitment fee for the
committed line of credit.
    5. Applicants request an order that would permit the Funds to enter
into a master interfund lending agreement (``Interfund Lending
Agreement'') under which the Funds would lend and borrow money for
temporary purposes directly to and from each other through a credit
facility (``Interfund Loan''). Applicants state that the proposed
credit facility would reduce potential borrowing Funds' costs and
enhance lending Funds' ability to earn higher rates of interest on
short-term loans. Although the proposed credit facility would reduce
the Funds' need to borrow from banks, the Funds would be free to
establish and/or continue committed lines of credit or other borrowing
arrangements with banks.
    6. The credit facility may be used when the cash position of a Fund
is insufficient to meet a day's cash requirements, such as when
shareholder redemptions exceed anticipated volumes. When a Fund sells
portfolio securities to meet redemption requests, it may not receive
payment in settlement for up to three days, or longer in the case of
certain foreign transactions, even though redemption requests are
normally satisfied immediately. Other reasons that cash may not be
available in a timely fashion to meet redemptions or settle
transactions are: circumstances such as following September 11, 2001;
when a sale of securities fails; or improper delivery instructions by
the broker effecting the transaction delays delivery of cash to the
custodian. In such cases, the credit facility could provide a source of
immediate, short-term liquidity pending receipt of cash and result in
savings to the borrowing Fund and increased returns to the lending
Funds.
    7. While bank borrowings generally could supply needed cash to
cover unanticipated redemptions and sales fails, under the proposed
credit facility a borrowing Fund would pay lower interest rates than
those offered by banks on short-term loans. In addition, Funds making
short-term cash loans directly to other Funds would earn interest at a
rate higher than they otherwise could obtain from investing their cash
in repurchase agreements. Thus, applicants believe that the proposed
credit facility would benefit both borrowing and lending Funds. The
interest rate charged to a Fund on any loan made pursuant to the
proposed credit facility (``Interfund Loan Rate'') would be determined
daily and would be the average of the ``Joint Accounts Repo Rate'' and
the ``Bank Loan Rate,'' both as defined below. The Joint Accounts Repo
Rate for any day would be the current overnight repurchase agreement
rate available through the Joint Accounts. The Bank Loan Rate for any
day would be calculated by the ``Credit Facility Team'' (as defined
below) on each day an Interfund Loan is made according to a formula
established by each Fund's board of directors or trustees (``Board'')
intended to approximate the lowest interest rate at which a bank short-
term loan would be available to the Fund. The formula would be based
upon a publicly available rate (e.g., Federal funds plus 25 basis
points) and would vary with this rate so as to reflect changing bank
loan rates. The Board of each Fund would periodically review the
continuing appropriateness of using the publicly available rate, as
well as the relationship between the Bank Loan Rate and current bank
loan rates that would be available to the Fund. The initial formula and
any subsequent modifications to the formula would be subject to the
approval of each Fund's Board.
    8. The credit facility would be administered by the Fund's
treasurer, a representative from Ameriprise's treasury department, and
a representative from compliance, all of whom are employees of
Ameriprise (collectively, the ``Credit Facility Team''). Under the
proposed credit facility, the portfolio managers for each participating
Fund could provide standing instructions to participate daily as a
borrower or lender. The Credit Facility Team on each business day would
collect data on the uninvested cash and borrowing requirements of all
participating Funds from the Funds' custodians. Once it determined the
aggregate amount of cash available for loans and borrowing demand, the
Credit Facility Team would allocate loans among borrowing Funds without
any further communication from portfolio managers. Applicants expect
far more available uninvested cash each day than borrowing demand.
After the Credit Facility Team has allocated cash for

Interfund Loans, the Credit Facility Team would invest any remaining
cash in accordance with the standing instructions of portfolio managers
or return remaining amounts to the Funds. The money market Funds
typically would not participate as borrowers because they rarely need
to borrow cash to meet redemptions.
    9. The Credit Facility Team would allocate borrowing demand and
cash available for lending among the Funds on what the Credit Facility
Team believes to be an equitable basis, subject to certain
administrative procedures applicable to all Funds, such as the time of
filing requests to participate, minimum loan lot sizes, and the need to
minimize the number of transactions and associated administrative
costs. To reduce transaction costs, each Interfund Loan normally would
be allocated in a manner intended to minimize the number of
participants necessary to complete the loan transaction.
    10. The Credit Facility Team would (a) Monitor the interest rates
charged and the other terms and conditions of the Interfund Loans; (b)
limit the borrowings and loans entered into by each Fund to ensure that
they comply with the Fund's investment policies and limitations; (c)
ensure equitable treatment of each Fund; and (d) make quarterly reports
to the Board of each Fund concerning any transactions by the Fund under
the credit facility and the interest rates charged. The method of
allocation and related administrative procedures would be approved by
each Fund's Board, including a majority of directors or trustees who
are not ``interested persons'' of the Fund, as defined in section
2(a)(19) of the Act (``Independent Board Members''), to ensure that
both borrowing and lending Funds participate on an equitable basis.
    11. Ameriprise, through the Credit Facility Team, would administer
the credit facility as part of its duties under its existing
administrative services agreement with each Fund and would receive no
additional compensation for its services. No Fund may participate in
the credit facility unless: (a) The Fund has obtained shareholder
approval for its participation, if such approval is required by law;
(b) the Fund has fully disclosed all material information concerning
the credit facility in its prospectus or statement of additional
information (``SAI''); and (c) the Fund's participation in the credit
facility is consistent with its investment objectives, limitations, and
organizational documents.
    12. In connection with the credit facility, applicants request an
order under (a) section 6(c) of the Act granting relief from sections
18(f) and 21(b) of the Act; (b) section 12(d)(1)(J) of the Act granting
relief from section 12(d)(1) of the Act; (c) sections 6(c) and 17(b) of
the Act granting relief from sections 17(a)(1) and 17(a)(3) of the Act;
and (d) under section 17(d) of the Act and rule 17d-1 under the Act to
permit certain joint arrangements.

Applicants' Legal Analysis

    1. Section 17(a)(3) generally prohibits any affiliated person, or
affiliated person of an affiliated person, from borrowing money or
other property from a registered investment company. Section 21(b)
generally prohibits any registered management company from lending
money or other property to any person if that person controls or is
under common control with the company. Section 2(a)(3)(C) of the Act
defines an ``affiliated person'' of another person, in part, to be any
person directly or indirectly controlling, controlled by, or under
common control with, the other person. Applicants state that the Funds
may be under common control by virtue of having RiverSource as their
common investment adviser and/or by reason of having common officers
and/or directors or trustees.
    2. Section 6(c) provides that an exemptive order may be granted
where an exemption is necessary or appropriate in the public interest
and consistent with the protection of investors and the purposes fairly
intended by the policy and provisions of the Act. Section 17(b)
authorizes the Commission to exempt a proposed transaction from section
17(a) provided that the terms of the transaction, including the
consideration to be paid or received, are reasonable and fair and do
not involve overreaching on the part of any person concerned, and the
transaction is consistent with the policy of the investment company as
recited in its registration statement and with the general purposes of
the Act. Applicants believe that the proposed arrangements satisfy
these standards for the reasons discussed below.
    3. Applicants submit that sections 17(a)(3) and 21(b) were intended
to prevent a person with strong potential adverse interests to, and
some influence over the investment decisions of, a registered
investment company from causing or inducing the investment company to
engage in lending transactions that unfairly inure to the benefit of
such person and that are detrimental to the best interests of the
investment company and its shareholders. Applicants assert that the
proposed credit facility transactions do not raise these concerns
because: (a) Ameriprise, through the Credit Facility Team, would
administer the program as a disinterested party; (b) all Interfund
Loans would consist only of uninvested cash reserves that a Fund
otherwise would invest in short-term repurchase agreements or other
short-term instruments; (c) the Interfund Loans would not involve a
greater risk than such other investments; (d) the lending Fund would
receive interest at a rate higher than it could obtain through such
other investments; and (e) the borrowing Fund would pay interest at a
rate lower than otherwise available to it under its bank loan
agreements and avoid the quarterly commitment fees associated with
committed lines of credit. Moreover, applicants believe that the other
conditions in the application would effectively preclude the
possibility of any Fund obtaining an undue advantage over any other
Fund.
    4. Section 17(a)(1) generally prohibits an affiliated person of a
registered investment company, or an affiliated person of an affiliated
person, from selling any securities or other property to the company.
Section 12(d)(1) generally makes it unlawful for a registered
investment company to purchase or otherwise acquire any security issued
by any other investment company except in accordance with the
limitations set forth in that section. Applicants state that the
obligation of a borrowing Fund to repay an Interfund Loan may
constitute a security under sections 17(a)(1) and 12(d)(1). Section
12(d)(1)(J) provides that the Commission may exempt persons or
transactions from any provision of section 12(d)(1) if and to the
extent that such exemption is consistent with the public interest and
the protection of investors. Applicants contend that the standards
under sections 6(c), 17(b), and 12(d)(1)(J) are satisfied for all the
reasons set forth above in support of their request for relief from
sections 17(a)(3) and 21(b) and for the reasons discussed below.
    5. Applicants state that section 12(d)(1) was intended to prevent
the pyramiding of investment companies in order to avoid imposing on
investors additional and duplicative costs and fees attendant upon
multiple layers of investment companies. Applicants submit that the
proposed credit facility does not involve these abuses. Applicants note
that there will be no duplicative costs or fees to the Funds or to the
Funds' shareholders, and that Ameriprise will receive no additional
compensation for its services in administering the credit facility.
Applicants also note that the purpose of the proposed credit facility
is to provide

economic benefits for all of the participating Funds.
    6. Section 18(f)(1) of the Act prohibits registered open-end
investment companies from issuing any senior security except that a
company is permitted to borrow from any bank, if immediately after the
borrowing, there is asset coverage of at least 300 per centum for all
borrowings of the company. Under section 18(g) of the Act, the term
``senior security'' includes any bond, debenture, note or similar
obligation or instrument constituting a security and evidencing
indebtedness. Applicants request relief from section 18(f)(1) to the
limited extent necessary to implement the credit facility (because the
lending Funds are not banks).
    7. Applicants believe that granting relief under section 6(c) of
the Act is appropriate because the Funds would remain subject to the
requirement of section 18(f)(1) of the Act that all borrowings of a
Fund, including combined Interfund Loans and bank borrowings, have at
least 300 per centum asset coverage. Based on the conditions and
safeguards described in the application, applicants also submit that to
allow the Funds to borrow from other Funds pursuant to the proposed
credit facility is consistent with the purposes and policies of section
18(f)(1) of the Act.
    8. Section 17(d) and rule 17d-1 generally prohibit any affiliated
person of a registered investment company, or any affiliated person of
an affiliated person, when acting as principal, from effecting any
joint transaction in which the company participates unless the
transaction is approved by the Commission. Rule 17d-1(b) provides that
in passing upon applications filed under the rule, the Commission will
consider whether the participation of a registered investment company
in a joint enterprise on the basis proposed is consistent with the
provisions, policies, and purposes of the Act and the extent to which
the company's participation is on a basis different from or less
advantageous than that of other participants.
    9. Applicants submit that the purpose of section 17(d) is to avoid
overreaching by and unfair advantage to investment company insiders.
Applicants believe that the credit facility is consistent with the
provisions, policies, and purposes of the Act in that it offers both
reduced borrowing costs and enhanced returns on loaned funds to all
participating Funds and their shareholders. Applicants note that each
Fund would have an equal opportunity to borrow and lend on equal terms
consistent with its investment policies and fundamental investment
limitations. Applicants therefore believe that each Fund's
participation in the credit facility will be on terms that are no
different from or less advantageous than that of other participating
Funds.

Applicants' Conditions

    Applicants agree that any order granting the requested relief will
be subject to the following conditions:
    1. The Interfund Loan Rate to be charged to the Funds under the
credit facility will be the average of the Joint Accounts Repo Rate and
the Bank Loan Rate.
    2. On each business day, the Credit Facility Team will compare the
Bank Loan Rate with the Joint Accounts Repo Rate and will make cash
available for Interfund Loans only if the Interfund Loan Rate is (a)
more favorable to the lending Fund than the Joint Accounts Repo Rate
and (b) more favorable to the borrowing Fund than the Bank Loan Rate.
    3. If a Fund has outstanding borrowings, any Interfund Loans to the
Fund (a) will be at an interest rate equal to or lower than any
outstanding bank loan; (b) will be secured at least on an equal
priority basis with at least an equivalent percentage of collateral to
loan value as any outstanding bank loan that requires collateral; (c)
will have a maturity no longer than any outstanding bank loan (and in
any event not over seven days); and (d) will provide that, if an event
of default occurs under any agreement evidencing an outstanding bank
loan to the Fund, that event of default will automatically (without
need for action or notice by the lending Fund) constitute an immediate
event of default under the Interfund Lending Agreement entitling the
lending Fund to call the Interfund Loan (and exercise all rights with
respect to any collateral) and that such call will be made if the
lending bank exercises its right to call its loan under its agreement
with the borrowing Fund.
    4. A Fund may make an unsecured borrowing through the credit
facility if its outstanding borrowings from all sources immediately
after the interfund borrowing total 10% or less of its total assets,
provided that if the Fund has a secured loan outstanding from any other
lender, including but not limited to another Fund, the Fund's interfund
borrowing will be secured on at least an equal priority basis with at
least an equivalent percentage of collateral to loan value as any
outstanding loan that requires collateral. If a Fund's total
outstanding borrowings immediately after an interfund borrowing would
be greater than 10% of its total assets, the Fund may borrow through
the credit facility only on a secured basis. A Fund may not borrow
through the credit facility or from any other source if its total
outstanding borrowings immediately after the interfund borrowing would
exceed the limits imposed by section 18 of the Act.
    5. Before any Fund that has outstanding interfund borrowings may,
through additional borrowings, cause its outstanding borrowings from
all sources to exceed 10% of its total assets, the Fund must first
secure each outstanding Interfund Loan by the pledge of segregated
collateral with a market value at least equal to 102% of the
outstanding principal value of the loan. If the total outstanding
borrowings of a Fund with outstanding Interfund Loans exceed 10% of its
total assets for any other reason (such as a decline in net asset value
or because of shareholder redemptions), the Fund will within one
business day thereafter (a) repay all its outstanding Interfund Loans;
(b) reduce its outstanding indebtedness to 10% or less of its total
assets; or (c) secure each outstanding Interfund Loan by the pledge of
segregated collateral with a market value at least equal to 102% of the
outstanding principal value of the loan until the Fund's total
outstanding borrowings cease to exceed 10% of its total assets, at
which time the collateral called for by this condition (5) shall no
longer be required. Until each Interfund Loan that is outstanding at
any time that a Fund's total outstanding borrowings exceed 10% of its
total assets is repaid or the Fund's total outstanding borrowings cease
to exceed 10% of its total assets, the Fund will mark the value of the
collateral to market each day and will pledge such additional
collateral as is necessary to maintain the market value of the
collateral that secures each outstanding Interfund Loan at least equal
to 102% of the outstanding principal value of the loan.
    6. No Fund may lend to another Fund through the credit facility if
the loan would cause the lending Fund's aggregate outstanding loans
through the credit facility to exceed 15% of its net assets at the time
of the loan.
    7. A Fund's Interfund Loans to any one Fund shall not exceed 5% of
the lending Fund's current net assets.
    8. The duration of Interfund Loans will be limited to the time
required to receive payment for securities sold, but in no event more
than seven days. Loans effected within seven days of each other will be
treated as separate loan transactions for purposes of this condition.
    9. A Fund's borrowings through the credit facility, as measured on
the day

when the most recent loan was made, will not exceed the greater of 125%
of the Fund's total net cash redemptions or 102% of sales fails for the
preceding seven calendar days.
    10. Each Interfund Loan may be called on one business day's notice
by a lending Fund and may be repaid on any day by a borrowing Fund.
    11. A Fund's participation in the credit facility must be
consistent with its investment policies and limitations and
organizational documents.
    12. The Credit Facility Team will calculate total Fund borrowing
and lending demand through the credit facility, and allocate interfund
loans on an equitable basis among the Funds, without the intervention
of any portfolio manager of the Funds. The Credit Facility Team will
not solicit cash for the credit facility from any Fund or prospectively
publish or disseminate loan demand data to portfolio managers. The
Credit Facility Team will invest amounts remaining after satisfaction
of borrowing demand in accordance with the standing instructions from
portfolio managers or return remaining amounts to the Funds.
    13. The Credit Facility Team will monitor the interest rates
charged and the other terms and conditions of the Interfund Loans and
will make a quarterly report to the Board of each Fund concerning the
participation of the Fund in the credit facility and the terms and
other conditions of any extensions of credit under the credit facility.
    14. The Board of each Fund, including a majority of the Independent
Board Members, will: (a) Review no less frequently than quarterly the
Fund's participation in the credit facility during the preceding
quarter for compliance with the conditions of any order permitting the
transactions; (b) establish the Bank Loan Rate formula used to
determine the Interfund Loan Rate and review no less frequently than
annually the continuing appropriateness of the Bank Loan Rate formula;
and (c) review no less frequently than annually the continuing
appropriateness of the Fund's participation in the credit facility.
    15. Each Fund will maintain and preserve for a period of not less
than six years from the end of the fiscal year in which any transaction
under the credit facility occurred, the first two years in an easily
accessible place, written records of all such transactions setting
forth a description of the terms of the transaction, including the
amount, the maturity and the rate of interest on the loan, the rate of
interest available at the time on short-term repurchase agreements and
bank borrowings, and such other information presented to the Fund's
Board in connection with the review required by conditions 13 and 14.
    16. In the event an Interfund Loan is not paid according to its
terms and the default is not cured within two business days from its
maturity or from the time the lending Fund makes a demand for payment
under the provisions of the Interfund Lending Agreement, the Credit
Facility Team promptly will refer the loan for arbitration to an
independent arbitrator selected by the Board of any Fund involved in
the loan who will serve as the arbitrator of disputes concerning
Interfund Loans.\2\ The arbitrator will resolve any problem promptly,
and the arbitrator's decision will be binding on both Funds. The
arbitrator will submit, at least annually, a written report to the
Board of each Fund setting forth a description of the nature of any
dispute and the actions taken by the Funds to resolve the dispute.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \2\ If the dispute involves Funds with separate Boards, the
Board of each Fund will select an independent arbitrator that is
satisfactory to each Fund.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    17. The Credit Facility Team will prepare and submit to the Board
of each Fund for review an initial report describing the operations of
the credit facility and the procedures to be implemented to ensure that
all Funds are treated fairly. After the commencement of operations of
the credit facility, the Credit Facility Team will report on the
operations of the credit facility at the quarterly meetings of each
Fund's Board.
    In addition, for two years following the commencement of the credit
facility, the independent public accountant for each Fund shall prepare
an annual report that evaluates the Credit Facility Team's assertion
that it has established procedures reasonably designed to achieve
compliance with the conditions of the order. The report shall be
prepared in accordance with the Statements on Standards for Attestation
Engagements No. 10 and it shall be filed pursuant to Item 77Q3 of Form
N-SAR as such Statements or Form may be revised, amended, or superseded
from time to time. In particular, the report shall address procedures
designed to achieve the following objectives: (a) That the Interfund
Loan Rate will be higher than the Joint Accounts Repo Rate, but lower
than the Bank Loan Rate; (b) compliance with the collateral
requirements as set forth in the application; (c) compliance with the
percentage limitations on interfund borrowing and lending; (d)
allocation of interfund borrowing and lending demand in an equitable
manner and in accordance with procedures established by the Board; and
(e) that the Interfund Loan Rate does not exceed the interest rate on
any third party borrowings of a borrowing Fund at the time of the
Interfund Loan.
    After the final report is filed, each Fund's independent public
accountant, in connection with its audit examinations, will continue to
review the operation of the credit facility for compliance with the
conditions of the application and its review will form the basis, in
part, of the auditor's report on internal accounting controls in Form
N-SAR.
    18. No Fund will participate in the credit facility upon receipt of
requisite regulatory approval unless it has fully disclosed in its
prospectus or SAI all material facts about its intended participation.

    For the Commission, by the Division of Investment Management,
under delegated authority.
Nancy M. Morris,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. E6-16365 Filed 10-3-06; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 8010-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 76, Number 70 (Tuesday, April 12, 2011)]
[Notices]
[Page 20386]
[FR Doc No: 2011-8580]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

Submission for OMB Review; Comment Request

Upon Written Request; Copies Available From: Securities and Exchange
Commission, Office of Investor Education and Advocacy, Washington, DC
20549-0213.

Extension:
    Rule 163; OMB Control No. 3235-0619; SEC File No. 270-556.

    Notice is hereby given that, pursuant to the Paperwork Reduction
Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.), the Securities and Exchange
Commission (``Commission'') has submitted to the Office of Management
and Budget this request for extension of the previously approved
collection of information discussed below.
    Rule 163 (17 CFR 230.163) provides an exemption from Section 5(c)
(15 U.S.C. 77e(c)) under the Securities Act of 1933 (15 U.S.C. 77a et
seq.) for certain communications by or on behalf of a well-known
seasoned issuer. The information filed under Rule 163 is publicly
available. We estimate that it takes approximately 0.24 burden hours
per response to provide the information required under Rule 163 and
that the information is filed by approximately 53 respondents for a
total annual reporting burden of approximately 13 hours. We estimate
that 25% of 0.24 hours per response (0.06 hours) is prepared by the
respondent for a total annual burden of approximately 3 hours (0.06
hours per response x 53 responses).
    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 control number.
    The public may view the background documentation for this
information collection at the following Web site, http://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 e-
mail to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>and (ii) Thomas Bayer, Chief
Information Officer, Securities and Exchange Commission, c/o Remi
Pavlik-Simon, 6432 General Green Way, Alexandria, VA 22312 or send an
e-mail to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Comments must be submitted to OMB
within 30 days of this notice.

    Dated: April 8, 2011.
Cathy H. Ahn,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2011-8580 Filed 4-11-11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 82, Number 127 (Wednesday, July 5, 2017)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 30961-30964]
[FR Doc No: 2017-13761]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. FAA-2017-0126; Directorate Identifier 2016-NM-211-AD;
Amendment 39-18943; AD 2017-13-13]
RIN 2120-AA64

Airworthiness Directives; The Boeing Company Airplanes

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: We are adopting a new airworthiness directive (AD) for certain
The Boeing Company Model 737-100, -200, -200C, -300, -400, and -500
series airplanes. This AD was prompted by reports of frame web cracking
at certain locations. This AD requires repetitive inspections in
certain locations of the frame web, and corrective action if necessary.
We are issuing this AD to address the unsafe condition on these
products.

DATES: This AD is effective August 9, 2017.
    The Director of the Federal Register approved the incorporation by
reference of a certain publication listed in this AD as of August 9,
2017.

ADDRESSES: For service information identified in this final rule,
contact Boeing Commercial Airplanes, Attention: Contractual & Data
Services (C&DS), 2600 Westminster Blvd., MC 110-SK57, Seal Beach, CA
90740-5600; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>; Internet https://www.myboeingfleet.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
425-227-1221. It is also available on the Internet at http://www.regulations.gov by searching for and locating Docket No. FAA-2017-
0126.

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-2017-
0126; 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 final rule, the regulatory evaluation, any comments
received, and other information. The address for the Docket Office
(phone:<PHONE_NUMBER>) is Docket Management Facility, U.S. Department of
Transportation, Docket Operations, M-30, West Building Ground Floor,
Room W12-140, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., Washington, DC 20590.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Galib Abumeri, Aerospace Engineer,
Airframe Branch, ANM-120L, FAA, Los Angeles Aircraft Certification
Office (ACO), 3960 Paramount Boulevard, Lakewood, CA 90712-4137; phone:
562-627-5324; fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>; email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Discussion

    We issued a notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) to amend 14 CFR
part 39 by adding an AD that would apply to certain The Boeing Company
Model 737-100, -200, -200C, -300, -400, and -500 series airplanes. The
NPRM published in the Federal Register on March 2, 2017 (82 FR 12303)
(``the NPRM''). The NPRM was prompted by reports of frame web cracking
at the station (STA) 344 system penetration holes between stringer S-
22L and stringer S-24L. The NPRM proposed to require repetitive
inspections in certain locations of the frame web, and corrective
action if necessary. We are issuing this AD to detect and correct frame
web cracking, which could grow in size until frames sever. Multiple
adjacent severed frames, or a severed frame near cracks in the chem-
milled fuselage skin, could result in uncontrolled decompression of the
airplane.

Comments

    We gave the public the opportunity to participate in developing
this AD. The following presents the comments received on the NPRM and
the FAA's response to each comment.

Request To Change Inspection and Corrective Actions for Group 1
Airplanes

    Boeing requested that we change the language in paragraph (g) of
the proposed AD to remove a reference to Parts 2 and 3 of the
Accomplishment Instructions of Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 737-
53A1354, dated December 2, 2016. Boeing noted that Group 1 airplanes
are those that have exceeded their limit of validity, and that the
inspections are not applicable to those airplanes. Boeing stated that
it believes the intent of paragraph (g) of the proposed AD is for the
operator to obtain maintenance actions in accordance with a method
approved by the FAA. Boeing further pointed out that the language in
paragraph (g) of the proposed AD allows operators to perform
inspections in accordance with Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 737-
53A1354, dated December 2, 2016, rather than in accordance with
paragraph (j) of the proposed AD (obtaining an alternative method of
compliance).
    We agree with the commenter's request for the reasons provided. We
have revised paragraph (g) of this AD to clarify the appropriate
actions for Group 1 airplanes.

Request To Correct a Service Bulletin Number

    Boeing requested that we change two sentences in paragraph (h) of
the proposed AD that refer to ``Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 757-
53A1354.'' Boeing noted that the correct service bulletin number is
``737-53A1354.''
    We agree with the commenter's request and have revised paragraph
(h) of this AD accordingly.

Request To Revise the Proposed AD To Provide Credit for Removal of the
1-Inch Diameter Hole at STA 336 or STA 344

    Boeing requested that we add a paragraph to the proposed AD to
provide credit for previous actions to remove the 1-inch diameter hole
at STA 336 or STA 344. Boeing noted that Boeing Alert Service Bulletin
737-53A1354, dated December 2, 2016, provides an exception for the Part
2 high frequency eddy current (HFEC) inspections of repaired locations,
provided the repair is the corrective action for the crack condition,
is approved by the Boeing Organization Designation Authorization (ODA),
and does not re-install any open hole. Boeing added that the proposed
AD does not include such language.
    We disagree with the request to revise this AD because it is not
necessary. Paragraph (h) of this AD specifies to do the applicable
inspections and related investigated and corrective actions in
accordance with Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 737-53A1354, dated
December 2, 2016. The service information already contains the criteria
and language proposed by Boeing within the required for compliance (RC)
steps in the Accomplishment Instructions of the service information.
Therefore, this language does not need to be repeated in this AD. We
have not changed this AD in this regard.

Request To Revise the Proposed AD To Provide Credit for Repairs of the
Open Hole at STA 328

    Boeing requested that we add a paragraph to the proposed AD to
provide credit for previous actions to repair any cracks at STA 328.
Boeing noted that Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 737-53A1354, dated
December 2, 2016, states that Part 3 HFEC inspections are not required
for the STA 328 frame if STA 328 was repaired in accordance with the
Accomplishment Instructions of Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 737-
53A1323. Boeing added that the proposed AD does not include such
language.
    We disagree with the request to revise this AD because it is not
necessary. Paragraph (h) of this AD specifies to do the applicable
inspections and related investigated and corrective actions in
accordance with Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 737-53A1354, dated
December 2, 2016. The service information already contains the criteria
and language proposed by Boeing within the RC steps in the
Accomplishment Instructions of the service information. Therefore, this
language does not need to be repeated in this AD. We have not changed
this AD in this regard.

Request To Revise the Proposed AD To Provide Credit for Repairs That
Remove or Plug an Open Hole Between Stringers S-20R and S-22R in the
STA 328 Frame Web

    Boeing requested that we add a paragraph to the proposed AD to
provide credit for previous actions to plug or remove any open hole
between stringers S-20R and S-22R in the STA 328 frame web. Boeing
noted that Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 737-53A1354, dated December 2,
2016, states that Part 3 HFEC inspections are not required at an open
hole in the STA 328 frame web if there is an installed repair that
plugs or removes the open hole between stringers S-20R and S-22R, and
the repair was approved by the Boeing ODA. Boeing added that the
proposed AD does not include such language.
    We disagree with the request to revise this AD because it is not
necessary. Paragraph (h) of the proposed AD specifies to do the
applicable inspections and related investigated and corrective actions
in accordance with Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 737-53A1354, dated
December 2, 2016. The service information already contains the criteria
and language proposed by Boeing within the RC steps in the
Accomplishment Instructions of the service information. Therefore, this
language does not need to be repeated in this AD. We have not changed
this AD in this regard.

Request To Change Compliance Times

    The European Aviation Safety Agency (EASA) requested that we change
the compliance times for the initial HFEC inspections required by
paragraph (h) of the proposed AD (i.e., before 35,000 total flight
cycles or within 4,500 flight cycles) to match the compliance times
specified in Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 737-53A1323, dated December
6, 2013, (i.e., for Group 2-5 airplanes with less than 28,300 total
flight cycles, before the accumulation of 20,000 total flight cycles or
within 2,200 flight cycles). EASA claimed that it would be desirable to
match the compliance times, as they are both addressing the same root
problem in the same area, using the same inspection type. EASA noted
that Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 737-53A1323, dated December 6, 2013,
is referenced in an FAA NPRM, Docket No. FAA-2014-0346 (we note that
the final rule has been published: AD 2015-23-08, Amendment 39-18324
(80 FR 73949, November 27, 2015)).
    We disagree with the commenter's request. The HFEC inspections for
the right side frames included in Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 737-
53A1354, dated December 2, 2016, were added based on analysis, not
reported cracking. Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 737-53A1354, dated
December 2, 2016 covers specific areas not included in Boeing Alert
Service Bulletin 737-53A1323, dated December 6, 2013. Since there have
been no reports of cracking in the applicable inspection areas on the
right side of the airplane, there is no technical justification to
lower the initial inspection times in this AD. We have not changed this
AD in this regard.

Effects of Winglets on Accomplishment of the Proposed Actions

    Aviation Partners Boeing stated that accomplishing the supplemental
type certificate (STC) ST01219SE does not affect the actions specified
in the NPRM.
    We concur with the commenter. We have redesignated paragraph (c) of
the proposed AD as paragraph (c)(1) of this AD and added paragraph
(c)(2) to this AD to state that installation of STC ST01219SE does not
affect the ability to accomplish the actions required by this AD.
Therefore, for airplanes on which STC ST01219SE is installed, a
``change in product'' alternative method of compliance (AMOC) approval
request is not necessary to comply with the requirements of 14 CFR
39.17.

Conclusion

    We reviewed the relevant data, considered the comments received,
and determined that air safety and the public interest require adopting
this final rule with the changes described previously and minor
editorial changes. We have determined that these minor changes:
     Are consistent with the intent that was proposed in the
NPRM for correcting the unsafe condition; and
     Do not add any additional burden upon the public than was
already proposed in the NPRM.
    We also determined that these changes will not increase the
economic burden on any operator or increase the scope of this final
rule.

Related Service Information Under 1 CFR Part 51

    We reviewed Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 737-53A1354, dated
December 2, 2016. The service information describes procedures for
repetitive HFEC, detailed, and general visual inspections in certain
locations of the frame web. 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.

Costs of Compliance

    We estimate that this AD affects 82 airplanes of U.S. registry. We
estimate the following costs to comply with this AD:

                                                 Estimated Costs
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                Cost on U.S.
              Action                    Labor cost        Parts cost      Cost per product        operators
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
HFEC, detailed, and general        114 work-hours x                 $0  $9,690 per           $794,580 per
 visual inspections.                $85 per hour =                       inspection cycle.    inspection cycle.
                                    $9,690 per
                                    inspection cycle.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    We have received no definitive data that would enable us to provide
cost estimates for the on-condition actions specified in this AD.

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

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

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39

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

Adoption of the Amendment

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

PART 39--AIRWORTHINESS DIRECTIVES

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

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

Sec.  39.13   [Amended]

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

2017-13-13 The Boeing Company: Amendment 39-18943; Docket No. FAA-
2017-0126; Directorate Identifier 2016-NM-211-AD.

(a) Effective Date

    This AD is effective August 9, 2017.

(b) Affected ADs

    None.

(c) Applicability

    (1) This AD applies to The Boeing Company Model 737-100, -200, -
200C, -300, -400, and -500 series airplanes, certificated in any
category, as identified in Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 737-
53A1354, dated December 2, 2016.
    (2) Installation of Supplemental Type Certificate (STC)
ST01219SE (http://rgl.faa.gov/Regulatory_and_Guidance_Library/
rgstc.nsf/0/ebd1cec7b301293e86257cb30045557a/$FILE/ST01219SE.pdf)
does not affect the ability to accomplish the actions required by
this AD. Therefore, for airplanes on which STC ST01219SE is
installed, a ``change in product'' alternative method of compliance
(AMOC) approval request is not necessary to comply with the
requirements of 14 CFR 39.17.

(d) Subject

    Air Transport Association (ATA) of America Code 53, Fuselage.

(e) Unsafe Condition

    This AD was prompted by reports of frame web cracking at station
(STA) 344 system penetration holes between stringer S-22L and
stringer S-24L. We are issuing this AD to detect and correct such
cracking, which could grow in size until frames sever. Multiple
adjacent severed frames, or a severed frame near cracks in the chem-
milled fuselage skin, could result in uncontrolled decompression of
the airplane.

(f) Compliance

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

(g) Group 1 Airplanes: Inspections and Corrective Actions

    For airplanes identified as Group 1 in Boeing Alert Service
Bulletin 737-53A1354, dated December 2, 2016: Within 120 days after
the effective date of this AD, accomplish actions to correct the
unsafe condition (e.g. inspections, repairs, and corrective
actions), using a method approved in accordance with the procedures
specified in paragraph (j) of this AD.

(h) Group 2 Airplanes: Repetitive Inspections and Corrective Actions

    For airplanes identified as Group 2 in Boeing Alert Service
Bulletin 737-53A1354, dated December 2, 2016: At the applicable
times specified in paragraph 1.E., ``Compliance,'' of Boeing Alert
Service Bulletin 737-53A1354, dated December 2, 2016, except as
required by paragraph (i)(1) of this AD: Do the inspections
specified in paragraphs (h)(1), (h)(2), and (h)(3) of this AD, and
do all applicable corrective actions, in accordance with the
Accomplishment Instructions of Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 737-
53A1354, dated December 2, 2016, except as required by paragraph
(i)(2) of this AD. Repeat the inspections thereafter at the
applicable times specified in paragraph 1.E., ``Compliance,'' of
Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 737-53A1354, dated December 2, 2016.
Do all applicable corrective actions before further flight.
    (1) Do high frequency eddy current (HFEC), detailed, and general
visual inspections for cracking of the left side section 41 lower
lobe frames, between STA 268.25 and STA 360.
    (2) Do detailed and general visual inspections for cracking of
the right side section 41 lower lobe frames, between STA 268.25 and
STA 360.

    (3) Do an HFEC inspection for cracking of the right side STA
312, STA 328, and STA 344, section 41 lower lobe frames.

(i) Service Information Exceptions

    (1) Where paragraph 1.E., ``Compliance,'' of Boeing Alert
Service Bulletin 737-53A1354, dated December 2, 2016, specifies a
compliance time ``after the original date of this service
bulletin,'' this AD requires compliance within the specified
compliance time after the effective date of this AD.
    (2) Where Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 737-53A1354, dated
December 2, 2016, specifies to contact Boeing for repair
instructions, and specifies that action as Required for Compliance
(RC), this AD requires repair before further flight using a method
approved in accordance with the procedures specified in paragraph
(j) of this AD.

(j) Alternative Methods of Compliance (AMOCs)

    (1) The Manager, Los Angeles Aircraft Certification Office
(ACO), FAA, has the authority to approve AMOCs for this AD, if
requested using the procedures found in 14 CFR 39.19. In accordance
with 14 CFR 39.19, send your request to your principal inspector or
local Flight Standards District Office, as appropriate. If sending
information directly to the manager of the ACO, send it to the
attention of the person identified in paragraph (k) of this AD.
Information may be emailed to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>    (2) Before using any approved AMOC, notify your appropriate
principal inspector, or lacking a principal inspector, the manager
of the local flight standards district office/certificate holding
district office.
    (3) An AMOC that provides an acceptable level of safety may be
used for any repair, modification, or alteration required by this AD
if it is approved by the Boeing Commercial Airplanes Organization
Designation Authorization (ODA) that has been authorized by the
Manager, Los Angeles ACO, to make those findings. To be approved,
the repair method, modification deviation, or alteration deviation
must meet the certification basis of the airplane, and the approval
must specifically refer to this AD.
    (4) Except as required by paragraph (i)(2) of this AD: For
service information that contains steps that are labeled as Required
for Compliance (RC), the provisions of paragraphs (j)(4)(i) and
(j)(4)(ii) of this AD apply.
    (i) The steps labeled as RC, including substeps under an RC step
and any figures identified in an RC step, must be done to comply
with the AD. If a step or substep is labeled ``RC Exempt,'' then the
RC requirement is removed from that step or substep. An AMOC is
required for any deviations to RC steps, including substeps and
identified figures.
    (ii) Steps not labeled as RC may be deviated from using accepted
methods in accordance with the operator's maintenance or inspection
program without obtaining approval of an AMOC, provided the RC
steps, including substeps and identified figures, can still be done
as specified, and the airplane can be put back in an airworthy
condition.

(k) Related Information

    For more information about this AD, contact Galib Abumeri,
Aerospace Engineer, Airframe Branch, ANM-120L, FAA, Los Angeles
Aircraft Certification Office (ACO), 3960 Paramount Boulevard,
Lakewood, CA 90712-4137; phone:<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>;
email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
(l) Material Incorporated by Reference

    (1) The Director of the Federal Register approved the
incorporation by reference (IBR) of the service information listed
in this paragraph under 5 U.S.C. 552(a) and 1 CFR part 51.
    (2) You must use this service information as applicable to do
the actions required by this AD, unless the AD specifies otherwise.
    (i) Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 737-53A1354, dated December 2,
2016.
    (ii) Reserved.
    (3) For service information identified in this AD, contact
Boeing Commercial Airplanes, Attention: Contractual & Data Services
(C&DS), 2600 Westminster Blvd., MC 110-SK57, Seal Beach, CA 90740-
5600; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>; Internet https://www.myboeingfleet.com.
    (4) 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
425-227-1221.
    (5) You may view this service information that is incorporated
by reference at the National Archives and Records Administration
(NARA). For information on the availability of this material at
NARA, call<PHONE_NUMBER>, or go to: http://www.archives.gov/federal-register/cfr/ibr-locations.html.

    Issued in Renton, Washington, on June 21, 2017.
John P. Piccola, Jr.,
Acting Manager, Transport Airplane Directorate, Aircraft Certification
Service.
[FR Doc. 2017-13761 Filed 7-3-17; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


  SEQ CHAPTER \h \r 1 Technical Hazardous Liquid Pipeline Safety
Standards Committee

Technical Pipeline Safety Standards Committee

Meeting of Wednesday, June 30, 2004

List of Documents for Vote and Sample Language to Call a Motion

On June 30, 2004, the Technical Hazardous Liquid Pipeline Safety
Standards Committee (THLPSSC) and the Technical Pipeline Safety
Standards Committee (TPSSC) will vote on the following:

(1)  NPRM - “Pipeline Safety: Underwater Periodic Inspections” (68
FR 69368).

(2)  Draft regulatory evaluation to the NPRM - “Pipeline Safety:
Underwater Periodic Inspections”.

*****

The following is sample language that can be used to call a motion:

1.  ___	The proposed rule as published in the Federal Register and the
Draft Reg-Evaluation are technically feasible, reasonable,
cost-effective, and practicable.

2. ___ 	The proposed rule as published in the Federal Register and the
Draft Reg-Evaluation are technically feasible, reasonable,
cost-effective, and practicable if the following changes are made.

3. ___	The proposed rule as published in the Federal Register and the
Draft Reg-Evaluation are not (or cannot be made) technically feasible,
reasonable, cost-effective and practicable.


                    UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

            DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

                    OFFICE OF THE SECRETARY

                             WASHINGTON, DC

Issued by the Department of Transportation on December 2, 2004

NOTICE OF ACTION TAKEN -- DOCKETS OST-2004-19666

________________________________________________________________________

This serves as notice to the public of the action described below, taken
by the Department official indicated (no additional confirming order
will be issued in this matter).

ApplicationApplications of   Evergreen International Airlines, Inc.
filed  11/12/04 for:

XX Exemption pursuant to 49 U.S.C. §40109 to provide the following
services:

Scheduled foreign air transportation of property and mail between a
point or points in the United States and Nagoya, Japan, and beyond to
Seoul, South Korea.   Evergreen also requests authority to integrate
this authority with Evergreen’s existing exemption and certificate
authority, and to commingle traffic on the authorized services.

XX Allocation of five-weekly U.S.-Japan all-cargo frequencies to provide
scheduled service between the United States and Nagoya, Japan.

Applicant rep:  Thomas V. Lydon<PHONE_NUMBER>  DOT Analyst: Gerald
Caolo<PHONE_NUMBER>

D I S P O SI T I O N

XX  Granted  (subject to conditions, see below)

The above action granting the exemption was effective when taken:
December 2, 2004, through, December 2, 2006

The frequency allocation was granted:  December 2, 2004, and will remain
in effect indefinitely, provided that Evergreen continues to hold the
necessary underlying authority to serve the United States-Nagoya market.

Action taken by:   Paul L. Gretch, Director

		    Office of International Aviation

XX   The authority granted here is consistent with the 1998 Memorandum
of Understanding between the United States and Japan.

Except to the extent exempted or waived, this authority is subject to
the terms, conditions, and limitations indicated:  	XX  Holder’s
certificates of public convenience and necessity

		XX  Standard Exemption Conditions (attached)

___________________________________________

___________________________________________

Conditions:  Consistent with our standard practice, the frequency
allocation granted is subject to the condition that if any frequencies
are not used for a period of 90 days, the allocation as to those
frequencies would expire automatically and the unused frequencies will
revert to the Department for reallocation.  The 90-day dormancy period
will begin on June 1, 2005, the date Evergreen proposes to inaugurate
operations with these frequencies.

The route integration authority granted is subject to the condition that
any service provided under this exemption shall be consistent with all
applicable agreements between the United States and the foreign
countries involved.  Furthermore, (a) nothing in the award of the route
integration authority requested should be construed as conferring upon
Evergreen rights (including fifth-freedom intermediate and/or beyond
rights) to serve markets where U.S. carrier entry is limited unless
Evergreen notifies the Department of its intent to serve such a market
and unless and until the Department has completed any necessary carrier
selection procedures to determine which carrier(s) should be authorized
to exercise such rights; and (b) should there be a request by any
carrier to use the limited-entry route rights that are included in
Evergreen’s authority by virtue of the route integration exemption
granted here, but that are not then being used by Evergreen, the holding
of such authority by route integration will not be considered as
providing any preference for Evergreen in a competitive carrier
selection proceeding to determine which carrier(s) should be entitled to
use the authority at issue.

________________________________________________________________________
______________

On the basis of data officially noticeable under Rule 24(g) of the
Department’s regulations, we found the applicant qualified to provide
the services authorized.

Under authority assigned by the Department in its regulations, 14 CFR
Part 385, we found that (1) our action was consistent with Department
policy; (2) grant of the authority was consistent with the public
interest; and (3) grant of the authority would not constitute a major
regulatory action under the Energy Policy and Conservation Act of 1975.
To the extent not granted, we denied all requests in the referenced
Docket.  We may amend, modify, or revoke the authority granted in this
Notice at any time without hearing at our discretion.

Persons entitled to petition the Department for review of the action set
forth in this Notice under the Department’s regulations, 14 CFR §
385.30, may file their petitions within seven (7) days after the date of
issuance of this Notice.  This action was effective when taken, and the
filing of a petition for review will not alter such effectiveness.

An electronic version of this order is available on the World Wide Web
at:

  HYPERLINK "http://dms.dot.gov//reports/reports_ aviation.asp"
http://dms.dot.gov//reports/reports_ aviation.asp

U.S. Carrier Exemption Conditions

In the conduct of the operations authorized, the U.S. carrier
applicant(s) shall:

(1)  Hold at all times effective operating authority from the government
of each country served;

(2)  Comply with applicable requirements concerning oversales contained
in 14 CFR 250 (for scheduled operations, if authorized);

(3)  Comply with the requirements for reporting data contained in 14 CFR
241;

(4)  Comply with requirements for minimum insurance coverage, and for
certifying that coverage to the Department, contained in 14 CFR 205;

(5)  Except as specifically exempted or otherwise provided for in a
Department Order, comply with the requirements of 14 CFR 203, concerning
waiver of Warsaw Convention liability limits and defenses;

(6)  Comply with all applicable requirements of the Federal Aviation
Administration and with all applicable U.S. Government requirements
concerning security, including, but not limited to, 49 CFR Part 1544.
To assure compliance with all applicable U.S. Government requirements
concerning security, the holder shall, before commencing any new service
(including charter flights) to or from a foreign airport, contact its
International Principal Security Inspector (IPSI) to advise the IPSI of
its plans and to find out whether the Transportation Security
Administration has determined that security is adequate to allow such
airport(s) to be served; and

(7)  Comply with such other reasonable terms, conditions, and
limitations required by the public interest as may be prescribed by the
Department of Transportation, with all applicable orders and regulations
of other U.S. agencies and courts, and with all applicable laws of the
United States.

The authority granted shall be effective only during the period when the
holder is in compliance with the conditions imposed above.

05/2004

 Evergreen proposes initial service between Columbus, Ohio, and Nagoya
and beyond to Seoul on a blind sector basis, beginning June 1, 2005.

 PAGE   3

 PAGE   3


[Federal Register: January 14, 2008 (Volume 73, Number 9)]
[Notices]
[Page 2297-2299]
[DOCID:fr14ja08-115]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-57111; File No. SR-Phlx-2008-01]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; Philadelphia Stock Exchange, Inc.;
Notice of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of Proposed Rule Change To
Expand and Permanently Adopt the $1 Strike Pilot Program

January 8, 2008.
    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 January 3, 2008, the Philadelphia Stock Exchange, Inc. (``Phlx'' or
``Exchange'') filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission
(``Commission'') the proposed rule change as described in Items I and
II below, which Items have been substantially prepared by the Exchange.
Phlx filed the proposal pursuant to section 19(b)(3)(A) of the Act \3\
and Rule 19b-4(f)(6) thereunder,\4\ which renders the proposal
effective upon filing with the Commission.\5\ The

Commission is publishing this notice to solicit comments on the
proposed rule change from interested persons.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1).
    \2\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4.
    \3\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A).
    \4\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6).
    \5\ The Exchange previously filed a proposed rule change that
was identical in all material respects to the instant proposal
pursuant to section 19(b)(1) of the Act and Rule 19b-4 thereunder.
See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 57086 (January 2, 2008) (SR-
Phlx-2007-90). Phlx subsequently withdrew such proposed rule change
on January 3, 2008 and filed the instant proposal for purposes of
expediting effectiveness of the proposal. See infra note 13 and
accompanying text.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

    The Exchange proposes to amend Commentary .05 to Phlx Rule 1012
(Series of Options Open for Trading) to expand the $1 Strike Pilot
Program (``$1 Pilot'') and to request permanent approval of the $1
Pilot.\6\ The text of the proposed rule change is available at the
Exchange, the Commission's Public Reference Room, and http://www.phlx.com
.

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

    \6\ The Commission approved the $1 Pilot on June 11, 2003. See
Securities Exchange Act Release No. 48013 (June 11, 2003), 68 FR
35933 (June 17, 2003) (SR-Phlx-2002-55). The $1 Pilot has
subsequently been extended through June 5, 2008. See Securities
Exchange Act Release Nos. 49801 (June 3, 2004), 69 FR 32652 (June
10, 2004) (SR-Phlx-2004-38) (extending the $1 Pilot until June 5,
2005); 51768 (May 31, 2005), 70 FR 33250 (June 7, 2005) (SR-Phlx-
2005-35) (extending the $1 Pilot until June 5, 2006); 53938 (June 5,
2006), 71 FR 34178 (June 13, 2006) (SR-Phlx-2006-36) (extending the
$1 Pilot until June 5, 2007); and 55666 (April 25, 2007), 72 FR
23879 (May 1, 2007) (SR-Phlx-2007-29) (extending the $1 Pilot until
June 5, 2008). The other options exchanges have similar $1 strike
price listing programs that were likewise extended through June 5,
2008.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

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

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

1. Purpose
    The purpose of the proposed rule change is to expand the number of
options classes eligible for the $1 Pilot and the range in which $1
strikes may be listed, and to request permanent approval of the $1
Pilot, thereby providing investors with greater flexibility in the
trading of equity options that overlie lower priced stocks and allowing
equity options positions that are better tailored to meet investment
objectives.
    The $1 Pilot, under the terms set forth in Commentary .05 to Phlx
Rule 1012, currently allows the Exchange to establish $1 strike price
intervals on options classes overlying no more than five individual
stocks designated by the Exchange where: (1) The underlying stock
closes below $20 on the primary market on the trading day before
selection by the Exchange; (2) the $1 strike price is from $3 to $20;
(3) the $1 strike price is no more than $5 above or below the closing
price of the underlying stock on the preceding day; and (4) the $1
strike price is not within $0.50 of an existing $2.50 strike price in
the same series. The Exchange may not list long-term option series
(``LEAPS'') at $1 strike price intervals for any class selected for the
$1 Pilot. In addition, pursuant to the $1 Pilot, the Exchange may list
$1 strike prices on any other option classes if those classes are
specifically designated by other securities exchanges that employ a
similar $1 strike price program under their respective rules.
    The Exchange proposes to expand the $1 Pilot to allow it to select
a total of 10, instead of the current 5, individual stocks on which
option series may be listed at $1 strike price intervals. Additionally,
the Exchange proposes to expand the price range on which it may list $1
strikes to $3-$50, instead of the current $3-$20. The proposed expanded
and permanent $1 Pilot would be known as the ``$1 Strike Program.'' The
Exchange notes that the existing restrictions on listing $1 strikes
would continue to apply; i.e., no $1 strike price may be listed that is
greater than $5 from the underlying stock's closing price in its
primary market on the previous day or that would result in strike
prices being $0.50 apart.
    As stated in the Commission order approving Phlx's $1 Pilot and in
the subsequent extensions of the $1 Pilot,\7\ the Exchange believes
that $1 strike price intervals provide greater trading flexibility to
investors so that they may better achieve their investment objectives.
The Exchange states that its member firms representing customers have
requested that Phlx seek to expand the $1 Pilot both in terms of the
number of classes that can be selected by the Exchange and the range in
which $1 strikes may be listed.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ See id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Phlx's last $1 Pilot report (the ``Report'') reviewed the
Exchange's positive experience with the $1 Pilot.\8\ The Exchange
states that the Report showed the strength and efficacy of the $1 Pilot
on the Exchange, as reflected by the increase in the percentage of $1
strikes in comparison to total options volume traded on Phlx at $1
strike price intervals and other options volume and the continuing
robust open interest of options traded on Phlx at $1 strike price
intervals. With regard to the impact on systems capacities, Phlx's
analysis of the $1 Pilot showed that the impact on Phlx's, OPRA's, and
market data vendors' respective automated systems has been negligible.
The Exchange states that, as indicated in the Report, the $1 Pilot has
not created, and in the future should not create, capacity problems for
the systems of OPRA. Phlx represents that it has sufficient capacity to
handle an expansion of the $1 Pilot, as proposed.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \8\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 55666 (April 25,
2007), 72 FR 23879 (May 1, 2007) (SR-Phlx-2007-29) (enclosing the
Report as Exhibit 3 to the filing).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Finally, because the $1 Pilot has been very successful in allowing
investors to establish equity options positions that are better
tailored to meeting their investment objectives, Phlx requests that the
$1 Pilot, as expanded, be approved on a permanent basis.
2. Statutory Basis
    The Exchange believes that its proposal is consistent with section
6(b) of the Act,\9\ in general, and furthers the objectives of section
6(b)(5), specifically,\10\ in that it is designed to promote just and
equitable principles of trade, to perfect the mechanism of a free and
open market and the national market system, and, in general, to protect
investors and the public interest. The proposal should achieve this by
allowing continued listing of options at $1 strike price intervals
within certain parameters, thereby stimulating customer interest in
options overlying the lowest tier of stocks and creating greater
trading opportunities and flexibility and providing customers with the
ability to more closely tailor investment strategies to the precise
movement of the underlying stocks.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

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

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

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

    The Exchange states that no written comments on the proposed rule
change were either solicited or received.

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

    Because the foregoing proposed rule change: (1) Does not
significantly affect the protection of investors or the public
interest; (2) does not impose any significant burden on competition;
and (3) by its terms does not become operative for 30 days after the
date of this filing, or such shorter time as the Commission may
designate if consistent with the protection of investors and the public
interest, the proposed rule change has become effective pursuant to
section 19(b)(3)(A) of the Act \11\ and Rule 19b-4(f)(6)
thereunder.\12\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \11\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A).
    \12\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6). In addition, Rule 19b-4(f)(6)(iii)
requires a self-regulatory organization to provide the Commission
with written notice of its intent to file the proposed rule change,
along with a brief description and text of the proposed rule change,
at least five business days prior to the date of filing of the
proposed rule change, or such shorter time as designated by the
Commission. The Exchange has fulfilled this requirement.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    A proposed rule change filed under Rule 19b-4(f)(6) normally does
not become operative for 30 days after the date of filing. However,
Rule 19b-4(f)(6)(iii) permits the Commission to designate a shorter
time if such action is consistent with the protection of investors and
the public interest. The Exchange requests that the Commission waive
the 30-day operative delay so that the Exchange can immediately
implement listing rules that are similar to those of other options
exchanges.\13\ The Commission believes that waiving the 30-day
operative delay is consistent with the protection of investors and the
public interest because the proposed rule change will provide the
Exchange's members and customers with added flexibility in the trading
of equity options and promote, without undue delay, additional
competition in the market for such options.\14\ The Commission expects
the Exchange to continue to monitor for options with little or no open
interest and trading activity and to act promptly to delist such
options. In addition, the Commission expects that Phlx will continue to
monitor the trading volume associated with the additional options
series listed as a result of this proposal and the effect of these
additional series on market fragmentation and on the capacity of the
Exchange's, OPRA's, and vendors' automated systems. For these reasons,
the Commission designates the proposed rule change as operative upon
filing.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \13\ See, e.g., Securities Exchange Act Release No. 57049
(December 27, 2007), 73 FR 528 (January 3, 2008) (SR-CBOE-2007-125).
    \14\ For purposes only of waiving the 30-day operative delay,
the Commission has also considered the proposed rule's impact on
efficiency, competition, and capital formation. See 15 U.S.C.
78c(f).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    At any time within 60 days of the filing of the proposed rule
change, the Commission may summarily abrogate such rule change if it
appears to the Commission that such action is necessary or appropriate
in the public interest, for the protection of investors, or otherwise
in furtherance of the purposes of the Act.

IV. Solicitation of Comments

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

Electronic Comments

     Use the Commission's Internet comment form (http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml.
); or     Send an e-mail to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Please include

File Number SR-Phlx-2008-01 on the subject line.

Paper Comments

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

All submissions should refer to File Number SR-Phlx-2008-01. This file
number should be included on the subject line if e-mail is used. To
help the Commission process and review your comments more efficiently,
please use only one method. The Commission will post all comments on
the Commission's Internet Web site (http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml
). Copies of the submission, all subsequent amendments, all

written statements with respect to the proposed rule change that are
filed with the Commission, and all written communications relating to
the proposed rule change between the Commission and any person, other
than those that may be withheld from the public in accordance with the
provisions of 5 U.S.C. 552, will be available for inspection and
copying in the Commission's Public Reference Room, 100 F Street, NE.,
Washington, DC 20549, on official business days between the hours of 10
a.m. and 3 p.m. Copies of the filing also will be available for
inspection and copying at the principal office of 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-Phlx-2008-01 and should be
submitted on or before February 4, 2008.

    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets,
pursuant to delegated authority.\15\
Florence E. Harmon,
Deputy Secretary.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \15\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

[FR Doc. E8-350 Filed 1-11-08; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 83, Number 75 (Wednesday, April 18, 2018)] [Rules and Regulations] [Pages 17091-17093] [FR Doc No: 2018-08196]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

National Highway Traffic Safety Administration

49 CFR Part 571

Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standards

CFR Correction

0 In Title 49 of the Code of Federal Regulations, Parts 400 to 571,  revised as of October 1, 2017, on page 982, in Sec.  571.217, the first  Figure 3D is removed, and on page 983, Figure 4 is reinstated to read  as follows:

Sec.  571.217  Standard No. 217; Bus emergency exits and window  retention and release.

* * * * * BILLING CODE 1301-00-D

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR18AP18.004

* * * * * [FR Doc. 2018-08196 Filed 4-17-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 1301-00-C


[Federal Register Volume 80, Number 190 (Thursday, October 1, 2015)]
[Notices]
[Page 59149]
[FR Doc No: 2015-24952]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

[FRL-9935-07-Region 1]

2015 Fall Joint Meeting of the Ozone Transport Commission and the
Mid-Atlantic Northeast Visibility Union

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Notice of meeting.

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

SUMMARY: The United States Environmental Protection Agency is
announcing the joint 2014 Fall Meeting of the Ozone Transport
Commission (OTC) and the Mid-Atlantic Northeast Visibility Union (MANE-
VU). The meeting agenda will include topics regarding reducing ground-
level ozone precursors and matters relative to Regional Haze and
visibility improvement in Federal Class I areas in a multi-pollutant
context.

DATES: The meeting will be held on November 5, 2015 starting at 9:15
a.m. and ending at 4:00 p.m.

ADDRESSES: (LOCATION) Hilton Baltimore at Camden Yards, 401 W. Pratt
Street, Baltimore, MD 21201,<PHONE_NUMBER>.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Donald Cooke,<PHONE_NUMBER>, E-Mail:
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>    For documents and press inquiries contact: Ozone Transport
Commission, 444 North Capitol Street NW., Suite 322, Washington, DC
20001;<PHONE_NUMBER>; email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Web site: http://www.otcair.org.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990 contain
at Section 184 provisions for the Control of Interstate Ozone Air
Pollution. Section 184(a) establishes an Ozone Transport Region (OTR)
comprised of the States of Connecticut, Delaware, Maine, Maryland,
Massachusetts, New Hampshire, New Jersey, New York, Pennsylvania, Rhode
Island, Vermont, parts of Virginia and the District of Columbia. The
purpose of the OTC is to deal with ground-level ozone formation,
transport, and control within the OTR.
    The Mid-Atlantic/Northeast Visibility Union (MANE-VU) was formed at
in 2001, in response to EPA's issuance of the Regional Haze rule. MANE-
VU's members include: Connecticut, Delaware, the District of Columbia,
Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, New Hampshire, New Jersey, New York,
Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, Vermont, the Penobscot Indian Nation, the
St. Regis Mohawk Tribe along with EPA and Federal Land Managers.
    Type of Meeting: Open.
    Agenda: Copies of the final agenda will be available from the OTC
office<PHONE_NUMBER>; by email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or via the OTC Web
site at http://www.otcair.org.

    Dated: September 15, 2015.
H. Curtis Spalding,
Regional Administrator, Region I.
[FR Doc. 2015-24952 Filed 9-30-15; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P