[Federal Register Volume 81, Number 200 (Monday, October 17, 2016)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 71365-71367]
[FR Doc No: 2016-25034]

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

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

Bureau of Industry and Security

15 CFR Parts 740 and 746

[Docket No. 160915848-6952-01]
RIN 0694-AH12

Cuba: Revisions to License Exceptions

AGENCY: Bureau of Industry and Security, Commerce.

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: This rule amends a license exception to allow cargo aboard
aircraft to transit Cuba when that cargo is bound for destinations
other than Cuba. This rule also authorizes export and reexport of
certain items sold directly to individuals in Cuba under a license
exception. Finally, this rule revises the lists of ineligible Cuban
officials for purposes of certain license exceptions. BIS is publishing
this rule to further implement the administration's policy of
increasing engagement and commerce that benefits the Cuban people.

DATES: Effective: October 17, 2016.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Foreign Policy Division, Bureau of
Industry and Security, Phone:<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Background

    On December 17, 2014, the President announced a new approach in
U.S. policy toward Cuba. This approach recognized that increased
engagement and commerce benefits the American and Cuban people, and
sought to make the lives of ordinary Cubans easier and more prosperous.
In furtherance of that policy, and in coordination with the Department
of the Treasury's Office of Foreign Assets Control (OFAC), the Bureau
of Industry and Security published five rules amending the Export
Administration Regulation (EAR) between January 16, 2015, and March 16,
2016 (see 80 FR 2286, 80 FR 43314, 80 FR 56898, 81 FR 4580, and 81 FR
13972). Collectively these rules established License Exception Support
for the Cuban People (SCP) (Sec.  740.21 of the EAR) and revised
existing license exceptions and licensing policy in the EAR for Cuba.
    Today, BIS is taking this action in coordination with OFAC, which
is amending the Cuban Assets Control Regulations (CACR) (31 CFR part
515).
    This rule continues the President's policy of increasing engagement
and commerce between the United States and Cuba by making cargo
transiting Cuba via aircraft on temporary sojourn eligible for License
Exception Aircraft, Vessels and Spacecraft (AVS) (Sec.  740.15 of the
EAR), placing it on par with such cargo aboard vessels on temporary
sojourn to Cuba. This rule also makes a non-substantive clarifying edit
in describing the limits that apply to the transiting cargo.
Previously, one of those limits read: ``The cargo . . . does not enter
the Cuban economy. . . .'' This rule revises that limit to read: ``The
cargo . . . is not removed from the aircraft or vessel for use in Cuba.
. . .'' BIS believes that the latter more clearly expresses the
underlying concept, i.e., that the cargo must truly be in transit to be
eligible for this license exception. This final rule continues to apply
the other limits of License Exception AVS (that the cargo must not be
transferred to another vessel and must leave with the same vessel when
it departs) to aircraft as well as vessels without any substantive
change.
    In furtherance of the President's policy to support the Cuban
people, this rule also makes exports or reexports of eligible items
sold directly to eligible individuals in Cuba for their personal use or
their immediate family's personal use eligible for License Exception
SCP. To be eligible, the items must be designated as EAR99 or
controlled on the Commerce Control List (CCL) (Supplement No. 1 to Part
774 of the EAR) only for anti-terrorism reasons. Additionally, the
purchasers and end users must not be members of the Council of
Ministers, flag officers of the Revolutionary Armed Forces, or members
of the Politburo. This amendment to License Exception SCP facilitates
direct sales to individuals in Cuba by online retailers and others that
sell eligible consumer products directly to end users. This new
provision of License Exception SCP complements existing authorizations
in the EAR. License Exception SCP already authorizes the export or
reexport to Cuba of certain items for use by the Cuban private sector.
There is an existing case-by-case licensing policy for the export or
reexport to Cuba of items that would meet the needs of the Cuban
people, including items for wholesale and retail distribution for
domestic consumption by the Cuban people. Additionally, certain
donations to the Cuban people have been authorized pursuant to License
Exceptions Gift Parcels and Humanitarian Donations (GFT) (Sec.  740.12
of the EAR), Consumer Communications

Devices (CCD) (Sec.  740.19 of the EAR), and SCP.
    Finally, this rule revises the lists of Cuban government and Cuban
Communist Party officials that are ineligible for provisions of three
license exceptions: individual gift parcels (GFT, Sec.  740.12(a) of
the EAR), consumer communications devices (CCD, Sec.  740.19 of the
EAR), and software and commodities that will be used by the private
sector or by individuals to improve the free flow of communications or
support certain private sector activities in Cuba (SCP, Sec.
740.21(d)(4) of the EAR). Under this rule, ineligible recipients are
limited to members of the Council of Ministers, flag officers of the
Revolutionary Armed Forces, and members of the Politburo. BIS is
revising these lists to correspond to amendments that OFAC is making to
its definitions of prohibited officials of the Government of Cuba and
prohibited members of the Cuban Communist Party in Sec. Sec.  515.337
and 515.338 of the CACR, respectively.

Export Administration Act

    Although the Export Administration Act expired on August 20, 2001,
the President, through Executive Order 13222 of August 17, 2001, 3 CFR,
2001 Comp., p. 783 (2002), as amended by Executive Order 13637 of March
8, 2013, 78 FR 16129 (March 13, 2013), and as extended by the Notice of
August 4, 2016, 81 FR 52587 (August 8, 2016), has continued the Export
Administration Regulations in effect under the International Emergency
Economic Powers Act. BIS continues to carry out the provisions of the
Export Administration Act, as appropriate and to the extent permitted
by law, pursuant to Executive Order 13222 as amended by Executive Order
13637.

Rulemaking Requirements

    1. Executive Orders 13563 and 12866 direct agencies to assess all
costs and benefits of available regulatory alternatives and, if
regulation is necessary, to select regulatory approaches that maximize
net benefits (including potential economic, environmental, public
health and safety effects, distributive impacts, and equity). Executive
Order 13563 emphasizes the importance of quantifying both costs and
benefits, of reducing costs, of harmonizing rules, and of promoting
flexibility. This rule has been designated a ``significant regulatory
action,'' although not economically significant, under section 3(f) of
Executive Order 12866. Accordingly, the rule has been reviewed by the
Office of Management and Budget (OMB).
    2. Notwithstanding any other provision of law, no person is
required to respond to, nor shall any person be subject to a penalty
for failure to comply with, a collection of information subject to the
requirements of the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501 et
seq.) (PRA), unless that collection of information displays a currently
valid OMB control number. This rule involves a collection of
information approved under OMB control number 0694-0088--Simplified
Network Application Processing+ System (SNAP+) and the Multipurpose
Export License Application, which carries an annual estimated burden of
31,833 hours. BIS believes that this rule will have no significant
impact on that burden. To the extent that it has any impact, BIS
believes that this rule will reduce the paperwork burden to the public
because it will make some transactions that currently require a license
from BIS eligible for a license exception. In those instances,
exporters and reexporters will be relieved of the burden of applying
for a license.
    Send comments regarding this burden estimate or any other aspect of
this collection of information, including suggestions for reducing the
burden, to Jasmeet K. Seehra, Office of Management and Budget, by email
at<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or by fax to<PHONE_NUMBER> and to William Arvin
at<EMAIL_ADDRESS>    3. This rule does not contain policies with Federalism implications
as that term is defined under Executive Order 13132.
    4. The provisions of the Administrative Procedure Act (5 U.S.C.
553) requiring notice of proposed rulemaking and the opportunity for
public participation, and a delay in effective date, are inapplicable
because this regulation involves a military or foreign affairs function
of the United States (see 5 U.S.C. 553(a)(1)). This rule is a part of a
foreign policy initiative to change the nature of the relationship
between Cuba and the United States announced by the President on
December 17, 2014. Delay in implementing this rule to obtain public
comment would undermine the foreign policy objectives that the rule is
intended to implement. Further, no other law requires that a notice of
proposed rulemaking and an opportunity for public comment be given for
this rule. Because a notice of proposed rulemaking and an opportunity
for public comment are not required to be given for this rule under 5
U.S.C. 553, or by any other law, the requirements of the Regulatory
Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.) are not applicable.

List of Subjects

15 CFR Part 740

    Administrative practice and procedure, Exports, Reporting and
recordkeeping requirements.

15 CFR Part 746

    Exports, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.

    For the reasons set forth in the preamble, 15 CFR Chapter VII,
Subchapter C is amended as follows:

PART 740--[AMENDED]

0
1. The authority citation for part 740 continues to read as follows:

    Authority: 50 U.S.C. 4601 et seq.; 50 U.S.C. 1701 et seq.; 22
U.S.C. 7201 et seq.; E.O. 13026, 61 FR 58767, 3 CFR, 1996 Comp., p.
228; E.O. 13222, 66 FR 44025, 3 CFR, 2001 Comp., p. 783; Notice of
August 4, 2016, 81 FR 52587 (August 8, 2016).

0
2. Section 740.12 is amended by revising paragraphs (a)(2)(v)(A) and
(B) to read as follows:

Sec.  740.12   Gift parcels and humanitarian donations (GFT).

    (a) * * *
    (2) * * *
    (v) * * *
    (A) No gift parcel may be sent to any member of the Council of
Ministers or flag officer of the Revolutionary Armed Forces.
    (B) No gift parcel may be sent to any member of the Politburo.
* * * * *

0
3. Section 740.15 is amended by revising the introductory text and
paragraph (d)(6), removing the second (duplicate) ``note to paragraph
(d),'' redesignating paragraph (e) as paragraph (f), and adding a new
paragraph (e) to read as follows:

Sec.  740.15  Aircraft, vessels and spacecraft (AVS).

    This License Exception authorizes departure from the United States
of foreign registry civil aircraft on temporary sojourn in the United
States and of U.S. civil aircraft for temporary sojourn abroad; the
export of equipment and spare parts for permanent use on a vessel or
aircraft; exports to vessels or planes of U.S. or Canadian registry and
U.S. or Canadian Airlines' installations or agents; the export or
reexport of cargo that will transit Cuba on an aircraft or vessel on
temporary sojourn; and the export of spacecraft and components for
fundamental research. Generally, no License Exception symbol is
necessary

for export clearance purposes; however, when necessary, the symbol
``AVS'' may be used.
* * * * *
    (d) * * *
    (6) Cuba, eligible vessels and purposes. Only the types of vessels
listed in this paragraph (d)(6) departing for Cuba for the purposes
listed in this paragraph (d)(6) may depart for Cuba pursuant to this
paragraph (d). Vessels used to transport both passengers and items to
Cuba may transport automobiles only if the export or reexport of the
automobiles to Cuba has been authorized by a separate license issued by
BIS (i.e., not authorized by license exception).
    (i) Cargo vessels for hire for use in the transportation of items;
    (ii) Passenger vessels for hire for use in the transportation of
passengers and/or items; and
    (iii) Recreational vessels that are used in connection with travel
authorized by the Department of the Treasury, Office of Foreign Assets
Control (OFAC).

    Note to paragraph (d)(6)(iii):  Readers should also consult U.S.
Coast Guard regulations at 33 CFR part 107 Subpart B--Unauthorized
Entry into Cuban Territorial Waters.

* * * * *
    (e) Intransit cargo. Cargo laden on board an aircraft or vessel may
transit Cuba provided:
    (1) The aircraft or vessel is exported or reexported on temporary
sojourn to Cuba pursuant to paragraph (a) or (d) of this section or a
license from BIS; and
    (2) The cargo departs with the aircraft or vessel at the end of its
temporary sojourn to Cuba, is not removed from the aircraft or vessel
for use in Cuba and is not transferred to another aircraft or vessel
while in Cuba.
* * * * *

0
4. Section 740.19 is amended by revising paragraphs (c)(2)(i) and (ii)
to read as follows:

Sec.  740.19  Consumer communications devices (CCD).

* * * * *
    (c) * * *
    (2) * * *
    (i) Ineligible Cuban Government Officials. Members of the Council
of Ministers and flag officers of the Revolutionary Armed Forces.
    (ii) Ineligible Cuban Communist Party Officials. Members of the
Politburo.

0
5. Section 740.21 is amended by:
0
a. Removing the word ``or'' from the end of paragraph (b)(2);
0
b. Removing the period from the end of paragraph (b)(3) and adding in
its place ``; or'';
0
c. Adding paragraph (b)(4) and;
0
d. Revising paragraphs (d)(4)(ii) and (iii).
    The addition and revisions read as follows:

Sec.  740.21  Support for the Cuban People (SCP).

* * * * *
    (b) * * *
    (4) Items sold directly to individuals in Cuba for their personal
use or their immediate family's personal use, other than officials
identified in paragraphs (d)(4)(ii) or (iii) of this section.
* * * * *
    (d) * * *
    (4) * * *
    (ii) Members of the Council of Ministers and flag officers of the
Revolutionary Armed Forces; and
    (iii) Members of the Politburo.
* * * * *

PART 746--[AMENDED]

0
6. The authority citation for part 746 continues to read:

    Authority:  50 U.S.C. 4601 et seq.; 50 U.S.C. 1701 et seq.; 22
U.S.C. 287c; Sec 1503, Pub. L. 108-11, 117 Stat. 559; 22 U.S.C.
6004; 22 U.S.C. 7201 et seq.; 22 U.S.C. 7210; E.O. 12854, 58 FR
36587, 3 CFR, 1993 Comp., p. 614; E.O. 12918, 59 FR 28205, 3 CFR,
1994 Comp., p. 899; E.O. 13222, 66 FR 44025, 3 CFR, 2001 Comp., p.
783; E.O. 13338, 69 FR 26751, 3 CFR, 2004 Comp., p 168; Presidential
Determination 2003-23, 68 FR 26459, 3 CFR, 2004 Comp., p. 320;
Presidential Determination 2007-7, 72 FR 1899, 3 CFR, 2006 Comp., p.
325; Notice of May 3, 2016, 81 FR 27293 (May 5, 2016); Notice of
August 4, 2016, 81 FR 52587 (August 8, 2016).

0
7. Section 746.2 is amended by revising paragraph (a)(1)(x) to read as
follows:

Sec.  746.2  Cuba.

    (a) * * *
    (1) * * *
    (x) Aircraft, vessels and spacecraft (AVS) for certain aircraft on
temporary sojourn; equipment and spare parts for permanent use on a
vessel or aircraft, and ship and plane stores; vessels on temporary
sojourn; or cargo transiting Cuba on aircraft or vessels on temporary
sojourn (see Sec.  740.15(a), (b), (d), and (e) of the EAR).
* * * * *

    Dated: October 11, 2016.
Matthew S. Borman,
Deputy Assistant Secretary for Export Administration.
[FR Doc. 2016-25034 Filed 10-14-16; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 3510-33-P


TELEPHONE CALL RECORD

    Incoming Call

 _ Outgoing Call

Account & Task Number

0<IP_ADDRESS>

Project Name

National Strategy, Evaluation of Category Discharges

Date

4/18/06

Time

4:00pm

Person Calling

Bryan Lange, Engineer

Activity

TRI reasonableness check, dioxin

Person Called

Don Nelson, Washington Department of Ecology permit writer for Kimberly
Clark mill in Everett

Telephone No.

(360) 407-6940

General Subject

Notes from telephone conversation between Don Nelson, Washington Ecology
and Bryan Lange, ERG held on April 18, 2006.

TOPICS DISCUSSED AND ACTION TAKEN

Q: The permit for Kimberly Clark mill in Everett WA contains a Special
Condition (SP16) that requires them to submit study reports regarding
their furan discharges, can you send those reports?

Mr. Nelson faxed over a copy of the KC reports from 2004 and 2005
describing the actions and sampling with respect to control of furans.
The mill attributes furans largely to the raw water. Neither report
mentions anything about the dioxins and salt hog-fuel.

Q: Do other Washington mills have furan compliance issues?

Furan limits are not consistent, KC is 10 ppq and Weyerhaeuser
Cosmopolis had not had furans compliance issues because their limit was
31.9 ppq.

Q: I heard Weyerhaeuser planed to close the Cosmopolis mill middle of
next year, is that correct?

They plan to close in August of 2006.

Q: Has KC submitted study reports for dioxin? I spoke to Jim Ketchum he
indicated that salt laden hog fuel (specifically the hog fuel boilers
baghouse ash system) was a key component of dioxin formation. Has the
mill submitted info that would elaborate on that? Are there other mills
that burn salt-laden wood waste?

There isn’t a dioxin compliance problem at KC so no study reports have
been submitted.

Washington Department of Ecology doesn’t keep track of where the hog
fuel comes from.  No mills have logs floated to the mill, but KC has a
chip facility outside the mill that probably receives floated logs.
Lots of mills buy chips from Canada. Up there it’s cheaper to
transport them that way.  The boiler MACT will reduce the practice of
burning salt-laden wood waste because of HCl formation. We have
considered asking KC to test their chips for dioxin.

The Ranier mill in Pt. Angeles was able to reduce their dioxin by
installed a clarifier for their quenching water back in the 90’s, but
that mill has since closed.


[Federal Register: July 1, 2008 (Volume 73, Number 127)]
[Notices]
[Page 37464]
[DOCID:fr01jy08-46]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES

Food and Drug Administration

[Docket No. FDA-2004-N-0188] (formerly Docket No. 2004N-0081)

Agency Information Collection Activities; Announcement of Office
of Management and Budget Approval; Request for Designation as Country
Not Subject to the Restrictions Applicable to Human Food and Cosmetics
Manufactured From, Processed With, or Otherwise Containing, Material
From Cattle

AGENCY: Food and Drug Administration, HHS.

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) is announcing that a
collection of information entitled ``Request for Designation as Country
not Subject to the Restrictions Applicable to Human Food and Cosmetics
Manufactured from, Processed With, or Otherwise Containing, Material
from Cattle'' has been approved by the Office of Management and Budget
(OMB) under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Jonna Capezzuto, Office of the Chief
Information Officer (HFA-250), Food and Drug Administration, 5600
Fishers Lane, Rockville, MD 20857,<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: In the Federal Register of April 17, 2008
(73 FR 20785), the agency announced that the proposed information
collection had been submitted to OMB for review and clearance under 44
U.S.C. 3507. An agency may not conduct or sponsor, and a person is not
required to respond to, a collection of information unless it displays
a currently valid OMB control number. OMB has now approved the
information collection and has assigned OMB control number 0910-0623.
The approval expires on June 30, 2011. A copy of the supporting
statement for this information collection is available on the Internet
at http://www.reginfo.gov/public/do/PRAMain.

    Dated: June 24, 2008.
Jeffrey Shuren,
Associate Commissioner for Policy and Planning.
[FR Doc. E8-14882 Filed 6-30-08; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4160-01-S


[Federal Register Volume 85, Number 99 (Thursday, May 21, 2020)]
[Notices]
[Page 30956]
[FR Doc No: 2020-10994]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

[EPA-HQ-ORD-2015-0635; FRL-10009-79-ORD]

Board of Scientific Counselors (BOSC) Chemical Safety for
Sustainability and Health and Environmental Risk Assessment
Subcommittee Meeting--May 2020

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Notice of public meeting.

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

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), Office of Research
and Development (ORD), gives notice of a meeting of the Board of
Scientific Counselors (BOSC) Chemical Safety for Sustainability and
Health and Environmental Risk Assessment (CSS-HERA) Subcommittee to
review their responses to charge questions on the draft FY 19-22
Strategic Research Action Plan (StRAP). Due to unforeseen
administrative circumstances, EPA is announcing this meeting with less
than 15 calendar days' notice.

DATES: The videoconference meeting will be held on Wednesday, May 27,
2020, from 1 p.m. to 4 p.m. (EDT). Meeting times are subject to change.
This meeting is open to the public. Those who wish to attend must
register by May 26, 2020. Comments must be received by May 25, 2020, to
be considered by the subcommittee. Requests for the draft agenda or
making a presentation at the meeting will be accepted until May 25,
2020.

ADDRESSES: Instructions on how to connect to the videoconference will
be provided upon registration at https://www.eventbrite.com/e/us-epa-bosc-chemical-safety-for-sustainability-css-and-health-and-environmental-risk-assessment-tickets-104092351024. Attendees should
register no later than on May 26, 2020.
    Submit your comments to Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-ORD-2015-0635 by one
of the following methods:
     www.regulations.gov: Follow the online instructions for
submitting comments.
    [ssquf] Note: Comments submitted to the www.regulations.gov website
are anonymous unless identifying information is included in the body of
the comment.
     Email: Send comments by electronic mail (email) to:
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Attention Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-ORD-2015-0635.
    [ssquf] Note: Comments submitted via email are not anonymous. The
sender's email will be included in the body of the comment and placed
in the public docket which is made available on the internet.
    Instructions: All comments received, including any personal
information provided, will be included in the public docket without
change and may be made available online at www.regulations.gov.
Information claimed to be Confidential Business Information (CBI) or
other information whose disclosure is restricted by statute will not be
included in the public docket, and should not be submitted through
www.regulations.gov or email. For additional information about the
EPA's public docket visit the EPA Docket Center homepage at http://www.epa.gov/dockets/.
    Public Docket: Publicly available docket materials may be accessed
Online at www.regulations.gov.
    Copyrighted materials in the docket are only available via hard
copy. The telephone number for the ORD Docket Center is<PHONE_NUMBER>.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: The Designated Federal Officer (DFO),
Tom Tracy, via phone/voice mail at:<PHONE_NUMBER>; or via email at:
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Any member of the public interested in receiving a
draft agenda, attending the meeting, or making a presentation at the
meeting should contact Tom Tracy.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The Board of Scientific Counselors (BOSC) is
a federal advisory committee that provides advice and recommendations
to EPA's Office of Research and Development on technical and management
issues of its research programs. Meeting agenda and materials will be
posted to https://www.epa.gov/bosc.
    Proposed agenda items for the meeting include but are not limited
to the following: Review of charge questions, draft subcommittee
report, and subcommittee discussion.
    Information on Services Available: For information on translation
services, access, or services for individuals with disabilities, please
contact Tom Tracy at<PHONE_NUMBER> or<EMAIL_ADDRESS>To request
accommodation of a disability, please contact Tom Tracy at least ten
days prior to the meeting to give the EPA adequate time to process your
request.

    Authority: Pub. L. 92-463, section 1, Oct. 6, 1972, 86 Stat.
770.

    Dated: May 14, 2020.
Mary Ross,
Director, Office of Science Advisor, Policy, and Engagement.
[FR Doc. 2020-10994 Filed 5-20-20; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


[Federal Register Volume 86, Number 190 (Tuesday, October 5, 2021)]
[Notices]
[Page 54992]
[FR Doc No: 2021-21635]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Coast Guard

[Docket No. USCG-2021-0735]

Policy Letter: Change 1 to CG-MMC Policy Letter 01-21, Guidelines
for Qualifying for STCW Endorsements for Basic and Advanced IGF Code
Operations

AGENCY: Coast Guard, Homeland Security (DHS).

ACTION: Notice of availability.

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

SUMMARY: The Coast Guard announces the availability of Change 1 to CG-
MMC Policy Letter 01-21, Guidelines for Qualifying for STCW
Endorsements for Basic and Advanced IGF Code Operations. The Coast
Guard will use applicable regulations and this policy to evaluate
whether mariners may be issued endorsements for Basic and Advanced IGF
Code Operations.

DATES: The policies announced in Change 1 to CG-MMC Policy Letter 01-21
are effective as of September 20, 2021.

ADDRESSES: To view the policy letter mentioned in this notice, search
the docket number USCG-2021-0735 using the Federal eRulemaking Portal
at https://www.regulations.gov.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For information about this document,
contact James Cavo, Mariner Credentialing Program Policy Division (CG-
MMC-2), Coast Guard; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>; email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The Coast Guard is revising CG-MMC Policy
Letter 01-21 to reduce the amount of seagoing service required to renew
an endorsement for Basic or Advanced IGF Code Operations and to add an
additional method to renew the endorsement by providing evidence of
being a qualified instructor of a relevant course.
    The seagoing service option to renew a Basic or Advanced IGF Code
Operations endorsement in the original policy letter exceeds the
seagoing service requirement to initially qualify for an STCW
endorsement in Basic IGF Code Operations. Holding an STCW endorsement
for Advanced Liquefied Gas Tanker Cargo Operations or Basic Liquefied
Gas Tanker Cargo Operations is a method to qualify for the Basic IGF
Code endorsement. The seagoing service requirement to qualify for
either an Advanced Liquefied Gas Tanker Cargo Operations endorsement or
an Basic Liquefied Gas Tanker Cargo Operations endorsement is 90 days.
This change reduces the seagoing service required as an option to renew
an STCW endorsement for Basic IGF Code Operations to 90 days. In
addition, this change notice reduces the seagoing service required as
an option to renew an STCW for Advanced IGF Code Operations to 90 days.
    Methods to qualify for renewal of an STCW endorsement in IGF Code
Operations include completion of refresher training, evidence of being
a qualified instructor of a relevant course, or seagoing service.
Mariners will also need to meet the applicable requirements in 46 CFR
10.227 for the renewal of their MMC.
    This notice is issued under authority of 5 U.S.C. 552(a).

    Dated: September 20, 2021.
J.G. Lantz,
U.S. Coast Guard, Director of Commercial Regulations and Standards.
[FR Doc. 2021-21635 Filed 10-4-21; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 9110-04-P


[Federal Register Volume 74, Number 120 (Wednesday, June 24, 2009)]
[Notices]
[Pages 30191-30192]
[FR Doc No: E9-14726]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-60132; File No. SR-FINRA-2009-015]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; Financial Industry Regulatory
Authority, Inc.; Order Approving Proposed Rule Change Relating to
Expedited Administration of Promissory Note Cases

June 17, 2009.
    On April 7, 2009, the Financial Industry Regulatory Authority, Inc.
(``FINRA'') (f/k/a National Association of Securities Dealers, Inc.
(``NASD'')) filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (``SEC''
or ``Commission''), pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the Securities
Exchange Act of 1934 (``Exchange Act'' or ``Act'') \1\ and Rule 19b-4
thereunder,\2\ a proposed rule change to the Code of Arbitration
Procedure for Industry Disputes (``Industry Code''). The proposed rule
change was published for comment in the Federal Register on May 14,
2009.\3\ The Commission received no comments on the proposed rule
change.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1).
    \2\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4.
    \3\ See Exchange Act Release No. 59885 (May 7, 2009); 74 FR
22788 (May 14, 2009).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

I. Description of the Proposal

    FINRA proposed to adopt Rule 13806 of the Code of Arbitration
Procedure for Industry Disputes (``Industry Code''), to establish
procedures to expedite the administration of arbitrations in which a
member's only claim is that an associated person failed to pay money
owed on a promissory note; and to amend Rules 13214 and 13600 of the
Industry Code to make conforming changes.
    In order to proceed under proposed new Rule 13806, a claimant would
not be permitted to include any additional allegations in the Statement
of Claim. FINRA stated that, in the absence of additional allegations
by members or associated persons, promissory note cases involve
straightforward contracts with few documents being entered into
evidence. The new procedures would streamline the process for
promissory note cases and reduce expenses for the parties while
maintaining the procedural safeguards in the Industry Code for the
associated person against whom a member asserts a claim.
    Specifically, under the proposed procedures:
     Parties would choose a single public arbitrator from the
roster of arbitrators approved to hear statutory discrimination
claims,\4\ unless an associated person files a counterclaim or third
party claim of more than $100,000, exclusive of interest or expenses,
or the counterclaim or third party claim is unspecified or does not
request money damages.\5\ In FINRA's view, the arbitrators on this
roster would be especially suited to resolve these disputes because of
the depth of their experience and their familiarity with employment
law;
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ See Rule 13802(c)(3). These specially qualified arbitrators
are attorneys familiar with employment law who have at least ten
years of legal experience. In addition, a chair or single arbitrator
may not have represented primarily the views of employers or of
employees within the last five years. Primarily means 50 percent or
more of the arbitrator's business or professional activities within
the last five years.
    \5\ The $100,000 threshold was chosen because FINRA recently
raised the threshold for a single chair-qualified arbitrator in all
cases to $100,000. Under the rule change, if the amount of a claim
is more than $100,000, exclusive of interest and expenses, or is
unspecified, or if the claim does not request money damages, the
panel will consist of three arbitrators, unless the parties agree in
writing to one arbitrator. See Exchange Act Release No. 59340
(February 2, 2009), 74 FR 6335 (February 6, 2009) (SR-FINRA-2008-
047).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

     If the associated person does not file an answer,
simplified discovery procedures would apply \6\ and, regardless of the
amount in controversy, the single arbitrator would render an award
based on the pleadings and other materials submitted by the parties.
The arbitrator would be paid an honorarium

of $125 for each arbitration resolved in this manner; \7\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ Rule 13800(d) (Simplified Arbitration--Discovery and
Additional Evidence) provides for limited discovery in arbitrations
involving $25,000 or less, exclusive of interest and expenses.
    \7\ In simplified arbitration proceedings administered under
Rules 12800 and 13800 (Simplified Arbitration), the arbitrator
honorarium is $125. The honorarium under proposed Rule 13806 is
intended to be consistent with these rules.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

     If the associated person files an answer (but does not
seek any additional relief or assert any counterclaims or third party
claims), regular discovery procedures would apply \8\ and, regardless
of the amount in controversy, the single arbitrator would hold a
hearing; and
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \8\ The 13500 series of rules would provide for prehearing
procedures and discovery in these cases.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

     If the associated person files a counterclaim or third
party claim, then regular discovery procedures would apply and panel
composition would be based on the amount of the counterclaim or third
party claim. If the counterclaim and/or third party claim is not more
than $100,000, exclusive of interest and expenses, the Director \9\
would appoint a single public arbitrator from the roster of arbitrators
approved to hear statutory discrimination claims. If the counterclaim
and/or third party claim is more than $100,000, exclusive of interest
and expenses, then the Director would appoint a three-arbitrator panel.
The Director would appoint one public arbitrator from the roster of
arbitrators approved to hear statutory discrimination claims who would
serve as chairperson, one arbitrator from the public roster, and one
arbitrator from the non-public roster. If the counterclaim or third
party claim is filed after a single arbitrator is appointed, and a
three-arbitrator panel is required, the Director would retain the
appointed arbitrator as chair and appoint two additional arbitrators
(one public and one non-public arbitrator). Regardless of whether the
panel is composed of one or three arbitrators, FINRA would pay the
arbitrators the honoraria provided for in the Industry Code for
arbitrations resolved by a hearing.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \9\ Rule 13100(k) defines the term ``Director'' to mean the
``Director of FINRA Dispute Resolution. Unless the Code provides
that the Director may not delegate a specific function, the term
includes FINRA staff to whom the Director has delegated authority.''
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    FINRA has proposed to amend Rule 13214 (Payment of Arbitrators) to
reflect that the rule applies to arbitrator honoraria except as
specified in new Rule 13806(f) or as specifically excluded in Rule
13214. Under the proposal, FINRA would pay an arbitrator an honorarium
of $125 for each arbitration in which the associated person does not
file an answer and the award is based on the arbitrator's review of the
pleadings and other materials submitted by the parties. As these are
expedited proceedings, FINRA would not pay an honorarium for resolving
a discovery-related motion without a hearing session or for resolving a
contested motion concerning issuance of a subpoena without a hearing
session. In instances where full discovery would be conducted under the
13500 series of rules, FINRA would pay the honorarium prescribed in
Rule 13214 for discovery-related motions without a hearing session and
for contested motions concerning issuance of a subpoena without a
hearing session.
    FINRA, in addition, proposed to amend Rule 13600 (Required
Hearings) to reflect that a hearing will be held unless new Rule
13806(e)(1) provides otherwise. Under the proposal, if the associated
person does not file an answer, no initial prehearing conference or
hearing would be held. Generally, in the absence of additional
allegations by members or associated persons, promissory note cases
involve straightforward contracts with few documents entered into
evidence. FINRA believes that, in these situations, promissory note
cases would be processed more quickly and efficiently and expenses
would be reduced for the parties and the forum if the arbitrator were
to render the award on the pleadings and other materials submitted by
the parties.\10\ In FINRA's view, the new procedures would not
negatively impact its administration of other cases filed in the forum.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \10\ The rationale for the proposed rule change was confirmed in
a phone conversation with Margo Hassan and Ken Andrichik of FINRA,
on May 6, 2009.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

II. Discussion

    After careful review, the Commission finds that the proposed rule
change is consistent with the requirements of the Act and the rules and
regulations thereunder applicable to a national securities
association.\11\ In particular, the Commission finds that the proposed
rule change is consistent with Section 15A(b)(6) of the Act,\12\ in
that it is designed, among other things, to prevent fraudulent and
manipulative acts and practices; 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.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \11\ In approving the proposed rule change, the Commission has
considered the rule change's impact on efficiency, competition, and
capital formation. 15 U.S.C. 78c(f).
    \12\ 15 U.S.C. 78o-3(b)(6).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Commission believes that the proposed rule change will protect
the public interest by helping to ensure that promissory note cases are
processed quickly and efficiently, and by helping to reduce expenses
for the parties and the forum without adversely affecting the
administration of other cases filed with the forum.

III. Conclusion

    For the foregoing reasons, the Commission finds that the proposed
rule change is consistent with the Act and the rules and regulations
thereunder applicable to a national securities association.
    It is therefore ordered, pursuant to Section 19(b)(2) of the
Act,\13\ that the proposed rule change (SR-FINRA-2007-015) be and
hereby is approved.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \13\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(2).
    \14\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12).

    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets,
pursuant to delegated authority.\14\
Florence E. Harmon,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. E9-14726 Filed 6-23-09; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8010-01-P