[Federal Register Volume 79, Number 142 (Thursday, July 24, 2014)]
[Notices]
[Pages 43114-43117]
[FR Doc No: 2014-17401]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 72645; File No. SR-NYSEArca-2014-44]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; NYSE Arca, Inc.; Order Granting
Approval of Proposed Rule Change Relating To Listing and Trading Shares
of First Trust Long/Short Equity ETF Under NYSE Arca Equities Rule
8.600

July 18, 2014.

I. Introduction

    On May 21, 2014, NYSE Arca, Inc. (``Exchange'' or ``NYSE Arca'')
filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (``Commission''),
pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934
(``Act'') \1\ and Rule 19b-4 thereunder,\2\ a proposed rule change to
list and trade shares (``Shares'') of the First Trust Long/Short Equity
ETF (``Fund'') under NYSE Arca Equities Rule 8.600. The proposed rule
change was published for comment in the Federal Register on June 9,
2014.\3\ The Commission received no comments on the proposed rule
change. This order grants approval of the proposed rule change.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1).
    \2\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4.
    \3\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 72299 (Jun. 3,
2014), 79 FR 33018 (``Notice'').
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

II. Description of Proposed Rule Change

    The Exchange proposes to list and trade Shares of the Fund under
NYSE Arca Equities Rule 8.600, which governs the listing and trading of
Managed Fund Shares \4\ on the Exchange. The Fund will be a series of
First Trust Exchange-Traded Fund III (``Trust''),\5\ a registered
management investment company. The Fund will be an actively-managed
exchange-traded fund (``ETF'') and will not seek to replicate the
performance of a specified index. First Trust Advisors L.P.
(``Adviser'') will be the investment adviser for the Fund.\6\ Brown
Brothers Harriman & Co. will be the administrator, accounting agent,
custodian, and transfer agent for the Fund, and First Trust Portfolios
L.P. will be the principal underwriter and distributor for the Fund.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ A Managed Fund Share is a security that represents an
interest in an investment company registered under the Investment
Company Act of 1940 (``1940 Act''), organized as an open-end
investment company or similar entity that invests in a portfolio of
securities selected by its investment adviser consistent with its
investment objectives and policies. In contrast, an open-end
investment company that issues Investment Company Units, listed and
traded on the Exchange under NYSE Arca Equities Rule 5.2(j)(3),
seeks to provide investment results that correspond generally to the
price and yield performance of a specific foreign or domestic stock
index, fixed income securities index, or combination thereof.
    \5\ The Trust is registered under the 1940 Act. According to the
Exchange, on April 1, 2014, the Trust filed with the Commission an
amendment to its registration statement on Form N-1A relating to the
Fund (File Nos. 333-176976 and 811-22245) (``Registration
Statement''). In addition, the Exchange states that the Trust has
obtained certain certain exemptive relief under the 1940 Act. See
Investment Company Act Release No. 28468 (Oct. 27, 2008) (File No.
812-13477).
    \6\ The Exchange represents that the Adviser is not registered
as a broker-dealer, but is affiliated with First Trust Portfolios
L.P., a broker dealer. The Exchange further represents that the
Adviser has implemented a ``fire wall'' with respect to its broker-
dealer affiliate regarding access to information concerning the
composition and changes to the Fund's portfolio. In addition,
according to the Exchange, in the event (a) the Adviser or any sub-
adviser becomes, or becomes newly affiliated with, a broker-dealer,
or (b) any new adviser or sub-adviser is, or becomes affiliated
with, a broker-dealer, the Adviser or any new adviser or sub-
adviser, as applicable, will implement a fire wall with respect to
its relevant personnel or its broker-dealer affiliate regarding
access to information concerning the composition and changes to the
Fund's portfolio, and will be subject to procedures designed to
prevent the use and dissemination of material, non-public
information regarding such portfolio.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange has made the following representations and statements
in describing the Fund and its investment strategies, including other
portfolio holdings and investment restrictions.\7\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ The Commission notes that additional information regarding
the Trust, the Fund, and the Shares, including investment
strategies, risks, net asset value (``NAV'') calculation, creation
and redemption procedures, fees, portfolio holdings disclosure
policies, distributions, and taxes, among other information, is
included in the Notice and the Registration Statement, as
applicable. See Notice and Registration Statement, supra notes 3 and
5, respectively.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Principal Investments of the Fund

    According to the Exchange, the Fund will seek to provide investors
with long-term total return. The Fund intends to pursue its investment
objective by establishing long and short positions in a portfolio of
Equity Securities (as defined below). Under normal market
conditions,\8\ at least 80% of the Fund's

net assets will be exposed to U.S. exchange-listed equity securities of
U.S. and foreign companies by investing in such securities directly and
in U.S. ETFs that provide exposure to such securities.\9\ The
securities of the companies and ETFs in which the Fund will invest are
referred to collectively as ``Equity Securities.'' The Equity
Securities held by the Fund may include U.S. exchange-listed equity
securities of foreign issuers as well as investments in the equity
securities of foreign issuers that are in the form of U.S. exchange-
listed American Depositary Receipts (``ADRs'') or U.S. exchange-listed
Global Depositary Receipts (``GDRs,'' and together with ADRs,
``Depositary Receipts''), as well as unsponsored ADRs.\10\ The Equity
Securities in which the Fund may invest (with the exception of
unsponsored ADRs) will be listed on a U.S. national securities
exchange, all of which are members of the Intermarket Surveillance
Group (``ISG'').
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \8\ The term ``under normal market conditions'' or ``under
normal circumstances'' includes, but is not limited to, the absence
of adverse market, economic, political, or other conditions,
including extreme volatility or trading halts in the equities
markets or the financial markets generally; operational issues
causing dissemination of inaccurate market information; or force
majeure type events such as systems failure, natural or man- made
disaster, act of God, armed conflict, act of terrorism, riot or
labor disruption, or any similar intervening circumstance.
    \9\ For purposes of the Fund's principal investments, ETFs
include Investment Company Units (as described in NYSE Arca Equities
Rule 5.2(j)(3)); Portfolio Depositary Receipts (as described in NYSE
Arca Equities Rule 8.100); and Managed Fund Shares (as described in
NYSE Arca Equities Rule 8.600). The ETFs all will be listed and
traded in the U.S. on registered exchanges. The ETFs in which the
Fund may invest will primarily be equity index-based ETFs that hold
substantially all of their assets in securities representing a
specific equity index. While the Fund may invest in inverse ETFs,
the Fund will not invest in leveraged (e.g., 2X, -2X, 3X, or -3X)
ETFs.
    \10\ The Fund will not invest more than 10% of its investments
in Equity Securities in unsponsored ADRs.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    As indicated above, the Fund will take long and short positions in
Equity Securities. As opposed to taking long positions in which an
investor seeks to profit from increases in the price of a security,
short selling (or ``selling short'') is a technique that will be used
by the Fund to try and profit from the falling price of a security.
Short selling involves selling a security that has been borrowed from a
third party with the intention of buying an identical security back at
a later date to return to that third party.
    The Adviser will select Equity Securities using an investment
process that analyzes fundamental, market-related, technical and
statistical attributes of Equity Securities to assess total return
potential. The Adviser will then use this analysis as the basis to
establish long and short positions within the Fund's portfolio. The
Exchange notes that having both long and short positions in an equity
security portfolio is a common way to create returns that are
independent of market moves. One advantage of a long and short
portfolio is that the long and short positions may offset one another
in a manner that results in a lower net exposure to the direction of
the market. In addition, cash balances arising from the use of short
selling typically will be held in money market instruments.\11\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \11\ Money market instruments will generally be short-term cash
instruments that have a remaining maturity of 397 days or less and
exhibit high quality credit profiles. These include U.S. Treasury
Bills and repurchase agreements.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Other Investments of the Fund

    While the Fund, under normal circumstances,\12\ will invest at
least 80% of its net assets in Equity Securities as described above,
the Fund may also invest its remaining assets in other investments as
described below.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \12\ See supra note 8.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Fund may invest a portion of its net assets in high-quality,
money market instruments on an ongoing basis. The instruments in which
the Fund may invest include: (1) Short-term obligations issued by the
U.S. government; (2) negotiable certificates of deposit (``CDs''),
fixed time deposits and bankers' acceptances of U.S. and foreign banks
and similar institutions; (3) commercial paper rated at the date of
purchase ``Prime-1'' by Moody's Investors Service, Inc. or ``A-1+'' or
``A-1'' by Standard & Poor's Ratings Group, Inc., a division of The
McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc., or, if unrated, of comparable quality as
determined by the Adviser; (4) repurchase agreements (only from or to a
commercial bank or a broker-dealer, and only if the purchase is
scheduled to occur within seven (7) days or less); and (5) money market
mutual funds. CDs are short-term negotiable obligations of commercial
banks. Time deposits are non-negotiable deposits maintained in banking
institutions for specified periods of time at stated interest rates.
Bankers' acceptances are time drafts drawn on commercial banks by
borrowers, usually in connection with international transactions.
    The Fund also may invest up to 20% of its net assets in U.S.
exchange-listed equity index futures contracts. All of such equity
index futures contracts will be listed on an exchange that is a member
of ISG.
    In certain situations or market conditions, the Fund may
temporarily depart from its normal investment policies and strategies
provided that the alternative is consistent with its investment
objective and is in the best interest of the Fund. For example, the
Fund may hold little or no short positions for extended periods, or the
Fund may hold a higher than normal proportion of its net assets in cash
in times of extreme market stress.

Investment Restrictions of the Fund

    The Fund will seek to qualify for treatment as a regulated
investment company under Subchapter M of the Internal Revenue Code of
1986, as amended.
    In addition, as part of its non-principal strategy, the Fund may
hold up to an aggregate amount of 15% of its net assets in illiquid
assets (calculated at the time of investment). The Fund will monitor
its portfolio liquidity on an ongoing basis to determine whether, in
light of current circumstances, an adequate level of liquidity is being
maintained, and will consider taking appropriate steps in order to
maintain adequate liquidity if, through a change in values, net assets,
or other circumstances, more than 15% of the Fund's net assets are held
in illiquid securities and other illiquid assets.
    The Fund will not invest 25% or more of the value of its net assets
in securities of issuers in any one industry. This restriction will not
apply to (a) obligations issued or guaranteed by the U.S. government,
its agencies, or instrumentalities, or (b) securities of other
investment companies.

III. Discussion and Commission's Findings

    After careful review, the Commission finds that the proposed rule
change is consistent with the requirements of Section 6 of the Act \13\
and the rules and regulations thereunder applicable to a national
securities exchange.\14\ In particular, the Commission finds that the
proposal is consistent with Section 6(b)(5) of the Act,\15\ which
requires, among other things, that the Exchange's rules be designed to
promote just and equitable principles of trade, 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. The Commission notes that the Fund and the Shares must comply
with the initial and continued listing criteria in NYSE Arca Equities
Rule 8.600 for the Shares to be listed and traded on the Exchange.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \13\ 15 U.S.C. 78f.
    \14\ In approving this proposed rule change, the Commission has
considered the proposed rule's impact on efficiency, competition,
and capital formation. See 15 U.S.C. 78c(f).
    \15\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5).

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

    The Commission finds that the proposal to list and trade the Shares
on the Exchange is consistent with Section 11A(a)(1)(C)(iii) of the
Act,\16\ which sets forth Congress' finding that it is in the public
interest and appropriate for the protection of investors and the
maintenance of fair and orderly markets to assure the availability to
brokers, dealers, and investors of information with respect to
quotations for, and transactions in, securities. Quotation and last-
sale information for the Shares and the underlying U.S. exchange-traded
Equity Securities will be available via the Consolidated Tape
Association (``CTA'') high-speed line. In addition, the Fund's
Portfolio Indicative Value, as defined in NYSE Arca Equities Rule
8.600(c)(3), will be widely disseminated at least every fifteen seconds
during the NYSE Arca Core Trading Session by one or more major market
data vendors.\17\ On a daily basis, the Adviser, on behalf of the Fund,
will disclose on the Fund's Web site the following information
regarding each portfolio holding (``Disclosed Portfolio,'' as defined
in NYSE Arca Equities Rule 8.600(c)(2)), as applicable to the type of
holding: ticker symbol, CUSIP number or other identifier, if any; a
description of the holding; the identity of the security, index, or
other asset or instrument underlying the holding, if any; quantity held
(as measured by, for example, par value, notional value or number of
shares, contracts, or units); maturity date, if any; coupon rate, if
any; effective date, if any; market value of the holding; and the
percentage weighting of the holding in the Fund's portfolio. The Web
site information will be publicly available at no charge. In addition,
a basket composition file, which includes the security names and share
quantities, if applicable, required to be delivered in exchange for a
Fund's Shares, together with estimates and actual cash components, will
be publicly disseminated daily prior to the opening of the New York
Stock Exchange (``NYSE'') via the National Securities Clearing
Corporation. The NAV of the Fund will be determined as of the close of
trading (normally 4:00 p.m., Eastern Time) on each day the NYSE is open
for business.\18\ Information regarding market price and trading volume
of the Shares will be continually available on a real-time basis
throughout the day on brokers' computer screens and other electronic
services. Information regarding the previous day's closing price and
trading volume information for the Shares will be published daily in
the financial section of newspapers. Information regarding the Equity
Securities and U.S. exchange-traded futures contracts held by the Fund
will be available from the national exchanges trading such securities
and futures contracts, respectively, automated quotation systems,
published or other public sources, or on-line information services,
such as Bloomberg or Reuters or any such future service provider. In
addition, quotation information from brokers and dealers or pricing
services will be available for fixed income securities, including U.S.
government obligations, other money market instruments, and repurchase
agreements. The Fund's Web site will include a form of the prospectus
for the Fund and additional data relating to NAV and other applicable
quantitative information for the Fund.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \16\ 15 U.S.C. 78k-1(a)(1)(C)(iii).
    \17\ According to the Exchange, several major market data
vendors display or make widely available Portfolio Indicative Values
taken from CTA or other data feeds.
    \18\ NAV will be calculated for the Fund by taking the market
price of the Fund's net assets, including interest or dividends
accrued but not yet collected, less all liabilities, and dividing
such amount by the total number of Shares outstanding. The result,
rounded to the nearest cent, will be the NAV per Share. All
valuations will be subject to review by the Board of Trustees of the
Trust or its delegate. According to the Exchange, equity securities
(including ETFs and Depositary Receipts) listed on any exchange
other than The NASDAQ Stock Market LLC (``NASDAQ'') will be valued
at the last sale price on the exchange on which they are principally
traded on the business day as of which such value is being
determined. Equity securities listed on the NASDAQ will be valued at
the official closing price on the business day as of which such
value is being determined. If there has been no sale on such day, or
no official closing price in the case of securities traded on the
NASDAQ, the securities will be valued using fair value pricing.
Equity securities traded on more than one securities exchange will
be valued at the last sale price or official closing price, as
applicable, on the business day as of which such value is being
determined at the close of the exchange representing the principal
market for such securities. Exchange-traded futures contracts will
be valued at the closing price in the market where such contracts
are principally traded. Intra-day and closing price information
regarding unsponsored ADRs will be available from major market data
vendors such as Bloomberg and Reuters. Overnight repurchase
agreements will be valued at cost. Term repurchase agreements (i.e.,
those whose maturity exceeds seven days) will be valued at the
average of the bid quotations obtained daily from at least two
recognized dealers.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Commission further believes that the proposal to list and trade
the Shares is reasonably designed to promote fair disclosure of
information that may be necessary to price the Shares appropriately and
to prevent trading when a reasonable degree of transparency cannot be
assured. The Exchange will obtain a representation from the issuer of
the Shares that the NAV per Share will be calculated daily and that the
NAV and the Disclosed Portfolio for the Fund will be made available to
all market participants at the same time. Trading in Shares of the Fund
will be halted if the circuit breaker parameters in NYSE Arca Equities
Rule 7.12 have been reached or because of market conditions or for
reasons that, in the view of the Exchange, make trading in the Shares
inadvisable,\19\ and trading in the Shares will be subject to NYSE Arca
Equities Rule 8.600(d)(2)(D), which sets forth additional circumstances
under which trading in the Shares of the Fund may be halted. The
Exchange states that it has a general policy prohibiting the
distribution of material, non-public information by its employees.
Consistent with NYSE Arca Equities Rule 8.600(d)(2)(B)(ii), the
Commission notes that the Reporting Authority must implement and
maintain, or be subject to, procedures designed to prevent the use and
dissemination of material, non-public information regarding the actual
components of the Fund's portfolio. In addition, the Exchange states
that the Adviser is affiliated with a broker-dealer and that the
Adviser has implemented a fire wall with respect to its broker-dealer
affiliate regarding access to information concerning the composition
and changes to the Fund's portfolio.\20\ The Exchange represents that
trading in the Shares will be subject to the existing trading
surveillances, administered by

the Financial Industry Regulatory Authority (``FINRA'') on behalf of
the Exchange, which are designed to detect violations of Exchange rules
and applicable federal securities laws.\21\ The Exchange further
represents that these procedures are adequate to properly monitor
Exchange-trading of the Shares in all trading sessions and to deter and
detect violations of Exchange rules and federal securities laws
applicable to trading on the Exchange. Moreover, prior to the
commencement of trading, the Exchange states that it will inform its
Equity Trading Permit Holders in an Information Bulletin of the special
characteristics and risks associated with trading the Shares.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \19\ These reasons may include: (1) The extent to which trading
is not occurring in the securities or the financial instruments
comprising the Disclosed Portfolio of the Fund; or (2) whether other
unusual conditions or circumstances detrimental to the maintenance
of a fair and orderly market are present. With respect to trading
halts, the Exchange may consider all relevant factors in exercising
its discretion to halt or suspend trading in the Shares of the Fund.
    \20\ See supra note 6. The Exchange states that an investment
adviser to an open-end fund is required to be registered under the
Investment Advisers Act of 1940 (``Advisers Act''). As a result, the
Adviser and its related personnel are subject to the provisions of
Rule 204A-1 under the Advisers Act relating to codes of ethics. This
Rule requires investment advisers to adopt a code of ethics that
reflects the fiduciary nature of the relationship to clients, as
well as compliance with other applicable securities laws.
Accordingly, procedures designed to prevent the communication and
misuse of non-public information by an investment adviser must be
consistent with Rule 204A-1 under the Advisers Act. In addition,
Rule 206(4)-7 under the Advisers Act makes it unlawful for an
investment adviser to provide investment advice to clients unless
such investment adviser has (i) adopted and implemented written
policies and procedures reasonably designed to prevent violation, by
the investment adviser and its supervised persons, of the Advisers
Act and the Commission rules adopted thereunder; (ii) implemented,
at a minimum, an annual review regarding the adequacy of the
policies and procedures established pursuant to subparagraph (i)
above and the effectiveness of their implementation; and (iii)
designated an individual (who is a supervised person) responsible
for administering the policies and procedures adopted under
subparagraph (i) above.
    \21\ The Exchange states that FINRA surveils trading on the
Exchange pursuant to a regulatory services agreement and that the
Exchange is responsible for FINRA's performance under this
regulatory services agreement.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange represents that the Shares are deemed to be equity
securities, thus rendering trading in the Shares subject to the
Exchange's existing rules governing the trading of equity securities.
In support of this proposal, the Exchange has made representations,
including the following:
    (1) The Shares will be subject to NYSE Arca Equities Rule 8.600,
which sets forth the initial and continued listing criteria applicable
to Managed Fund Shares.
    (2) The Exchange has appropriate rules to facilitate transactions
in the Shares during all trading sessions.
    (3) FINRA, on behalf of the Exchange, will communicate as needed
regarding trading in the Shares, underlying Equity Securities, and
equity index futures contracts with other markets and other entities
that are members of ISG, and FINRA, on behalf of the Exchange, may
obtain trading information regarding trading in the Shares, Equity
Securities, and equity index futures contracts from such markets and
other entities. In addition, the Exchange may obtain information
regarding trading in the Shares, underlying Equity Securities, and
equity index futures contracts from markets and other entities that are
members of ISG or with which the Exchange has in place a comprehensive
surveillance sharing agreement.
    (4) The Equity Securities in which the Fund may invest (including
Depositary Receipts, with the exception of unsponsored ADRs) will be
listed on a U.S. national securities exchange, all of which are members
of ISG. The Fund will not invest more than 10% of its investments in
Equity Securities in unsponsored ADRs. All of the Fund's equity index
futures contracts will be listed on an exchange that is a member of
ISG.
    (5) Prior to the commencement of trading, the Exchange will inform
its Equity Trading Permit Holders in an Information Bulletin of the
special characteristics and risks associated with trading the Shares.
Specifically, the Information Bulletin will discuss the following: (a)
The procedures for purchases and redemptions of Shares in creation
units (and that Shares are not individually redeemable); (b) NYSE Arca
Equities Rule 9.2(a), which imposes a duty of due diligence on its
Equity Trading Permit Holders to learn the essential facts relating to
every customer prior to trading the Shares; (c) the risks involved in
trading the Shares during the Opening and Late Trading Sessions when an
updated Portfolio Indicative Value will not be calculated or publicly
disseminated; (d) how information regarding the Portfolio Indicative
Value and Disclosed Portfolio is disseminated; (e) the requirement that
Equity Trading Permit Holders deliver a prospectus to investors
purchasing newly issued Shares prior to or concurrently with the
confirmation of a transaction; and (f) trading information.
    (6) For initial and continued listing, the Fund will be in
compliance with Rule 10A-3 under the Act,\22\ as provided by NYSE Arca
Equities Rule 5.3.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \22\ 17 CFR 240.10A-3.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    (7) The Fund may hold up to an aggregate amount of 15% of its net
assets in illiquid assets (calculated at the time of investment).
    (8) Under normal market circumstances, at least 80% of the Fund's
net assets will be exposed to U.S. exchange-listed Equity Securities.
While the Fund may invest in inverse ETFs, the Fund will not invest in
leveraged ETFs. The Fund may invest up to 20% of its net assets in U.S.
exchange-listed equity index futures contracts.
    (9) A minimum of 100,000 Shares for the Fund will be outstanding at
the commencement of trading on the Exchange. This approval order is
based on all of the Exchange's representations, including those set
forth above and in the Notice, and the Exchange's description of the
Fund.
    For the foregoing reasons, the Commission finds that the proposed
rule change is consistent with Section 6(b)(5) of the Act \23\ and the
rules and regulations thereunder applicable to a national securities
exchange.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \23\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

IV. Conclusion

    It is therefore ordered, pursuant to Section 19(b)(2) of the
Act,\24\ that the proposed rule change (SR-NYSEArca-014-44) be, and it
hereby is, approved.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \24\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(2).
    \25\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets,
pursuant to delegated authority.\25\

Kevin M. O'Neill,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2014-17401 Filed 7-23-14; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 85, Number 116 (Tuesday, June 16, 2020)]
[Notices]
[Pages 36412-36413]
[FR Doc No: 2020-12941]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Federal Emergency Management Agency

[Docket ID: FEMA-2020-0025; OMB No. 1660-0147]

Agency Information Collection Activities: Proposed Collection;
Comment Request; Coronavirus (COVID-19) Donations Web Portal

AGENCY: Federal Emergency Management Agency, DHS.

ACTION: 60-Day Notice and request for comments.

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

SUMMARY: The Federal Emergency Management Agency, as part of its
continuing effort to reduce paperwork and respondent burden, invites
the general public to take this opportunity to comment on new
information collection. In accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act
of 1995, this notice seeks comments concerning a voluntary donations
web portal located on the FEMA.gov internet site. This information will
allow FEMA to collect voluntary information on possible donations of
key equipment and resources that can be distributed to key
organizational recipients directly responding to the COVID-19 pandemic.

DATES: Comments must be submitted on or before August 17, 2020.

ADDRESSES: To avoid duplicate submissions to the docket, please use
only one of the following means to submit comments:
    (1) Online. Submit comments at www.regulations.gov under Docket ID
FEMA-2020-0025. Follow the instructions for submitting comments.
    (2) Mail. Submit written comments to Docket Manager, Office of
Chief Counsel, DHS/FEMA, 500 C Street SW, 8NE, Washington, DC 20472-
3100.
    All submissions received must include the agency name and Docket
ID. Regardless of the method used for submitting comments or material,
all submissions will be posted, without change, to the Federal
eRulemaking Portal at http://www.regulations.gov, and will include any
personal information you provide. Therefore, submitting this
information makes it public. You may wish to read the Privacy and
Security Notice that is available via a link on the homepage of
www.regulations.gov.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Cindy Ramsay, Supervisory External
Affairs Specialist, Public Affairs Division<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
You may contact the Information

Management Division for copies of the proposed collection of
information at email address<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: FEMA implemented a web form into the
FEMA.gov internet site to collect voluntary donations of medical
equipment. This information will allow FEMA to collect voluntary
information on possible donations of key equipment and resources that
can be distributed to key organizational recipients directly responding
to the COVID-19 pandemic.
    The web form collects:
     Collection of Company Information;
     Collection of Company Point of Contact Information; and
     Logistical details of goods for potential donations in
direct support of COVID-19 response.
    FEMA has authorization to perform this function as described in the
National Response Framework, Fourth Edition, October 28, 2019. The
National Response Framework Volunteer and Donations Management Support
Annex states in its Purpose, ``The Volunteer and Donations Management
Support Annex describes the coordination processes used to support the
state in ensuring the most efficient and effective use of unaffiliated
volunteers, unaffiliated organizations, and unsolicited donated goods
to support all Emergency Support Functions (ESFs) for incidents
requiring a Federal response, including offers of unaffiliated
volunteer services and unsolicited donations to the Federal
Government.''

Collection of Information

    Title: Coronavirus (COVID-19) Donations Web Portal.
    Type of Information Collection: New Collection.
    OMB Number: OMB Collection 1660-0147.
    FEMA Forms: FEMA Form 248-0-0-1; Donations Web Portal.
    Abstract: Because of the substantial risk to life, safety, or
health of individuals due to the probable shortage in emergency medical
equipment, supporting distribution infrastructure and other life-
sustaining equipment related to Coronavirus (COVID-19) treatment, FEMA
implemented a web form into the FEMA.gov internet site to collect
voluntary donations of medical equipment.
    This information will allow FEMA to collect voluntary information
on possible donations of key equipment and resources that can be
distributed to key organizational recipients directly responding to the
COVID-19 pandemic.
    FEMA will determine if the goods being donated are needed by any
organization responding to the COVID-19 situation and uses the
information to connect donors making donations with organizations in
need by helping to coordinate the movement of those goods either on
their own or through contracts. The type of coordination and assistance
will vary depending on the type and number of items being donated and
the need for the donation.
    Affected Public: All individuals in any way involved with the
COVID-19 pandemic as it pertains to medical services, medical equipment
or exposure to the COVID-19 virus.
    Estimated Number of Respondents: 340.
    Estimated Number of Responses: 3,400.
    Estimated Total Annual Burden Hours: 567.
    Estimated Total Annual Respondent Cost: $14,697.
    Estimated Respondents' Operation and Maintenance Costs: None.
    Estimated Respondents' Capital and Start-Up Costs: None.
    Estimated Total Annual Cost to the Federal Government: $34,153.

Comments

    Comments may be submitted as indicated in the ADDRESSES caption
above. Comments are solicited to (a) evaluate whether the proposed data
collection is necessary for the proper performance of the agency,
including whether the information shall have practical utility; (b)
evaluate the accuracy of the agency's estimate of the burden of the
proposed collection of information, including the validity of the
methodology and assumptions used; (c) enhance the quality, utility, and
clarity of the information to be collected; and (d) minimize the burden
of the collection of information on those who are to respond, including
through the use of appropriate automated, electronic, mechanical, or
other technological collection techniques or other forms of information
technology, e.g., permitting electronic submission of responses.

Maile Arthur,
Deputy Director, Information Management Division, Office of the Chief
Administrative Officer, Mission Support, Federal Emergency Management
Agency, Department of Homeland Security.
[FR Doc. 2020-12941 Filed 6-15-20; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 9111-19-P


[Federal Register Volume 88, Number 109 (Wednesday, June 7, 2023)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 37147-37149]
[FR Doc No: 2023-12151]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Coast Guard

33 CFR Part 165

[Docket Number USCG-2023-0355]
RIN 1625-AA00

Safety Zone; Kanawha River, Charleston, WV

AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS.

ACTION: Temporary final rule.

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

SUMMARY: The Coast Guard is establishing a safety zone for all
navigable waters of the Kanawha River between mile markers 58.1 and
59.1. The safety zone is needed to protect personnel, vessels, and the
marine environment from the potential hazards created by a fireworks
display. Entry of vessels or persons into this zone is prohibited
unless specifically authorized by Captain of the Port Marine Safety
Unit Huntington.

DATES: This rule is effective from 8:45 p.m. on June 30, 2023, through
10:15 p.m. on September 4, 2023.

ADDRESSES: To view documents mentioned in this preamble as being
available in the docket, go to https://www.regulations.gov, type USCG-
2023-0355 in the search box and click ``Search.'' Next, in the Document
Type column, select ``Supporting & Related Material.''

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: If you have questions on this rule,
call or email MST1 Chelsea Zimmerman, Marine Safety Unit Huntington,
U.S. Coast Guard;<PHONE_NUMBER>, [email protected].

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Table of Abbreviations

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

II. Background Information and Regulatory History

    The Coast Guard is issuing this temporary rule without prior notice
and opportunity to comment pursuant to authority under section 4(a) of
the Administrative Procedure Act (APA) (5 U.S.C. 553(b)). This
provision authorizes an agency to issue a rule without prior notice and
opportunity to comment when the agency for good cause finds that those
procedures are ``impracticable, unnecessary, or contrary to the public
interest.'' Under 5 U.S.C. 553(b)(B), the Coast Guard finds that good
cause exists for not publishing a notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM)
with respect to this rule because we must establish the safety zone by
June 30, 2023, and lack sufficient time to request public comments and
respond to these comments before the safety zone must be established.
Waiting for a full comment period to run would inhibit the Coast
Guard's ability to keep the public safe from the hazards associated
with a fireworks display and the ability to minimize the impact to
vessel traffic on the navigable waterway.
    Under 5 U.S.C. 553(d)(3), the Coast Guard finds that good cause
exists for making this rule effective less than 30 days after
publication in the Federal Register. Delaying the effective date of
this rule would be contrary to the public interest because immediate
action is needed to respond to the potential safety hazards associated
with the Nitro Memorial Day Celebration taking place on the Kanawha
River between mile marker 43 and mile marker 44.

III. Legal Authority and Need for Rule

    The Coast Guard is issuing this rule under authority in 46 U.S.C.
70034. The Captain of the Port Ohio Valley (COTP) has determined that
potential hazards associated with Live on the Levee 2023 starting June
30, 2023, will be a safety concern for anyone on the Kanawha River from
mile marker 58.1 to mile marker 59.1. This rule is needed to protect
personnel, vessels, and the marine environment from potential hazards
associated with a fireworks display.

IV. Discussion of the Rule

    This rule establishes a safety zone from 8:45 p.m. through 10:15
p.m. on June 30, 2023 with a rain date of July 1, 2023, or July 2,
2023, and a safety zone from 8:45 p.m. through 10:15 p.m. on July 4,
2023, with a rain date of September 4, 2023. The safety zone will cover
all navigable waters between mile markers 58.1 and 59.1 on the Kanawha
River. The duration of the safety zone is intended to protect
personnel, vessels, and the marine environment from potential hazards
created by a fireworks display.
    No vessel or person will be permitted to enter the safety zone
without obtaining permission from the COTP or

a designated representative. A designated representative is a
commissioned, warrant, or petty officer of the U.S. Coast Guard (USCG)
assigned to units under the operational control of the COTP. To seek
permission to enter, contact the COTP or a designated representative
via VHF-FM channel 16, or through Marine Safety Unit Huntington at 304-
733-0198. Persons and vessels permitted to enter the safety zone must
comply with all lawful orders or directions issued by the COTP or
designated representative. The COTP or a designated representative will
inform the public of the effective period for the safety zone as well
as any changes in the dates and times of enforcement through Local
Notice to Mariners (LNMs), Broadcast Notices to Mariners (BNMs), and/or
Marine Safety Information Bulletins (MSIBs), as appropriate.

V. Regulatory Analyses

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

A. Regulatory Planning and Review

    Executive Orders 12866 and 13563 direct agencies to assess the
costs and benefits of available regulatory alternatives and, if
regulation is necessary, to select regulatory approaches that maximize
net benefits. This rule has not been designated a ``significant
regulatory action,'' under Executive Order 12866. Accordingly, this
rule has not been reviewed by the Office of Management and Budget
(OMB).
    This regulatory action determination is based on the size,
location, and duration of the safety zone. This safety zone impacts a
1-mile stretch of the Kanawha River for a limited duration of less than
2 hours. Vessel traffic will be informed about the safety zone through
local notices to mariners. Moreover, the Coast Guard will issue
Broadcast Notices to Mariners via VHF-FM marine channel 16 about the
zone and the rule allows vessels to seek permission to transit the
zone.

B. Impact on Small Entities

    The Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980, 5 U.S.C. 601-612, as
amended, requires Federal agencies to consider the potential impact of
regulations on small entities during rulemaking. The term ``small
entities'' comprises small businesses, not-for-profit organizations
that are independently owned and operated and are not dominant in their
fields, and governmental jurisdictions with populations of less than
50,000. The Coast Guard certifies under 5 U.S.C. 605(b) that this rule
will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of
small entities.
    While some owners or operators of vessels intending to transit the
safety zone may be small entities, for the reasons stated in section
V.A above, this rule will not have a significant economic impact on any
vessel owner or operator.
    Under section 213(a) of the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement
Fairness Act of 1996 (Pub. L. 104-121), we want to assist small
entities in understanding this rule. If the rule would affect your
small business, organization, or governmental jurisdiction and you have
questions concerning its provisions or options for compliance, please
call or email the person listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT
section.
    Small businesses may send comments on the actions of Federal
employees who enforce, or otherwise determine compliance with, Federal
regulations to the Small Business and Agriculture Regulatory
Enforcement Ombudsman and the Regional Small Business Regulatory
Fairness Boards. The Ombudsman evaluates these actions annually and
rates each agency's responsiveness to small business. If you wish to
comment on actions by employees of the Coast Guard, call 1-888-REG-FAIR
(1-888-734-3247). The Coast Guard will not retaliate against small
entities that question or complain about this rule or any policy or
action of the Coast Guard.

C. Collection of Information

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

D. Federalism and Indian Tribal Governments

    A rule has implications for federalism under Executive Order 13132,
Federalism, if it has a substantial direct effect on the States, on the
relationship between the National Government and the States, or on the
distribution of power and responsibilities among the various levels of
government. We have analyzed this rule under that Order and have
determined that it is consistent with the fundamental federalism
principles and preemption requirements described in Executive Order
13132.
    Also, this rule does not have tribal implications under Executive
Order 13175, Consultation and Coordination with Indian Tribal
Governments, because it does not have a substantial direct effect on
one or more Indian tribes, on the relationship between the Federal
Government and Indian tribes, or on the distribution of power and
responsibilities between the Federal Government and Indian tribes.

E. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act

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

F. Environment

    We have analyzed this rule under Department of Homeland Security
Directive 023-01, Rev. 1, associated implementing instructions, and
Environmental Planning COMDTINST 5090.1 (series), which guide the Coast
Guard in complying with the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969
(42 U.S.C. 4321-4370f), and have determined that this action is one of
a category of actions that do not individually or cumulatively have a
significant effect on the human environment. This rule involves a
safety zone of limited duration of less than 2 hours that will limit
access of the Kanawha River from mile marker 58.1 to mile marker 59.1.
It is categorically excluded from further review under paragraph L60(a)
of Appendix A, Table 1 of DHS Instruction Manual 023-01-001-01, Rev. 1.
A Record of Environmental Consideration supporting this determination
is available in the docket. For instructions on locating the docket,
see the ADDRESSES section of this preamble.

G. Protest Activities

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

List of Subjects in 33 CFR Part 165

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

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

PART 165--REGULATED NAVIGATION AREAS AND LIMITED ACCESS AREAS

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

    Authority: 46 U.S.C. 70034, 70051, 70124; 33 CFR 1.05-1, 6.04-1,
6.04-6, and 160.5; Department of Homeland Security Delegation No.
00170.1, Revision No. 01.3.

0
2. Add Sec.  165.T08-0355 to read as follows:

Sec.  165.T08-0355  Safety Zone; Kanawha River, Charleston, WV.

    (a) Location. The following area is a safety zone: All navigable
waters of the Kanawha River from mile marker 58.1 to mile marker 59.1
near Haddad Riverfront Park, Charleston, WV.
    (b) Definitions. Designated representative means a Coast Guard
Patrol Commander (PATCOM), including a Coast Guard coxswain, petty
officer, or other officer operating a Coast Guard vessel and a Federal,
State, and local officer designated by or assisting the Captain of the
Port Ohio Valley (COTP) in the enforcement of the regulations in this
section.
    Participant means all persons and vessels registered with the event
sponsor as a participant in the race.
    (c) Regulations. (1) The Coast Guard may patrol the event area
under the direction of a designated Coast Guard Patrol Commander. The
Patrol Commander may be contacted on Channel 16 VHF-FM (156.8 MHz) by
the call sign ``PATCOM.''
    (2) All persons and vessels not registered with the sponsor as
participants or official patrol vessels are considered spectators. The
``official patrol vessels'' consist of any Coast Guard, state or local
law enforcement and sponsor provided vessels assigned or approved by
the Commander, Eighth Coast Guard District, to patrol the event.
    (3) Spectator vessels desiring to transit the regulated area may do
so only with prior approval of the Patrol Commander and when so
directed by that officer and will be operated at a no wake speed in a
manner which will not endanger participants in the event or any other
craft.
    (4) No spectator shall anchor, block, loiter, or impede the through
transit of participants or official patrol vessels in the regulated
area during the effective dates and times, unless cleared for entry by
or through an official patrol vessel.
    (5) The Patrol Commander may forbid and control the movement of all
vessels in the regulated area. When hailed or signaled by an official
patrol vessel, a vessel shall come to an immediate stop and comply with
the directions given. Failure to do so may result in expulsion from the
area, citation for failure to comply, or both.
    (6) Any spectator vessel may anchor outside the regulated area
specified above, but may not anchor in, block, or loiter in a navigable
channel.
    (7) The Patrol Commander may terminate the event or the operation
of any vessel at any time it is deemed necessary for the protection of
life or property.
    (8) To seek permission to enter, contact the COTP or the COTP's
representative by VHF-FM marine radio channel 16 or phone at 1-800-253-
7465. Those in the regulated area must comply with all lawful orders or
directions given to them by the COTP or the designated representative.
    (9) The COTP will provide notice of the regulated area through
advanced notice via local notice to mariners and broadcast notice to
mariners and by on-scene designated representatives.
    (d) Enforcement periods. (1) The safety zone described in paragraph
(a) will be enforced from 8:45 p.m. through 10:15 p.m. on June 30,
2023, with a rain date of July 1, 2023, or July 2, 2023.
    (2) The safety zone described in paragraph (a) will be enforced
from 8:45 p.m. through 10:15 p.m. on July 4, 2023, with a rain date of
September 4, 2023.

    Dated: May 30, 2023.
H.R. Mattern,
Captain, U.S. Coast Guard, Captain of the Port Ohio Valley.
[FR Doc. 2023-12151 Filed 6-6-23; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE P


[Federal Register: July 27, 2010 (Volume 75, Number 143)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Page 43876-43878]
[DOCID:fr27jy10-22]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. FAA-2010-0701; Directorate Identifier 2010-NM-017-AD]
RIN 2120-AA64

Airworthiness Directives; Fokker Services B.V. Model F.28 Mark
0100 Airplanes

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM).

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

SUMMARY: We propose to adopt a new airworthiness directive (AD) for the
products listed above that would supersede an existing AD. This
proposed AD results from mandatory continuing airworthiness information
(MCAI) originated by an aviation authority of another country to
identify and correct an unsafe condition on an aviation product. The
MCAI describes the unsafe condition as:

    Two reports have been received where, during inspection of the
vertical stabilizer of F28 Mark 0100 aeroplanes, one of the bolts
that connect the horizontal stabilizer control unit actuator with
the dog-links was found broken (one on the nut side & one on the
head side). In both occasions, the bolt shaft was still present in
the connection and therefore the horizontal stabilizer function was
not affected. If a single dog-link connection fails, the complete
stabilizer load is taken up by the remaining dog-link connection. *
* *
    To address and correct this unsafe condition EASA [European
Aviation Safety Agency] issued AD 2007-0287 [corresponding FAA AD
2008-22-14] that required a one-time inspection of the affected
bolts, * * * and replacement of failed bolts with serviceable parts.
EASA AD 2007-0287 also required the installation of a tie wrap
through the lower bolts of the horizontal stabilizer control unit,
to keep the bolt in place in the event of a bolt head failure.
    Recent examination revealed that the bolts failed due to stress
corrosion, attributed to excessive bolt torque. Investigation of the
recently failed bolts showed that the modification as required by AD
2007-0287 is not adequate.
* * * * *
    Loss of horizontal stabilizer function could result in partial loss
of control of the airplane. The proposed AD would require actions that
are intended to address the unsafe condition described in the MCAI.

DATES: We must receive comments on this proposed AD by September 10,
2010.

ADDRESSES: You may send comments by any of the following methods:
     Federal eRulemaking Portal: Go to http://
www.regulations.gov. Follow the instructions for submitting comments.
     Fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>.
     Mail: U.S. Department of Transportation, Docket
Operations, M-30, West Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140, 1200 New
Jersey Avenue, SE., Washington, DC 20590.
     Hand Delivery: U.S. Department of Transportation, Docket
Operations, M-30, West Building Ground Floor, Room W12-40, 1200 New
Jersey Avenue, SE., Washington, DC, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday
through Friday, except Federal holidays.
    For the Fokker service information identified in this proposed AD,
contact Fokker Services B.V., Technical Services Dept., P.O. Box 231,
2150 AE Nieuw-Vennep, the Netherlands; telephone +31 (0)252-627-350;
fax +31 (0)252-627-211; e-mail
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Internet http://
www.myfokkerfleet.com.
    For the Goodrich service information identified in this proposed
AD, contact Goodrich Corporation, Landing Gear, 1400 South Service
Road, West Oakville L6L 5Y7, Ontario, Canada; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>;
e-mail<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Internet http://www.goodrich.com/
TechPubs.
    You may review copies of the referenced service information at the
FAA, Transport Airplane Directorate, 1601 Lind Avenue, SW., Renton,
Washington. 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; 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 proposed AD, the regulatory
evaluation, any comments received, and other information. The street
address for the Docket Operations office (telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>) is
in the ADDRESSES section. Comments will be available in the AD docket
shortly after receipt.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Tom Rodriguez, Aerospace Engineer,
International Branch, ANM-116, Transport Airplane Directorate, FAA,
1601 Lind Avenue, SW., Renton, Washington 98057-3356; telephone (425)
227-1137; fax<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Comments Invited

    We invite you to send any written relevant data, views, or
arguments about this proposed AD. Send your comments to an address
listed under the ADDRESSES section. Include ``Docket No. FAA-2010-0701;
Directorate Identifier 2010-NM-017-AD'' at the beginning of your
comments. We specifically invite comments on the overall regulatory,
economic, environmental, and energy aspects of this proposed AD. We
will consider all comments received by the closing date and may amend
this proposed AD based on those comments.
    We have lengthened the 30-day comment period for proposed ADs that
address MCAI originated by aviation authorities of other countries to
provide adequate time for interested parties to submit comments. The
comment period for these proposed ADs is now typically 45 days, which
is consistent with the comment period for domestic transport ADs.
    We will post all comments we receive, without change, to http://
www.regulations.gov, including any personal information you provide. We
will also post a report summarizing each substantive verbal contact we
receive about this proposed AD.

Discussion

    On October 9, 2008, we issued AD 2008-22-14, Amendment 39-15710 (73
FR 70261, November 20, 2008). That AD required actions intended to
address an unsafe condition on the products listed above.
    Since we issued AD 2008-22-14, we have received information that
the actions required in AD 2008-22-14 are insufficient to prevent the
unsafe condition from occurring. The European Aviation Safety Agency
(EASA), which is the Technical Agent for the Member States of the
European Community, has issued EASA Airworthiness Directive 2009-0216,
dated October 7, 2009 (referred to after this as ``the MCAI''), to
correct an unsafe condition for the specified products. The MCAI
states:

    Two reports have been received where, during inspection of the
vertical stabilizer of F28 Mark 0100 aeroplanes, one of the bolts
that connect the horizontal stabilizer control unit actuator with
the dog-links was found broken (one on the nut side & one on the
head side). In both occasions, the bolt shaft was still present in
the connection and therefore the horizontal stabilizer function was
not affected. If a single dog-link connection fails, the complete
stabilizer load is taken up by the remaining dog-link connection.
Any failed connection should be detected and corrected at the next
scheduled inspection.
    To address and correct this unsafe condition EASA issued AD
2007-0287 [corresponding FAA AD 2008-22-14] that required a one-time
inspection of the affected bolts, Part Number (P/N) 23233-1, and
replacement of failed bolts with serviceable parts. EASA AD 2007-
0287 also required the installation of a tie wrap through the lower
bolts of the horizontal stabilizer control unit, to keep the bolt in
place in the event of a bolt head failure.
    Recent examination revealed that the bolts failed due to stress
corrosion, attributed to excessive bolt torque. Investigation of the
recently failed bolts showed that the modification as required by AD
2007-0287 is not adequate.
    To address the stress corrosion, the manufacturer of the bolt,
Goodrich, has introduced a bolt with an improved corrosion
protection, P/N 23233-3, through Service Bulletin 23100-27-29.
    For the reasons described above, this EASA AD retains the
requirements of AD 2007-0287, which is superseded, and adds the
requirement to replace the affected P/N 23233-1 bolts with improved
bolts. Concurrently, the tie-wrap must be removed.

    Loss of horizontal stabilizer function could result in partial loss
of control of the airplane. You may obtain further information by
examining the MCAI in the AD docket.

Relevant Service Information

    Fokker Services B.V. has issued Fokker Service Bulletin SBF100-27-
092, dated April 27, 2009. Goodrich has issued Service Bulletin 23100-
27-29, dated November 14, 2008. The actions described in this service
information are intended to correct the unsafe condition identified in
the MCAI.

FAA's Determination and Requirements of This Proposed AD

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

Differences Between This AD and the MCAI or Service Information

    We have reviewed the MCAI and related service information and, in
general, agree with their substance. But we might have found it
necessary to use different words from those in the MCAI to ensure the
AD is clear for U.S. operators and is enforceable. In making these
changes, we do not intend to differ substantively from the information
provided in the MCAI and related service information.
    We might also have proposed different actions in this AD from those
in the MCAI in order to follow FAA policies. Any such differences are
highlighted in a Note within the proposed AD.

Costs of Compliance

    Based on the service information, we estimate that this proposed AD
would affect about 4 products of U.S. registry.
    The actions that are required by AD 2008-22-14 and retained in this
proposed AD take about 3 work-hours per product, at an average labor
rate of $85 per work-hour. Based on these figures, the estimated cost
of the currently required actions is $255 per product.
    We estimate that it would take about 7 work-hours per product to
comply with the new basic requirements of this proposed AD. The average
labor rate is $85 per work-hour. Required parts would cost about $1,550
per product. Where the service information lists required parts costs
that are covered under warranty, we have assumed that there will be no
charge for these costs. As we do not control warranty coverage for
affected parties, some parties may incur costs higher than estimated
here. Based on these figures, we estimate the cost of the proposed AD
on U.S. operators to be $8,580, or $2,145 per product.

Authority for This Rulemaking

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

Regulatory Findings

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

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39

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

The Proposed Amendment

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

PART 39--AIRWORTHINESS DIRECTIVES

    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]

    2. The FAA amends Sec.  39.13 by removing Amendment 39-15710 (73 FR
70261, November 20, 2008) and adding the following new AD:

Fokker Services B.V.: Docket No. FAA-2010-0701; Directorate
Identifier 2010-NM-017-AD.

Comments Due Date

    (a) We must receive comments by September 10, 2010.

Affected ADs

    (b) This AD supersedes AD 2008-22-14, Amendment 39-15710.

Applicability

    (c) This AD applies to Fokker Services B.V. Model F.28 Mark 0100
airplanes, certificated in any category, all serial numbers.

Subject

    (d) Air Transport Association (ATA) of America Code 27: Flight
Controls.

Reason

    (e) The mandatory continuing airworthiness information (MCAI)
states:

    Two reports have been received where, during inspection of the
vertical stabilizer of F28 Mark 0100 aeroplanes, one of the bolts
that connect the horizontal stabilizer control unit actuator with
the dog-links was found broken (one on the nut side & one on the
head side). In both occasions, the bolt shaft was still present in
the connection and therefore the horizontal stabilizer function was
not affected. If a single dog-link connection fails, the complete
stabilizer load is taken up by the remaining dog-link connection. *
* *
    To address and correct this unsafe condition EASA [European
Aviation Safety Agency] issued AD 2007-0287 [corresponding FAA AD
2008-22-14] that required a one-time inspection of the affected
bolts, * * * and replacement of failed bolts with serviceable parts.
EASA AD 2007-0287 also required the installation of a tie wrap
through the lower bolts of the horizontal stabilizer control unit,
to keep the bolt in place in the event of a bolt head failure.
    Recent examination revealed that the bolts failed due to stress
corrosion, attributed to excessive bolt torque. Investigation of the
recently failed bolts showed that the modification as required by AD
2007-0287 is not adequate.
* * * * *
    Loss of horizontal stabilizer function could result in partial
loss of control of the airplane.

Compliance

    (f) You are responsible for having the actions required by this
AD performed within the compliance times specified, unless the
actions have already been done.

Restatement of Requirements of AD 2008-22-14

Actions and Compliance

    (g) Unless already done, within 6 months after December 26, 2008
(the effective date of AD 2008-22-14), do the following actions.
    (1) Perform a one-time inspection (integrity check) for failure
of the lower bolts of the stabilizer control unit dog-links, in
accordance with the Accomplishment Instructions of Fokker Service
Bulletin SBF100-27-091, dated August 31, 2007. If a failed bolt is
found, before further flight, replace the bolt with a serviceable
bolt in accordance with the Accomplishment Instructions of the
service bulletin.
    (2) Install a tie-wrap through the lower bolts of the stabilizer
control unit, in accordance with the Accomplishment Instructions of
Fokker Service Bulletin SBF100-27-091, dated August 31, 2007.

New Requirements of This AD: Actions

    (h) Within 30 months after the effective date of this AD, do the
actions specified in paragraphs (h)(1) and (h)(2) of this AD
concurrently. Accomplishing the actions of both paragraphs (h)(1)
and (h)(2) of this AD terminates the actions required by paragraph
(g) of this AD.
    (1) Remove the tie-wrap, P/N MS3367-2-9, from the lower bolts of
the horizontal stabilizer control unit, in accordance with the
Accomplishment Instructions of Fokker Service Bulletin SBF100-27-
092, dated April 27, 2009.
    (2) Remove the lower bolts, P/N 23233-1, of the horizontal
stabilizer control unit and install bolts, P/N 23233-3, in
accordance with the Accomplishment Instructions of Goodrich Service
Bulletin 23100-27-29, dated November 14, 2008.
    (i) After accomplishing the requirements of paragraph (h) of
this AD, do not install a bolt having P/N 23233-1 or a tie-wrap
having P/N MS3367-2-9.

FAA AD Differences

    Note 1: This AD differs from the MCAI and/or service information
as follows: No difference.

Other FAA AD Provisions

    (j) The following provisions also apply to this AD:
    (1) Alternative Methods of Compliance (AMOCs): The Manager,
International Branch, ANM-116, Transport Airplane Directorate, FAA,
has the authority to approve AMOCs for this AD, if requested using
the procedures found in 14 CFR 39.19. Send information to Attn: Tom
Rodriguez, Aerospace Engineer, International Branch, ANM-116,
Transport Airplane Directorate, FAA, 1601 Lind Avenue, SW., Renton,
Washington 98057-3356; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax<PHONE_NUMBER>.
Before using any approved AMOC on any airplane to which the AMOC
applies, notify your principal maintenance inspector (PMI) or
principal avionics inspector (PAI), as appropriate, or lacking a
principal inspector, your local Flight Standards District Office.
The AMOC approval letter must specifically reference this AD.
    (2) Airworthy Product: For any requirement in this AD to obtain
corrective actions from a manufacturer or other source, use these
actions if they are FAA-approved. Corrective actions are considered
FAA-approved if they are approved by the State of Design Authority
(or their delegated agent). You are required to assure the product
is airworthy before it is returned to service.
    (3) Reporting Requirements: For any reporting requirement in
this AD, under the provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act (44
U.S.C. 3501 et seq.), the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) has
approved the information collection requirements and has assigned
OMB Control Number 2120-0056.

Related Information

    (k) Refer to MCAI EASA Airworthiness Directive 2009-0216, dated
October 7, 2009; Fokker Service Bulletin SBF100-27-091, dated August
31, 2007; Fokker Service Bulletin SBF100-27-092, dated April 27,
2009; and Goodrich Service Bulletin 23100-27-29, dated November 14,
2008; for related information.

    Issued in Renton, Washington, on July 21, 2010.
Jeffrey E. Duven,
Acting Manager, Transport Airplane Directorate, Aircraft Certification
Service.
[FR Doc. 2010-18399 Filed 7-26-10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


State of California

AIR RESOURCES BOARD

EXECUTIVE ORDER R-06-007

Public Hearing to Consider the Adoption of a Proposed Regulation for
Mobile Cargo Handling Equipment at Ports and Intermodal Rail Yards

WHEREAS, on December 8, 2005, the Air Resources Board (the Board or ARB)
conducted a public hearing to consider adoption of regulation to reduce
emissions of diesel particulate matter (PM) and oxides of nitrogen (NOx)
from mobile cargo handling equipment that operate at ports and
intermodal rail yards in the State of California, as set forth in the
Initial Statement of Reasons released to the public on October 21, 2005;

WHEREAS, following the public hearing on December 8, 2005, the Board
adopted Resolution 05-62 in which the Board approved adoption of new
section 2479 of article 3, chapter 3, division 3, title 13, California
Code of Regulations (CCR), as set forth in Attachment A thereto;

WHEREAS, Resolution 05-62 directed the Executive Officer to take final
action to adopt the regulation set forth in Attachment A to Resolution
05-62, with specified modifications and such other conforming
modifications as may be appropriate, after making the  modified
regulatory language available for public comment for a period of at
least 15 days, provided that the Executive Officer shall consider such
written comments as may be submitted during this period, shall make
further modifications as may be appropriate in light of the comments
received, and shall present the regulation to the Board for further
consideration if she determines that this is warranted;

WHEREAS, on May 18, 2006, the modified regulatory text, reflecting the
modifications approved by the Board and other changes made to best
reflect the intent of the Board at the hearing, were made available for
public comment for a period of 15 days, with the changes to the
originally proposed text clearly indicated, in accordance with the
provisions of title 1, California Code of Regulations, section 44;
Attachment 1 hereto reflects the modified regulation as made available
for comment; and

WHEREAS, written comments were received during the 15-day comment period
and those comments have been considered by the Executive Officer.

NOW, THEREFORE, IT IS ORDERED that the recitals and findings contained
in Resolution 05-62 are incorporated by reference herein.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that adoption of new section 2479, title 13, CCR
are adopted as set forth in Attachment 1 hereto.

Executed this     17th       day of     October     , 2006, at
Sacramento, California.

/s/

Catherine Witherspoon

Executive Officer

Attachment

Executive Order R-06-007	-  PAGE  2 -


Meeting Report:  Alaska Fisheries Development Foundation, Anchorage, AK.

8//10/2010

11:00 AM to 12:20 PM

Participants

James Browning, Executive Director 	Alaska Fisheries Development
Foundation

Don Anderson	U.E. EPA

Washington, DC

Zaya Ponomareva	AFDF

Betsy Bicknell	ERG

Glenn E. Reed, President	Pacific Seafood Processors Association, Seattle

Kathleen Wu	ERG, Chantilly, VA

Doug Donagan	Environmental Consultant, representing several processors

Anne Jones	ERG, Lexington, VA

Mark Sheer	Attorney, representing several processors

Mike Clutter	Icicle Seafoods

Chris LaCroix	Copper River Seafoods

Chris Norris	Icicle Seafoods

Slim Jorgen	Yard Arm Knoll (?)

Betsy Bicknell (ERG) provided Jim Browning, AFDF, with these notes for
his review. No comments were received from AFDF and the notes were
finalized as delivered on October 25, 2010.

Betsy Bicknell (ERG) met with Mr. Browning, Ms. Zaya, Mr. Reed, and Mr.
Donagan in person on Tuesday morning, August 10 2010.  Other
participants listed above joined the meeting by phone.  Prior to the
meeting ERG had provided a list of potential discussion topics
(attached).

Don Anderson (EPA/OW/EAD) began the meeting by providing a retrospective
of the national regulations that apply to seafood processing facilities
in Alaska.  In 1974-5, EPA established regulations for seafood
processing in the U.S., including regulations that were specifically
crafted for Alaska.  For certain parts of the Alaska seafood processing
industry, EPA set two levels of limits.  Less stringent limits required
that waste be ground to less than 0.5” prior to discharge.  For
seafood processing centers, called “non-remote” areas in the
regulations, EPA set limits for TSS and oil and grease, based on
screening solids from the wastewater and their off-shore disposal.

Mr. Anderson explained that Alaskan seafood processing industry
representatives challenged the regulations in court.  The court upheld
EPA. In 1980, exercising its right to petition, industry petitioned EPA
to change the regulations because they were too costly. EPA suspended
the regulations in 1980, while considering the petition, and has never
lifted the suspension. In January 1981, EPA published a proposed a
response to the petition.  In the proposal, EPA found that Juneau should
be reclassified as “remote,” while Ketchikan, Petersburg, and
Cordova should retain the classification of non-remote and the more
stringent regulations.  While evaluating the petition, EPA evaluated two
alternatives for managing the seafood processing wastes: 1)screening and
barging for ocean disposal and 2) byproduct recovery.

EPA Region 10 developed a General Permit for seafood processing industry
in 2001.  Comments on the proposed permit encouraged EPA to respond to
the 1980 petition and encourage waste recovery through byproduct
recovery. EPA has started the re-evaluation process, beginning with
collecting information reflecting the current state of the industry.  In
April 2010, EPA sent a questionnaire to nine seafood processing
companies with operations in Ketchikan, Petersburg, Cordova, and Juneau.
 EPA requested information about costs, revenues, technologies, and
related issues.  EPA will use this information to evaluate the economic
impacts of reinstating the suspended regulations.  EPA will evaluate
primary economic impacts, such as loss of profit, line closures, plant
closures, and job losses.  EPA will also evaluate secondary economic
impacts on the communities in which the processors are located and
foreign trade. Responses to the questionnaire are due October 1.

To supplement the information collected by the questionnaire, EPA is
conducting a series of meetings and site visits in Alaska, August 9 –
19.  Betsy Bicknell, from ERG an EPA contractor, and Lindsay Guzzo, EPA
Region 10, will visit seafood processing and byproduct recovery plants
in Ketchikan, Petersburg, Juneau, Cordova, and Kodiak  They will meet
with other stakeholders (industry, Alaska government, academic).

Mr. Anderson explained the timeline for the response to the petition.
EPA plans to publish a Notice of Data Availability (NODA) in the Federal
Register in January 2011.  In addition to describing the data that EPA
has collected, Mr. Anderson that the NODA will describe EPA’s
anticipated response to the 1980 industry petition.  The NODA will be
open for comment.  Mr. Anderson hopes that EPA will be able to publish a
response (including implementing regulation) to the 1980 petition by
August 2011.

Mr. Browning asked about the timing of the EPA information collection
activities, May – October, the busiest time in the seafood processing
industry.  Mr. Anderson responded that he understands the industry cycle
and appreciates that the industry will provide the good data that EPA
needs to make good decisions.

Mr. Clutter, from Icicle Seafoods (which operates three seafood
byproduct recovery facilities integrated with seafood processing)
commented that he appreciated the opportunity to provide industry
perspective.  He appreciates that EPA will give weight to comments from
folks who have been in the business over the years.  He noted that there
is not a one-size-fits-all approach to managing seafood processing
waste.

Ms. Bicknell noted that prior to the meeting, Mr. Reed asked if
locations to which the regulations for “remote” areas apply might be
re-classified to “non-remote.”  Don Anderson explained that Kenai
and Dutch Harbor could be reclassified as non-remote.  EPA would need to
publish its intent and take comment on the proposed change, before any
change would take affect.  Although this would be a separate action from
the petition response, it would likely be done at the same time.

Ms. Bicknell explained that the existing regulations are effluent
guidelines for total suspended solids (TSS) and oil and grease (O&G).
These guidelines are used by the permitting authority (in this case,
ADEC) to develop permit discharge limits.  Ms. Bicknell noted that
permit limits may be more stringent than the guidelines (and include
limits for additional pollutants) as needed to protect water quality.
She also noted that although the limits are based on technologies that
EPA has determined are technically feasible and economically achievable,
facilities may use any approach they can devise to meet their permit
discharge limits.

Mr. Donagan asked if EPA was considering changing the effluent
guidelines for remote areas.  Mr. Anderson responded that it is
possible, but not likely.  The focus of the current effort is response
to the 1980 industry petition, that is, the guidelines for land-based
non-remote facilities.

Mr. Reed asked if the criteria for what is remote or non-remote are
included in the Clean Water Act.  Mr. Anderson explained that the CWA
requires EPA to consider factors such as the age and location of
facilities as it develops guidelines.  The criteria EPA used to classify
Alaska seafood processing centers as “remote” or “non-remote”
are discussed in the 1975 Development Document.  They are also discussed
in the 1980 Industry Petition and the Agency’s proposed response.
These documents are on the seafood processing questionnaire website.
EPA’s response to the industry petition will not change the criteria.

Mr. Reed commented that most of the questions on EPA’s list of
discussion topics seem focused on the economics of the byproducts
production. He encouraged EPA to get specific information from the few
stand-alone by-products plants about their economics.  He asked if EPA
would account for price fluctuations in its analysis of the economic
achievability.

Ms. Jones explained that EPA will conduct numerous analyses of the
sensitivity of the analysis outcome to price fluctuations and other
factors.

Mr. Anderson discussed the current planned visits to secondary
by-products plants.  The visits could be followed with tailored
information requests, similar to the questionnaire sent to seafood
processors.  He noted that information provided by the industry may be
claimed as Confidential Business Information (CBI).  The industry needs
to protect its information, but other stakeholders want to know how EPA
made its decision about the petition.  Sometimes, when there are limited
numbers of facilities, EPA must screen the information it releases even
more.

Mr. Reed expressed a concern that during the plant visits the production
people will tell EPA that they can do anything, without considering if
it is economical.

Mr. Browning asked if the economic analysis would include energy and
transportation costs. Mr. Anderson confirmed that it would.

Mr. Reed noted the impact of increased energy demand might be different
in small Alaska communities than elsewhere.  This is because the
electric power in coastal towns is generated by diesel powered
generators.  Increased energy demands would require burning more diesel
(to generate steam or to generate electricity).

Meeting participants discussed additional permitting requirements of
changing current disposal practices.  Ocean disposal of screened wastes
will probably require an ocean dumping permit.  By-products production
is not zero discharge and will require a modified NPDES permit (with
limits developed from the byproducts subcategory).  Air permits may also
be required.  All participants noted that rendering processes generate
obnoxious odors, so odor control must be taken into account in the
development of byproduct recovery facilities.

Mr. Reed noted that the scale of facilities for southeast Alaska will be
quite different than Kodiak, where they have 54,000 tons input He also
mentioned that production information is publicly available at
seafood.com

Doug Donogan agreed that investments would be required for odor control.
 He also suggested that EPA account for the impact of additional
byproducts (oil and meal) into the word markets. Would adding Alaska
production increase the supply enough that prices would be depressed.

Mr. Reed suggested that EPA research Omega Protein. It considered
starting a meal production plant 10 years ago, but did not do so because
it didn’t “pencil out.”

Mr. Browning recalled a panel discussion that took place at the February
2009 conference in Portland, OR, focused on fish processing byproducts.
He recalled some of the panelists (Joel Cougor, Aleutan Protein; Tony
Bimbo, seafood economist) declared that the Alaskan seafood processing
industry was “sitting on a goldmine.”  The industry participants in
the meeting scoffed at this characterization of seafood processing
wastes.  They noted that there is a resource, but the size of the waste
stream is critical in determining if byproducts can be recovered
economically.  They noted Dutch Harbor has 350 million pounds per year
in a 10 month season (white fish and salmon), vastly different than the
amount of fish processed in the non-remote processing centers in
southeast.

Mr. Anderson mentioned that EPA will compare the cost of screening and
barging for ocean disposal to the cost of byproduct recovery.  Because
byproduct recovery has some payback, it may be a lower cost waste
management alternative, even if it doesn’t pay for itself.  Mr. Reed
stressed that if the seafood processing facility doesn’t operate in
the black it will not be operating.

Ms. Bicknell asked if the meeting participants were aware of other uses
of fish processing waste. Mr. Browning mentioned that someone in Sitka
had used fish waste to produce biodiesel.  They found that this
biodiesel production required more energy than it produced.  None of the
meeting attendees was aware of the anaerobic digestion of fish
processing waste to generate methane.

Ms. Jones asked what critical factors determined if seafood processors
produce byproducts from their processing waste.  Mr. Clutter explained
that the volume of waste and the length of the season are critical
factors.  In terms of location, he noted that in the non-remote
locations that are the focus of EPA’s study, when they are processing
salmon it overshadows any other species.  Icicle operates three
byproduct plants.  They produce both meal and oil.  They have found it
is not economically feasible to produce meal without oil.

Mr. Reed suggested that most processors think about producing byproducts
every year, but if they can’t do it profitably, they won’t do it.

Location:  tidal flow moves effluent away versus a sheltered bay, like
Sitka, where the wastes accumulate.

 Mr. Clutter noted that EPA’s discussion points asked about a
processor sending its waste to another facility or take waste from
someone else.  He felt both approaches had elements that were outside
the processors control and for this reason were not likely to be
pursued.  What would a producer do if the other facility had an
equipment breakdown or other event and refused to take their waste?   If
they were taking waste from another facility, they would have little
control of its quality (e.g., freshness, whether it had metal
contaminants that could harm the processing equipment),

The group discussed other impediments to by product recovery:  odor
issues, possible need for an air permit (because of burning more
diesel).

After the meeting broke up, Mr. Browning mentioned a byproduct recovery
project planned for Sitka, called Mountlake Mining Process (Pete
Nicklason’s project).  He said that Alaska Import Export Development
Authority (AIEDA) was close to committing funds to finance the project
and that AIEDA was doing its “due diligence.”

 PAGE

 PAGE   1


[Federal Register Volume 79, Number 74 (Thursday, April 17, 2014)]
[Notices]
[Pages 21816-21818]
[FR Doc No: 2014-08685]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-71932; File No. SR-ISE-2014-21]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; International Securities Exchange,
LLC; Notice of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of Proposed Rule
Change To Amend Supplementary Material .13 to Rule 504

April 11, 2014.
    Pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934
(the ``Act''),\1\ and Rule 19b-4 thereunder,\2\ notice is hereby given
that, on April 3, 2014, the International Securities Exchange, LLC (the
``Exchange'' or the ``ISE'') filed with the Securities and Exchange
Commission the proposed rule change, as described in Items I and II
below, which items have been prepared by the self-regulatory
organization. The Commission is publishing this notice to solicit
comments on the proposed rule change from interested persons.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

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

    The ISE proposes to amend Supplementary Material .13 to Rule 504,
regarding Mini Options traded on the ISE, to replace the reference to
``GOOG'' with ``GOOGL''. The text of the proposed rule change is
available on the Exchange's Web site (http://www.ise.com), at the
principal office of the Exchange, 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 these statements may be examined at
the places specified in Item IV below. The self-regulatory organization
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 Exchange proposes to amend Supplementary Material .13 to Rule
504, regarding Mini Options traded on the ISE, to replace the reference
to ``GOOG'' with ``GOOGL''. This is a competitive filing that is based
on proposals recently submitted by the BOX Options Exchange LLC
(``BOX'') and the Chicago Board Options Exchange, Incorporated
(``CBOE'').\3\ The Exchange is proposing to make a change to
Supplementary Material .13 to enable the continued trading of Mini
Options on Google's class A shares. The Exchange is proposing to make
this change because, on April 2, 2014, Google issued a new class of
shares (class C) to its shareholders in lieu of a cash dividend
payment. Additionally, this new class C of shares will be given the
current Google ticker, ``GOOG''. As a result, a new ticker, ``GOOGL'',
will be issued to the class A shares. The Exchange is proposing to
change the Google ticker referenced in Supplementary Material .13 from
``GOOG'' to ``GOOGL''.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 71848 (April 2,
2014) (SR-CBOE-2014-030); SR-BOX-2014-13.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The purpose of this change is to ensure that Supplementary Material
.13 properly reflects the intention and practice of the Exchange to
trade Mini Options on only an exhaustive list of underlying securities
outlined in its rules. This change is meant to continue the inclusion
of class A shares of Google in the current list of underlying
securities that Mini Options can be traded on, while making it clear
that class C shares of Google are not part of that list as that class
of options has not been approved for Mini Option trading. As a result,
the proposed change will also help avoid confusion.
2. Statutory Basis
    The Exchange believes that its proposal is consistent with the
requirements of the Act and the rules and regulations thereunder that
are applicable to a national securities exchange, and, in particular,
with the requirements of Section 6(b) of the Act.\4\ In particular, the
proposal is consistent with Section 6(b)(5) of the Act,\5\ because is
designed to promote just and equitable principles of trade, remove
impediments to and perfect the mechanisms of a free and open market and
a national market system and, in general, to protect investors and the
public interest. Additionally, the Exchange believes the proposed rule
change is consistent with the Section 6(b)(5) \6\ requirement that the
rules of an exchange not be designed to permit unfair discrimination
between customers, issuers, brokers, or dealers.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b).
    \5\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5).
    \6\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In particular, the proposed rule change to change the Google class
A ticker to its new designation is consistent with the Act because the
proposed change is merely updating the corresponding ticker to allow
for continued Mini Option trading on Google's class A shares. The
proposed change will allow for continued benefit to investors by
providing them with additional investment alternatives.

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 not necessary or appropriate in
furtherance of the purposes of the Act. In this regard and as indicated
above, the Exchange notes that the rule change is being proposed as a
competitive response to a filings submitted by BOX and the CBOE.\7\ The
proposed change does not impose any burden on intramarket competition
because it applies to all members. There is no burden on intermarket
competition as the proposed change is merely attempting to update the
new ticker for Google class A for Mini Options. As a result, there will
be no substantive changes to the Exchange's operations or its rules.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ See supra note 3.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

    The Exchange has not solicited, and does not intend to solicit,
comments on this proposed rule change. The Exchange has not received
any unsolicited written comments from members or other interested
parties.

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

    Because the proposed rule change does not (i) Significantly affect
the protection of investors or the public interest; (ii) impose any
significant burden on competition; and (iii) become operative for 30
days from the date on which it was filed, 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 \8\ and Rule 19b-
4(f)(6)(iii) thereunder.\9\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \8\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A).
    \9\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6)(iii). In addition, Rule 19b-
4(f)(6)(iii) requires a self-regulatory organization to give the
Commission written notice of its intent to file 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 Commission is waiving this five-day pre-filing
requirement.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    A proposed rule change filed under Rule 19b-4(f)(6) \10\ normally
does not become operative for 30 days after the date of filing.
However, pursuant to Rule 19b-4(f)(6)(iii) \11\ the Commission may
designate a shorter time if such action is consistent with the
protection of investors and the public interest.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \10\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6).
    \11\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6)(iii).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange has asked the Commission to waive the five-day pre-
filing requirement and the 30-day operative delay so that the proposal
may become operative immediately upon filing. The Commission believes
that waiving the 30-day operative delay is consistent with the
protection of investors and the public interest, as it will allow the
Exchange to continue to list mini options on the Google Class A shares
following the issuance of a new class of Google shares (class C) on
April 2, 2014. For this reason, the Commission designates the proposed
rule change to be operative upon filing.\12\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \12\ 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 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.

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-ISE-2014-21 on the subject line.

Paper Comments

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

All submissions should refer to File Number SR-ISE-2014-21. 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, 100 F Street NE.,
Washington, DC 20549, on official business days between the hours of
10:00 a.m. and 3:00 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-ISE-2014-21 and should be
submitted on or before May 8, 2014.

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

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

Jill M. Peterson,
Assistant Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2014-08685 Filed 4-16-14; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011-01-P