[Federal Register Volume 86, Number 184 (Monday, September 27, 2021)]
[Notices]
[Pages 53358-53365]
[FR Doc No: 2021-20818]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-93097; File No. SR-FINRA-2021-015]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; Financial Industry Regulatory
Authority, Inc.; Order Approving a Proposed Rule Change To Amend FINRA
Rules 1210 (Registration Requirements) and 1240 (Continuing Education
Requirements)

September 21, 2021.

I. Introduction

    On June 3, 2021, the Financial Industry Regulatory Authority, Inc.
(``FINRA'') 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'') \1\ and Rule 19b-4
thereunder,\2\ a proposed rule change to amend FINRA Rules 1240
(Continuing Education Requirements) and 1210 (Registration
Requirements) to, among other things, (1) require that the Regulatory
Element of FINRA's continuing education program for registered persons
of FINRA members (``CE Program'') be tailored to each registration
category and completed annually rather than every three years and (2)
provide a way for individuals to maintain their qualifications
following the termination of registration through continuing education.
The proposed rule change was published for comment in the Federal
Register on June 24, 2021.\3\ On July 23, 2021, FINRA consented to
extend until September 22, 2021, the time period in which the
Commission must approve the proposed rule change, disapprove the
proposed rule change, or institute proceedings to determine whether to
approve or disapprove the proposed rule change.\4\ On August 12, 2021,
FINRA responded to the comment letters received in response to the
Notice.\5\ This order approves the proposed rule change.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1).
    \2\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4.
    \3\ See Exchange Act Release No. 92183 (Jun. 15, 2021), 86 FR
33427 (Jun. 24, 2021) (File No. SR-FINRA-2021-015) (``Notice'').
    \4\ See letter from Afshin Atabaki, Special Advisor and
Associate General Counsel, FINRA, to Edward Schellhorn, Special
Counsel, Division of Trading and Markets, Commission, dated July 23,
2021. This letter is available at https://www.finra.org/sites/default/files/2021-07/SR-FINRA-2021-015-Extension1.pdf.
    \5\ See letter from Afshin Atabaki, Special Advisor and
Associate General Counsel, FINRA, to Vanessa Countryman, Secretary,
Commission, dated August 12, 2021, 2021 (``FINRA Letter''). The
FINRA Letter is available at https://www.sec.gov/comments/sr-finra-2021-015/srfinra2021015-9135950-247347.pdf.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

II. Description of the Proposed Rule Change

A. Background

    As discussed in the Notice, FINRA's CE Program is codified under
Rule 1240. The CE Program currently requires registered persons to
complete continuing education consisting of a Regulatory Element and a
Firm Element.\6\ The Regulatory Element, which is administered by
FINRA, focuses on regulatory requirements and industry standards,\7\
while the Firm Element is provided by each firm and focuses on, among
other things, securities products, services and strategies the firm
offers, firm policies, and industry trends.\8\ FINRA is proposing to
amend Rule 1240 and make conforming amendments to Rule 1210 to modify
aspects of both the Regulatory Element and the Firm Element.\9\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ See FINRA Rule 1240. See also FINRA Rule 1210.07 (All
Registered Persons Must Satisfy the Regulatory Element of Continuing
Education).
    \7\ FINRA's website describes the Regulatory Element as being
focused on compliance, regulatory, ethical and sales practice
standards. According to FINRA, its content is derived from industry
rules and regulations, and accepted standards and practices in the
industry. Moreover, participants must demonstrate proficiency in
order to satisfy the continuing education requirements. See https://www.finra.org/registration-exams-ce/continuing-education#regulatory.
    \8\ See Notice, 86 FR at 33428.
    \9\ FINRA stated that the proposed rule change was developed in
close consultation with the Securities Industry/Regulatory Council
(``CE Council'') and discussions with stakeholders, including the
North American Securities Administrators Association (``NASAA'').
Specifically, FINRA stated that the proposed changes to the CE
Program are based in part on the CE Council's September 2019
recommendations to enhance the CE Program. See Notice, 86 FR at
33429.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In addition, FINRA stated in the Notice that it and the CE Council
also plan to enhance the CE Program in other ways that do not require
changes to FINRA's rules.\10\ Among other things, FINRA and the CE
Council will work together to incorporate a variety of instructional
formats (including a mobile-compatible format) and provide firms with
advance notice of Regulatory Element topics as well as additional
resources and guidance to help firms develop effective Firm Element
training programs.\11\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \10\ See Notice, 86 FR at 33428.
    \11\ See id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

B. Transition to an Annual Regulatory Element for Each Registration
Category

    Currently, FINRA Rule 1240(a) initially requires a registered
person to complete the applicable Regulatory Element within 120 days
after the person's second registration anniversary date and,
thereafter, within 120 days after every third registration anniversary
date.\12\ FINRA's proposed rule change would amend FINRA Rule 1240(a)
and Rule 1210.07 to require registered persons to complete the
Regulatory Element of the CE Program annually by December 31. Firms,
however, would have the flexibility to require their registered persons
to complete the Regulatory Element sooner than December 31, which would
allow firms to coordinate the timing of the Regulatory Element with
other training requirements, including the Firm Element.\13\ Similarly,
the proposed rule change would preserve FINRA's ability to extend the
time by which a registered person must complete the Regulatory Element
for good cause shown if requested in writing and with supporting
documentation.\14\ Consistent

with current requirements, individuals who fail to complete their
Regulatory Element within the prescribed period would be automatically
designated as ``CE inactive'' \15\ in the Central Registration
Depository (``CRD'') system \16\ until the requirements of the
Regulatory Element have been satisfied.\17\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \12\ See FINRA Rule 1240(a)(1).
    \13\ See Notice, 86 FR at 33429. FINRA also stated that
individuals who would be registering as a representative or
principal for the first time on or after the implementation date of
the proposed rule change would be required to complete their initial
Regulatory Element for that registration category in the next
calendar year following their registration. In addition, subject to
specified conditions, individuals who would be reregistering as a
representative or principal on or after the implementation date of
the proposed rule change would also be required to complete their
initial Regulatory Element for that registration category in the
next calendar year following their reregistration. See id. at 33429.
    \14\ See proposed Rule 1240(a)(2). See also Notice, 86 FR at
33429. FINRA may also grant conditional examination waivers
requiring individuals to complete the Regulatory Element by a
specified date. Non-registered individuals who are participating in
the Financial Services Affiliate Waiver Program (``FSAWP'') under
Rule 1210.09 (``FSAWP Participants'') are also subject to the
Regulatory Element. See Notice, 86 FR at 33428.
    \15\ See proposed Rule 1240(a)(2). A CE inactive person is
prohibited from performing, or being compensated for, any activities
requiring FINRA registration, including supervision. Additionally,
if registered persons remain CE inactive for two consecutive years,
they must requalify by retaking required examinations (or obtain a
waiver of the applicable qualification examinations). See Notice, 86
FR at 33428.
    \16\ See https://www.finra.org/registration-exams-ce/classic-crd. As stated on the website, FINRA integrated the registration
filing functionality that supports the CRD Program into FINRA
Gateway, available at https://www.finra.org/filing-reporting/finra-gateway. The standalone CRD features were retired August 21, 2021.
    \17\ See Notice, 86 FR at 33428.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    FINRA stated that the current content of the Regulatory Element is
broad in nature, applying to both representatives and principals in a
single format that leads individuals through a story depicting
scenarios that they may encounter in the course of their work.\18\ The
proposed rule change would instead tailor the content of the Regulatory
Element to each registration category. Thus, registered persons would
be required to complete content specifically designed for each
representative or principal registration category that they hold.\19\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \18\ See id. FINRA stated that the Regulatory Element currently
consists of a subprogram for registered persons generally, and a
subprogram for principals and supervisors. According to FINRA, while
some of the current Regulatory Element content is unique to
particular registration categories, most of the content has broad
application to both representatives and principals. FINRA also
stated that the Regulatory Element was originally designed at a time
when most individuals had to complete the Regulatory Element at a
test center, and its design was shaped by the limitations of the
test center-based delivery model. Since 2015, FINRA has transitioned
the delivery of the Regulatory Element to an online platform (``CE
Online''), which allows individuals to complete the content online
at a location of their choosing, including their private residence.
According to FINRA, the transition to CE Online has enhanced FINRA's
ability to update continuing education content in a timelier fashion
and to develop content that is tailored to each registration
category as well as to present the materials in an optimal learning
format. See id.
    \19\ See proposed Rules 1240(a)(1) and (a)(4).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    FINRA's proposed rule change also proposes to amend Rule 1240(a) to
include five additional elements such that: (1) Individuals who are
designated as CE inactive would be required to complete all of their
pending and upcoming annual Regulatory Element, including any annual
Regulatory Element that becomes due during their CE inactive period, to
return to active status; \20\ (2) the two-year CE inactive period would
be calculated from the date individuals become CE inactive, and would
continue to run regardless of whether individuals terminate their
registrations; \21\ (3) individuals who become subject to a significant
disciplinary action may be required to complete assigned continuing
education content as prescribed by FINRA; \22\ (4) individuals who have
not completed any Regulatory Element content for a registration
category in the calendar year(s) prior to reregistering would not be
approved for registration for that category until they complete that
Regulatory Element content, pass an examination for that registration
category, or obtain an unconditional examination waiver for that
registration category, whichever is applicable; \23\ and (5) the
Regulatory Element requirements would apply to individuals who are
registered, or are in the process of registering as a representative or
principal.\24\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \20\ See Notice, 86 FR at 33429-30.
    \21\ See Notice, 86 FR at 33430.
    \22\ See id.
    \23\ See Notice, 86 FR at 33430.
    \24\ See id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    FINRA stated that moving to an annual Regulatory Element
requirement that is tailored to each registration category would
further the goals of the Regulatory Element by helping ensure that
registered persons are better trained in more recent regulatory issues,
allowing them to perform their work in a more compliant and effective
manner.\25\ For instance, FINRA stated that transitioning to an annual
Regulatory Element cycle would help ensure that registered persons
receive more frequent assessments on current issues and better
understand recent regulatory changes.\26\ Specifically, FINRA stated
that registered persons would be current on issues and regulatory
changes that would enable them to perform their work in a more
compliant and effective manner than would otherwise be possible with
Regulatory Element training taking place only once every three years
under the current CE Program.\27\ According to FINRA, this enhanced
timeliness and relevance of the Regulatory Element would reduce firms'
regulatory risk as well as enhancing compliance and reducing
compliance-related costs.\28\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \25\ See Notice, 86 FR at 33434.
    \26\ See id.
    \27\ See id.
    \28\ See id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

C. Recognition of Other Training Requirements for Firm Element and
Extension of Firm Element to All Registered Persons

    Currently, Rule 1240(b) requires a firm to develop and administer
an annual Firm Element training program for its covered registered
persons.\29\ The Firm Element must, at a minimum, include training in
ethics and professional responsibility, as well as training in the
following items concerning securities products, services, and
strategies offered by the member: (1) General investment features and
associated risk factors; (2) suitability and sales practice
considerations; and (3) applicable regulatory requirements.\30\ Firms
are required to conduct an annual needs analysis to, at minimum,
determine the appropriate Firm Element training for covered registered
persons at the firm based on the specific business of the member, and
then provide the Firm Element training annually.\31\ The current rule
does not expressly recognize other required training, such as training
relating to the anti-money laundering (``AML'') compliance program and
training relating to the annual compliance meeting, for purposes of
satisfying the Firm Element training.\32\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \29\ See Rule 1240(b). See also Notice, 86 FR at 33428. The rule
defines ``covered registered persons'' as any registered person who
has direct contact with customers in the conduct of a member's
securities sales, trading and investment banking activities, any
individual who is registered as an Operations Professional or a
Research Analyst, and the immediate supervisors of any such persons.
See Rule 1240(b)(1).
    \30\ See Rule 1240(b). See also Notice, 86 FR at 33428.
    \31\ See Rule 1240(b). See also Notice, 86 FR at 33428.
    \32\ See Rule 3310(e) and Rule 3110(a)(7). See also Notice, 86
FR at 33429.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    FINRA's proposed rule change would amend Rule 1240(b) to allow for
recognition of the successful completion of existing firm training
programs relating to the AML compliance program and the annual
compliance meeting toward satisfying an individual's annual Firm
Element requirement.\33\ The proposed rule change would also amend the
rule to extend the Firm Element requirement to all registered persons,
including individuals who maintain solely a permissive registration
consistent with Rule 1210.02, thereby further aligning the Firm Element
requirement with other broadly-based training requirements.\34\ FINRA
also is

proposing to modify the current minimum training criteria under Rule
1240(b) to provide that Firm Element training must cover topics related
to the role, activities, or responsibilities of the registered person,
as well as professional responsibility.\35\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \33\ See proposed Rule 1240(b)(2)(D). See also Notice, 86 FR at
33430.
    \34\ See proposed Rule 1240(b)(1). See also Notice, 86 FR at
33430.
    \35\ See proposed Rule 1240(b)(2)(B). See also Notice, 86 FR at
33430.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    FINRA stated that the proposed rule change would further enhance
and streamline the Firm Element requirement.\36\ Specifically, FINRA
stated that the inclusion of an express recognition of existing firm
training programs, such as the annual compliance meeting or AML
training, toward satisfying an individual's Firm Element requirement
would help firms conserve compliance resources currently devoted to
duplicative training programs.\37\ Additionally, FINRA stated that the
extension of the Firm Element requirement to all registered persons
would help ensure that firms enhance the securities knowledge, skill,
and professionalism of all registered persons.\38\ FINRA stated that it
would also ensure that registered persons are provided more specific
learning materials relevant to their day-to-day activities.\39\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \36\ See Notice, 86 FR at 33434.
    \37\ See id.
    \38\ See Notice, 86 FR at 33438.
    \39\ See id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

D. Maintenance of Qualification After Termination of Registration

    Currently, individuals whose registrations as representatives or
principals have been terminated for two or more years may reregister as
representatives or principals only if they requalify by retaking and
passing the applicable representative- or principal-level examination
or if they obtain a waiver of such examination(s) (the ``two-year
qualification period'').\40\ The proposed rule change would not
eliminate the two-year qualification period. Instead, the proposed rule
change would amend the rules governing requalification of registered
representatives who have terminated their registration to provide
individuals an alternative means of maintaining their qualifications
and staying current on their regulatory and securities knowledge
following the termination of a registration, subject to conditions and
limitations outlined in further detail below.\41\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \40\ See Rule 1210.08 (Lapse of Registration and Expiration of
SIE). FINRA also stated that the current two-year qualification
period before an individual would need to retest and pass their
examinations was adopted prior to the creation of the CE Program and
was intended to ensure that individuals who reregister are
relatively current on their regulatory and securities knowledge. See
Notice, 86 FR at 33429.
    \41\ See Notice, 86 FR at 33430. Eligible individuals who elect
not to participate in the proposed continuing education program to
maintain their qualifications would continue to be subject to the
two-year qualification period.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Specifically, the proposed rule change would adopt paragraph (c)
under Rule 1240, and Supplementary Material .01 and .02 to Rule 1240,
to provide eligible individuals who terminate any of their
representative or principal registrations the option of maintaining
their qualification for any of the terminated registrations for up to
five years by completing continuing education.\42\ This optional
program would be limited by the following conditions: (1) Individuals
would be required to be registered in the terminated category for at
least one year immediately prior to the termination of the category;
\43\ (2) individuals could elect to participate when they terminate a
registration or within two years from the termination of a
registration; \44\ (3) individuals would be required to complete
annually all prescribed continuing education; \45\ (4) individuals
would have a maximum of five years in which to reregister; \46\ (5)
individuals who have been CE inactive for two consecutive years, or who
become CE inactive for two consecutive years during their
participation, would not be eligible to participate or continue; \47\
and (6) individuals who are subject to a statutory disqualification, or
who become subject to a statutory disqualification following the
termination of their registration or during their participation, would
not be eligible to participate in, or continue with, the program.\48\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \42\ See proposed Rule 1240(c) and Supplementary Material .01
and .02 to Rule 1240. See also Notice, 86 FR at 33430.
    \43\ See Notice, 86 FR at 33430.
    \44\ See id. FINRA stated that individuals who elect to
participate at the later date would be required to complete, within
two years from the termination of their registration, any continuing
education that becomes due between the time of their Form U5
submission and the date that they commence their participation. In
addition, FINRA stated that it plans to enhance its systems to
notify individuals of their eligibility to participate, enable them
to affirmatively opt in, and notify them of their annual continuing
education requirement if they opt in. See id.
    \45\ See Notice, 86 FR at 33431. FINRA's proposed rule change
would also allow FINRA to grant an extension of time for the
participant to complete the prescribed continuing education
following a participant's request in writing with supporting
documentation and a showing of good cause. See id.
    \46\ See Notice, 86 FR at 33431.
    \47\ See id.
    \48\ See id. In addition, FINRA stated that any continuing
education content completed in furtherance of this proposed program
would be retroactively nullified upon disclosure of the statutory
disqualification. See id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    FINRA also is proposing two additional provisions in the proposed
rule change. The first is a look-back provision that would, subject to
specified conditions, extend the application of the proposed five-year
option to individuals who have been registered as a representative or
principal within two years immediately prior to the implementation date
of the proposed rule change and individuals who have been FSAWP
Participants immediately prior to the implementation date of the
proposed rule change.\49\ The second is a re-eligibility provision that
would allow individuals to regain eligibility to participate in the
proposed five-year continuing education option each time they
reregister with a firm for a period of at least one year and
subsequently terminate their registration, provided that they satisfy
the other participation conditions and limitations.\50\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \49\ See Notice, 86 FR at 33431. Among other things, proposed
Supplementary Material .01 to Rule 1240 and proposed Rule 1210.09
would provide the requirements and limitations to participation in
this optional five-year continuing education period for FSAWP
Participants, including when they would need to elect to
participate, when they would need to complete their initial annual
content, and adjustment of their initial participation period based
on the date that their registration was terminated. Additionally,
FINRA stated that while the current waiver program for FSAWP
Participants would not be available to new participants upon
implementation of the proposed rule change, individuals who are
FSAWP Participants immediately prior to the implementation date of
the proposed rule change could elect to continue in that waiver
program until the program has been retired. The proposed rule change
would preserve FINRA's ability to extend the time by which FSAWP
Participants must complete the Regulatory Element for good cause
shown under proposed Rule 1240(a)(2). See Notice, 86 FR at 33431.
    \50\ See Notice, 86 FR at 33431.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    FINRA also is proposing conforming amendments to Rule 1210,
including adding references to proposed Rule 1240(c) under Rule
1210.08.\51\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \51\ See id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    According to FINRA, the continuing education content for
participants of the proposed five-year continuing education option
would consist of a combination of Regulatory Element content and
content selected by FINRA and the CE Council from the Firm Element
content catalog discussed further below.\52\ The content would
correspond to the registration category for which individuals wish to
maintain their qualifications.\53\ The proposed rule change would also
provide that the continuing education content for participants of the
proposed five-year continuing education option must be completed
annually by December 31

each year, consistent with the proposed annual Regulatory Element
provision.\54\ In addition, FINRA stated that participants who are
maintaining their qualification status for a principal registration
category that includes one or more corequisite representative
registrations would also need to complete required annual continuing
education for the corequisite registrations in order to maintain their
qualification status for the principal registration category.\55\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \52\ See id.
    \53\ See id.
    \54\ See id. See also supra note 11 and accompanying text.
    \55\ See Notice, 86 FR at 33431.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    FINRA stated that the proposed rule change would: (1) Incentivize
individuals to stay current on their respective securities industry
knowledge following the termination of any of their registrations; (2)
promote investor protection given that the individuals availing
themselves of this optional program would be subjected to continuing
education that is as rigorous as the continuing education of registered
persons, while providing an opportunity for the securities industry to
retain skilled and experienced workers; (3) increase flexibility for
individuals to address life and career events and necessary absences
from registered functions without having to requalify each time; and
(4) enhance diversity and inclusion in the securities industry by
attracting and retaining a broader and diverse group of
professionals.\56\ FINRA has also stated that it plans to evaluate the
efficacy of the proposed rule change following its implementation to
ensure that it is meeting its goals.\57\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \56\ See Notice, 86 FR at 33431, 33435. According to FINRA, the
proposed rule change may be of particular value to women and older
workers. FINRA stated that women continue to be the primary
caregivers for children and aging family members and, as a result,
are likely to be absent from the industry for longer periods of time
than men. Additionally, FINRA stated that the proposed rule change
would provide longer-term relief for older workers, who are at a
higher risk of a job loss during certain economic downturns and who
are likely to remain unemployed for longer periods of time than
younger workers. See Notice, 86 FR at 33431.
    \57\ See Notice, 86 FR at 33431.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

E. Other Enhancements to the CE Program

    FINRA stated in the Notice that it intends to make additional
enhancements to the CE Program that will not require changes to FINRA
rules.\58\ FINRA stated that it would work with the CE Council to
incorporate a variety of instructional formats to present the
Regulatory Element content, including via a mobile compatible
application.\59\ In addition, FINRA stated that it would work with the
CE Council to publish in advance the Regulatory Element learning topics
for the next year so that firms may review those topics when developing
their Firm Element training plan to avoid unnecessary duplication of
topics if desired.\60\ Given that the proposed rule change would
transition to an annual Regulatory Element requirement, FINRA stated
that it would assist firms with compliance with that requirement by
enhancing its systems to provide firms and registered persons with
additional notification, management, and tracking functionality.\61\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \58\ See Notice, 86 FR at 33432.
    \59\ See id. In response to a Regulatory Notice that FINRA
issued concerning proposed changes to the CE Program, it received a
comment letter encouraging FINRA to make continuing education
available via a mobile application. FINRA stated that it intends to
take that suggestion and plans to make the Regulatory Element
content available via a mobile application. See FINRA Letter at 2-3.
    \60\ See Notice, 86 FR at 33432.
    \61\ See id. FINRA stated that the transition to an annual
Regulatory Element requirement would have the effect of increasing
the number of registered persons who would be required to complete
the Regulatory Element on an annual basis. As such, FINRA stated
that the enhancement of notification, modification, and tracking
functionality in its systems will be helpful for firms and
individuals. See Notice, 86 FR at 33432.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    FINRA also stated that it would improve the guidance and resources
available to firms to develop effective Firm Element training programs,
such as updated guidance for developing and documenting training plans
and specific principles.\62\ Further, FINRA stated that it would work
with the CE Council to develop a catalog of continuing education
content that would serve as an optional resource for firms to select
relevant Firm Element content and create learning plans for their
registered persons.\63\ According to FINRA, the catalog would include
content developed by third-party training providers, FINRA, and the
other Self-Regulatory Organizations participating in the CE
Program.\64\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \62\ See Notice, 86 FR at 33432.
    \63\ See Notice, 86 FR at 33432, 33434. FINRA stated that firms
would have the option of using the content in this catalog for
purposes of their Firm Element training and would not be obligated
to select content from the catalog.
    \64\ See Notice, 86 FR at 33432.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

F. Effective Date

    If the Commission approves the proposed rule change, FINRA will
announce the implementation dates of the proposed rule change in a
Regulatory Notice to be published no later than 90 days following
Commission approval.\65\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \65\ See id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

III. Discussion and Commission Findings

    After careful review of the proposed rule change, the comment
letters, and FINRA's response to the comments, the Commission finds
that the proposed rule change is consistent with the requirements of
the Exchange Act and the rules and regulations thereunder that are
applicable to a national securities association.\66\ Specifically, the
Commission finds that the proposed rule change is consistent with
Section 15A(b)(6) of the Exchange Act, which requires, among other
things, that FINRA rules be designed to prevent fraudulent and
manipulative acts and practices, to promote just and equitable
principles of trade, and, in general, to protect investors and the
public interest.\67\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \66\ In approving this rule change, the Commission has
considered the rule's impact on efficiency, competition, and capital
formation. See 15 U.S.C. 78c(f).
    \67\ 15 U.S.C. 78o-3(b)(6).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

A. Transition to Annual Regulatory Element for Each Registration
Category

    As stated above, FINRA is proposing to amend Rule 1240(a) and Rule
1210.07 to require registered persons to complete the Regulatory
Element of the CE Program annually by December 31 and to require
registered persons to complete the Regulatory Element content that is
tailored for each representative or principal registration category
that they hold.
    Most commenters were supportive of FINRA's proposed rule
change.\68\ One such commenter stated that it appreciated that member
firms would be allowed greater flexibility to administer the Regulatory
Element in conjunction with other training requirements.\69\ Another
cited: (1) The flexibility it would afford in allowing firms to
complete training prior to December 31; (2) its availability to
individuals via mobile application; and (3) that the proposed
Regulatory Element would still require a comparable amount of overall
continuing education as it did prior to the proposed rule change.\70\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \68\ See letter from James Rabenstine, Vice President and Chief
Compliance Officer, Nationwide Office of the Chief Legal Officer,
Nationwide Financial Services, Inc. (``NFS''), dated July 13, 2021
(``NFS Letter''); letter from Lisa Hopkins, NASAA President, General
Counsel, and Senior Deputy Commissioner of Securities, West
Virginia, NASAA, dated July 14, 2021 (``NASAA Letter''); letter from
Kevin Zambrowicz, Managing Director and Associate General Counsel,
Securities Industry and Financial Markets Association (``SIFMA''),
dated July 14, 2021 (``SIFMA Letter'').
    \69\ See SIFMA Letter at 2.
    \70\ See NFS Letter at 1. The NFS Letter also suggested that it
would be helpful for the Regulatory Element topics to be published
by October 1 of each year. FINRA stated that it would publish the
topics by no later than October 1 of each year in order to provide
firms with sufficient time to review the Regulatory Element topics
for each upcoming year. See FINRA Letter at 2 n.4.

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

    One commenter, although generally supportive of the proposed rule
change, expressed concern that moving to an annual Regulatory Element
may increase overall costs and burdens, both for firms and registered
persons, associated with an annual increase in required training.\71\
The commenter also suggested that the proposed transition from the
current three-year cycle to an annual requirement may not be
necessary.\72\ Alternatively, the commenter suggested that any
transition be done in two phases: (1) From three years to two years to
determine if its objectives were met; and then (2) from two years to
one year.\73\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \71\ See letter from Brian Egwele, dated July 2, 2021 (``Egwele
Letter''). FINRA also identified that the cost of changing to an
annual Regulatory Element generally would increase with the number
of representatives at a firm and thus would be higher in aggregate
at a larger firm. However, FINRA stated that economies of scale
likely exist in the application of the proposed requirements such
that the average additional cost of implementing this proposal per
representative at larger firms would likely be lower than at smaller
firms. See Notice, 86 FR at 33435.
    \72\ See Egwele Letter (expressing support for the proposed rule
change by stating that, even though the proposed rule change may
increase administrative workload and costs, the ``price is worth it
to remain compliant.'').
    \73\ See Egwele Letter.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In response, FINRA stated that the overall amount of training in a
three-year period would remain approximately the same as the amount of
training currently undertaken by completing the Regulatory Element once
every three years.\74\ Additionally, FINRA explained that the impact on
individuals from increased training requirements, such as the time
commitment associated with those trainings, would be limited in that
the overwhelming majority of registered persons only hold a single
registration category.\75\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \74\ See Notice, 86 FR at 33430.
    \75\ See Notice, 86 FR at 33435. According to FINRA, individuals
with more than one registration category account for approximately
35 percent of all registered persons.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    With respect to the commenter's proposed transition period, FINRA
responded that it believes that a phased implementation with different
timing requirements for any of the proposed components would be overly
complex and cause confusion. Additionally, FINRA stated that a phased
approach would require more resources and could result in greater costs
to keep multiple varying Regulatory Element systems and programs
running, including potential additional costs to firms to track and
manage differing requirements.\76\ For these reasons, FINRA declined to
amend the proposed rule change in response to the commenter's concerns.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \76\ See FINRA Letter at 3. FINRA also stated that the proposed
rule change includes several interrelated annual Regulatory Element
components: (1) Annual Regulatory Element content for registered
persons; (2) annual Regulatory Element content for non-registered
individuals who are participating in the waiver program under FINRA
Rule 1210.09; and (3) annual Regulatory Element content for
individuals who elect to maintain their qualification status for a
terminated registration category. See id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In addition, one commenter opposed the proposed change to increase
the frequency of the Regulatory Element, believing that it would have a
disparate impact on members of underrepresented populations who may
have more limited access to a broadband or high-speed internet
connection.\77\ The commenter also stated that a mobile compatible
format may not be adequate for continuing education given that mobile
devices may not meet all learning needs, and that potential access and
connectivity challenges will also make this an insufficient
solution.\78\ By contrast, a separate commenter was fully supportive of
FINRA making the Regulatory Element available via a mobile-compatible
format on the grounds that it would simplify the process for
individuals that have terminated their registration and wanted to
reenter the industry at some point in their career.\79\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \77\ See letter from John Watts, Senior Vice President and Chief
Counsel, PFS Investments, Inc. (``PFS''), dated July 15, 2021 (``PFS
Letter''). As noted above, the delivery of the Regulatory Element is
available through CE Online, which allows individuals to complete
the content online at a location of their choosing, including their
private residence. See supra note 19. Additionally, FINRA and the CE
Council have committed to making the annual Regulatory Element
content available to users via a mobile application. See supra note
60.
    \78\ See id.
    \79\ See NFS Letter at 2 (also expressing support for FINRA's
intention to publish learning topics in advance on the grounds that
it would be helpful for securities industry professionals).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In response, FINRA stated that it specifically tailored the
proposed rule change to help meet the individual needs of registered
persons and firms.\80\ Accordingly, FINRA stated that the Regulatory
Element would be designed to deliver content in a manner that is
broadly accessible and compatible with the diverse needs of individuals
and their learning needs.\81\ In developing the mobile-compatible
format, which includes a mobile responsive design, FINRA intends mobile
device users to be able to easily, quickly, and intuitively navigate
the Regulatory Element content.\82\ FINRA has committed to developing
the mobile application so that access to the training material and the
overall learning experience is engaging and intuitive for users such
that it would be a comparable to those taking the training on a
desktop.\83\ FINRA believes that these enhancements and the
availability of mobile compatibility would address the potential access
and diversity concerns that the commenter raised.\84\ Furthermore,
FINRA explained that it has made available in the past, and will
continue to do so in the future, additional options for individuals who
may need or prefer other solutions to fulfill their Regulatory Element
content obligations.\85\ For instance, FINRA stated that the Regulatory
Element training would also be accessible in other convenient ways,
including through a computer or other device at a firm location or on
various widely available public and community locations where computer
and broadband internet access is available for free.\86\ For these
reasons, FINRA declined to amend the proposed rule change in response
to the commenter's concerns.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \80\ See FINRA Letter at 3.
    \81\ See id.
    \82\ See FINRA Letter at 4 (FINRA committed to structuring and
formatting the Regulatory Element content to ensure that mobile
device users have a comparable experience to that of a desktop user
even in low bandwidth conditions).
    \83\ See FINRA Letter at 4.
    \84\ See FINRA Letter at 3-4. Additionally, FINRA stated that it
remains committed to understanding specific technology or access
needs and to provide potential solutions. See FINRA Letter at 4.
    \85\ See FINRA Letter at 4.
    \86\ See id. FINRA offers individuals the option of completing
their Regulatory Element session at test centers in various
locations of every state as well as internationally. Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Commission finds that the proposed rule change to move to an
annual Regulatory Element training with content tailored to an
individual's representative or principal registration categories is
designed to protect investors and is in the public interest. The
Commission finds that the rule is reasonably designed to minimize the
potential adverse impact on firms and their registered persons.
Furthermore, increasing the timeliness of registered persons' training,
as well as the relevance of the training's content by tailoring it to
each registration category that they hold, would enhance their
education and compliance with their regulatory obligations.
    The Commission further finds that a shift to an annual Regulatory
Element training is more advantageous when compared to the current CE
Program in which some existing registered persons may not receive
consistent updated

training from regulators on regulatory developments for up to three
years. More specifically, transitioning to an annual Regulatory Element
requirement, rather than taking a phased approach, should enhance a
firm's regulatory compliance, and reduce a firm's overall regulatory
risk because of the increased timeliness and relevance of the more
tailored content provided through an annual Regulatory Element
training. Additionally, the Commission also finds that the proposed
rule change would allow firms to maintain some flexibility for
administering the annual Regulatory Element given that firms may
require their registered persons to complete the annual requirement
earlier than December 31 each year so as to coincide with other
training requirements. The Commission also finds that FINRA has
reasonably determined that its proposed mobile accessibility would
provide a flexible, accessible, and effective learning experience for
users who choose to access the Regulatory Element through mobile
technology. The proposed mobile application compatibility would also
likely allow for a more diverse candidate pool by allowing individuals
to reenter or remain in the workforce if they have previously completed
the required examinations and have already proven themselves worthy, as
suggested by a commenter.\87\ Moreover, to the extent registered
persons need or prefer an alternative to mobile compatibility to
fulfill their Regulatory Element obligations, FINRA is committed to
making alternative options available. As outlined above, these
additional options include widely-available test centers as well as
public and community locations where computer and broadband access is
available for free. The Commission finds that FINRA has provided
reasonable solutions to address commenter concerns on accessibility.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \87\ See NFS Letter at 2.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Accordingly, for the reasons set forth above, the Commission finds
that the proposed rule change is designed to protect investors and is
in the public interest.

B. Recognition of Other Training Requirements for Firm Element and
Extension of Firm Element Training to All Registered Persons

    As stated above, FINRA's proposed rule change would amend Rule
1240(b) to allow for recognition of the successful completion of
existing firm training programs relating to the AML compliance program
and the annual compliance meeting toward satisfying an individual's
annual Firm Element requirement. The proposed rule change would also
amend the rule to extend the Firm Element training requirement to all
registered persons, including individuals who maintain solely a
permissive registration consistent with Rule 1210.02, thereby further
aligning the Firm Element requirement with other broadly-based training
requirements.
    A number of commenters addressed the Firm Element training
component of FINRA's proposed rule change. Most commenters supported
allowing the Firm Element to recognize a firm's AML compliance training
and annual compliance meeting as fulfilling that requirement.\88\ One
commenter stated that it appreciated that the Firm Element would
recognize other trainings that members provide to their registered
persons.\89\ Another commenter supported this proposal because (1)
requiring training to cover ``topics related to the role, activities or
responsibilities of the registered person'' \90\ and (2) requiring
members to develop written training plans that are evaluated annually
\91\ should mitigate any concerns that AML compliance and annual
compliance meeting trainings would simply be substituted for more
tailored training requirements.\92\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \88\ See NFS Letter at 1; SIFMA Letter at 2; NASAA Letter at 1-
2.
    \89\ See SIFMA Letter at 2.
    \90\ Proposed Rule 1240(b)(2)(B).
    \91\ See proposed Rule 1240(b)(2)(A).
    \92\ See NASAA Letter at 1-2.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    One commenter stated, however, that a firm's annual needs analysis
and written training plan should not need to be recompleted every year
if the firm has not changed business models.\93\ Additionally, the
commenter recommended that FINRA consider making the Regulatory Element
training the primary, if not the sole means, by which securities
industry personnel are made aware of important rules and issues.\94\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \93\ See Letter from Anonymous, dated July 1, 2021 (``Anonymous
Letter'').
    \94\ See Anonymous Letter.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In response, FINRA stated that the Firm Element, which is firm-
specific and may vary from firm-to-firm, is a necessary component of
the CE Program, complementing the Regulatory Element, which ensures
that registered persons receive uniform and comprehensive training from
regulators on regulatory developments.\95\ Similarly, FINRA stated that
even if a firm's business model has not changed, the regulatory or
industry developments that may have taken place still necessitate an
annual needs analysis to account for changes in addressing products,
services, or strategies offered by the firm.\96\ For these reasons,
FINRA declined to amend the proposed rule change to eliminate the Firm
Element component of its CE Program in response to the commenter's
concerns.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \95\ See FINRA Letter at 5.
    \96\ See id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Commission finds that proposed Rule 1240(b), which expressly
allows firms to consider training relating to their AML compliance
program and the annual compliance meeting toward satisfying an
individual's annual Firm Element requirement, combined with the
proposed rule's provision to extend the Firm Element requirement to all
registered persons, reasonably aligns the Firm Element requirement with
other required training.
    The proposed rule change would allow firms to satisfy the Firm
Element requirement with important, pre-existing AML compliance
training and annual compliance meetings, which should reduce otherwise
duplicative training programs for firms. In addition, extending the
Firm Element requirement to all registered persons at the firm,
including those with permissive registrations, would also help to
ensure a better trained and more compliant securities workforce, which
is to the advantage of the investing public. Furthermore, the
Commission finds that FINRA's determination to retain the Firm Element
of its CE program and the obligation that firms conduct an annual needs
analysis and written training plan, even in the absence of any new
regulatory or industry developments year-to-year, is reasonable.\97\
For these reasons, the Commission finds that the proposed rule change
is designed to protect investors and is in the public interest.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \97\ See id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

C. Maintenance of Qualification After Termination of Registration

    As stated above, subject to certain conditions, proposed Rule
1240(c), and Supplementary Material .01 and .02 to Rule 1240, would
provide eligible individuals who terminate any of their representative
or principal registrations the option of maintaining their
qualification for any of their terminated registrations for up to five
years without having to requalify by examination or having to obtain an
examination waiver by completing continuing education.\98\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \98\ See proposed Rule 1240(c) and Supplementary Material .01
and .02 to Rule 1240. See also Notice, 86 FR at 33430.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Most commenters expressed overall support for FINRA's proposal to
allow registered persons to maintain their

qualifications for up to five years through continuing education
without the need for reexamination after termination of a
registration.\99\ One commenter stated that the proposed change is one
step in the process to achieving greater diversity and inclusion in the
securities industry by reducing unnecessary barriers to reentry.\100\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \99\ See SIFMA Letter at 2; NASAA Letter at 2; NFS Letter at 2;
letter from Frederick Greene, Executive Vice President, Woodforest
Wealth Strategies, dated July 11, 2021 (``Woodforest Letter'');
letter from Carrie Chelko, Chief Compliance Officer, Fidelity
Investments, dated July 14, 2021 (``Fidelity Letter''); and letter
from Howard Spindel, Senior Managing Director, Integrated Solutions,
dated July 14, 2021 (``Integrated Letter'').
    \100\ See SIFMA Letter at 2.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Several commenters, however, expressed a preference for a longer
period of time that an individual could maintain their qualifications
following termination of a registration, instead of the five-year
period that FINRA proposed.\101\ One of those commenters strongly
supported this aspect of the proposal as a welcome and necessary
improvement to continuing education, but preferred a seven-year period
of time to maintain qualifications so as to more closely align with the
existing seven-year period in the FSAWP program.\102\ Other commenters
suggested that a seven-year period would be ideal in order to further
enhance the diversity benefits of this proposed rule change.\103\
Another commenter supported a longer period to maintain qualifications,
especially for individuals who are active within the securities
industry in a non-registered capacity who could be ``grandfathered in''
rather than needing to go through a waiver process that the commenter
described as ``onerous'' and ``subjective.'' \104\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \101\ See Fidelity Letter at 2; Integrated Letter at 2-3; NFS
Letter at 2; and Woodforest Letter at 1.
    \102\ See Fidelity Letter at 2.
    \103\ See NFS Letter at 2; Woodforest Letter at 1-2.
Additionally, the Woodforest Letter suggested that individuals
availing themselves of this program should be required to complete
at least the minimum Firm Element requirement, including training on
ethics, AML, regulations, and products and, if applicable,
additional continuing education relating to supervisory functions.
In response, FINRA stated that the continuing education content for
individuals who elect the proposed option would consist of a
combination of Regulatory Element content and content selected by
FINRA and the CE Council from the Firm Element content catalog.
According to FINRA, that content would correspond to the
registration category, including any supervisory or principal
registration category, for which individuals wish to maintain their
qualifications. In addition, FINRA stated that the content selected
from the Firm Element content catalog would be based on the minimum
standards for Firm Element training, including training in
professional responsibility. See FINRA Letter at 6. Commenters were
supportive of the content catalog, stating that it would enable more
timely and increased awareness that would enhance customer
protection, for example, by providing relevant information
regarding, among other things, trends in retail investor trading,
regulatory rule changes, and cybersecurity. See NASAA Letter at 1.
See also Fidelity Letter at 1.
    \104\ See Integrated Letter at 2-3.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In response, FINRA stated that it believes the proposed
participation period of up to five years would serve the diversity and
inclusion goals of the proposed rule change while still providing the
appropriate level of training for registered persons and protection for
investors.\105\ In particular, FINRA believes that this proposal would
help attract and retain a broader, more diverse population of
individuals to the securities industry by offering a program that is
sufficiently flexible to meet the individual needs of registered
persons and firms.\106\ Moreover, FINRA believes that limiting this
option to five years would help ensure that individuals' knowledge of
the industry does not become outdated.\107\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \105\ See FINRA Letter at 6. See also Notice, 86 FR at 33435
(explaining that FINRA believes a length of five years could achieve
the main goals and anticipated benefits of the proposed changes to
the CE Program. FINRA further stated that a seven-year period may
not best protect investors and that a five-year period may better
mitigate the impact of differences with state licensing
requirements.).
    \106\ See FINRA Letter at 3.
    \107\ See Notice, 86 FR at 33435-36.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    FINRA also stated, however, that the proposed five-year maintenance
option is not intended to address every situation in which an
individual terminates a registration and subsequently decides to
reregister.\108\ FINRA explained it has always provided an individual
who continues to work in the securities industry or a field ancillary
to the securities industry the ability to request an examination waiver
following a significant absence from a registered role or
function.\109\ For the above reasons, FINRA believes that the proposed
new five-year maintenance period is appropriate.\110\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \108\ See FINRA Letter at 6.
    \109\ See id. FINRA further stated that in determining whether
to grant a waiver in such cases, FINRA expressly considers whether
the individual was previously registered, and for how long relative
to the duration of time that the individual has been unregistered.
FINRA also explained that it considers whether the individual worked
in a field ancillary to the securities industry, and for how long,
while unregistered. See id.
    \110\ See FINRA Letter at 6.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Although FINRA declined to amend the participation period at this
time, FINRA stated that it would continue to monitor the efficacy of
the proposed CE Program, which will include a review of the
participation period.\111\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \111\ See Notice, 86 FR at 33431.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    One commenter, although supporting the proposed rule change, also
suggested that, if the rule change is adopted, FINRA should enhance CRD
to allow states that have not revised existing regulations to
efficiently process registration applications of persons who maintain
their qualifications beyond two years.\112\ In response, FINRA
recognized the benefits to the industry of having further alignment
between FINRA qualification requirements and state licensing
requirements.\113\ Thus, FINRA stated that it would work with NASAA and
state regulators to provide for an appropriate process and system to
allow states to track and process registration requests for individuals
operating under the two- or five-year examination provisions.\114\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \112\ See NASAA Letter at 2.
    \113\ See FINRA Letter at 6.
    \114\ See FINRA Letter at 5-6.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Commission finds that FINRA's proposed Rule 1240(c), and
proposed Supplementary Material .01 and .02 to Rule 1240, is in the
public interest and would protect investors because it would, among
other things, help enhance the education of registered persons and
their compliance with their regulatory obligations, thus reducing
regulatory risk. In particular, by providing a means for individuals to
maintain their qualifications after termination of a registration for a
longer period of time, the proposed rule change would aid the
securities industry in attracting and retaining a more diverse
workforce. Additionally, this proposed rule change would provide
registered persons with increased flexibility to manage significant
life events, including professional changes and development (such as
pursuing educational goals, a career change to a role in the firm that
is not part of the broker-dealer, working overseas for an extended
period due to a career change or an attempt at a different career path)
or personal life events (such as birth or adoption of a child,
unexpected loss in the family or relocation due to family needs). In
addition, the Commission finds that FINRA's decision to choose five
years as the time period for maintaining qualifications after
termination of a registration, while also continuing to monitor the
efficacy of the proposed CE Program, is reasonable.
    The proposed rule change would also increase opportunities for
reentry to the securities industry for individuals who may not have
otherwise been able to do so without retaking their qualification
examinations. As a result, this proposed rule change would provide
firms with a more diverse pool of applicants from under-represented
populations in the

securities industry, such as female and older registrants. In turn,
this proposed rule change would allow the industry to retain expertise
from skilled individuals, providing investors with the advantage of
greater experience among the individuals working in the industry. For
these reasons, the Commission finds the proposed rule change is
designed to protect investors and is in the public interest.

IV. Conclusion

    It is therefore ordered pursuant to Section 19(b)(2) of the
Exchange Act \115\ that the proposed rule change (SR-FINRA-2021-015),
be, and hereby is, approved.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \115\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(2).

    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets,
pursuant to delegated authority.\116\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \116\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

J. Matthew DeLesDernier,
Assistant Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2021-20818 Filed 9-24-21; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 82, Number 71 (Friday, April 14, 2017)]
[Notices]
[Page 17988]
[FR Doc No: 2017-07543]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Docket No. CP15-558-000]

PennEast Pipeline Company, LLC; Notice of Availability of the
Final Environmental Impact Statement for the Proposed Penneast Pipeline
Project

    The staff of the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC or
Commission) has prepared a final environmental impact statement (EIS)
for the PennEast Pipeline Project, proposed by PennEast Pipeline
Company, LLC (PennEast) in the above-referenced docket. PennEast
requests authorization to construct and operate a 120.2-mile-long
greenfield pipeline to provide 1.1 million dekatherms per day of year-
round natural gas transportation service from northern Pennsylvania to
markets in eastern and southeastern Pennsylvania, New Jersey, and
surrounding states. The 120.2 miles would consist of 116.0 miles of 36-
inch-diameter pipeline (78.3 miles in Pennsylvania and 37.7 miles in
New Jersey) as well as three laterals totaling 4.2 miles, and up to
47,700 horsepower (hp) of compression at one new compressor station in
Carbon County, Pennsylvania.
    The final EIS assesses the potential environmental effects of the
construction and operation of the PennEast Pipeline Project in
accordance with the requirements of the National Environmental Policy
Act (NEPA). The FERC staff concludes that approval of the proposed
project, with the mitigation measures recommended in the EIS, would
result in some adverse environmental impacts, but impacts would be
reduced to less than significant levels with the implementation of
PennEast's proposed and our recommended mitigation measures. This
determination is based on our review of the information provided by
PennEast and further developed from data requests; field
investigations; scoping; literature research; alternatives analysis;
and contacts with federal, state, and local agencies as well as Indian
tribes and individual members of the public.
    The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), U.S. Army Corps of
Engineers, and U.S. Department of Agriculture, Natural Resource
Conservation Service participated as cooperating agencies in the
preparation of the final EIS. Cooperating agencies have jurisdiction by
law or special expertise with respect to resources potentially affected
by the proposal and participate in the NEPA analysis. Although these
agencies provided input to the conclusions and recommendations
presented in the final EIS, the agencies will present their own
conclusions and recommendations in any respective record of decision or
determination for the project.
    The final EIS addresses the potential environmental effects of the
construction and operation of the following project facilities:
     116.0 miles of new, 36-inch-diameter pipeline extending
from Luzerne County, Pennsylvania to Mercer County, New Jersey;
     the 2.1-mile Hellertown Lateral consisting of 24-inch-
diameter pipeline in Northampton County, Pennsylvania;
     the 0.6-mile Gilbert Lateral consisting of 12-inch-
diameter pipeline in Hunterdon County, New Jersey;
     the 1.5-mile Lambertville Lateral consisting of 36-inch-
diameter pipeline in Hunterdon County, New Jersey;
     new, 47,700 hp Kidder Compressor Station in Kidder
Township, Carbon County, Pennsylvania; and
     associated aboveground facilities including eight metering
and regulating stations for interconnections, eleven main line valve
sites, and four pig launcher/receiver sites.
    The FERC staff mailed copies of the final EIS to federal, state,
and local government representatives and agencies; elected officials;
environmental and public interest groups; Native American tribes;
potentially affected landowners and other interested individuals and
groups; and newspapers and libraries in the project area. Paper copy
versions of this EIS (Volume 1 in paper copy with the remainder on CD)
were mailed to those specifically requesting them; all others received
a CD version of the complete document.
    In addition, the final EIS is available for public viewing on the
FERC's Web site (www.ferc.gov) using the eLibrary link. A limited
number of copies are available for distribution and public inspection
at: Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, Public Reference Room, 888
First Street NE., Room 2A, Washington, DC 20426.<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    In accordance with the Council on Environmental Quality's (CEQ)
regulations implementing NEPA, no agency decision on a proposed action
may be made until 30 days after the EPA publishes a notice of
availability of the final EIS in the Federal Register. However, the CEQ
regulations provide an exception to this rule when an agency decision
is subject to a formal internal appeal process that allows other
agencies or the public to make their views known. In such cases, the
agency decision may be made at the same time the notice of the final
EIS is published, allowing both periods to run concurrently. The
Commission decision for this proposed action is subject to a 30-day
rehearing period.
    Additional information about the project is available from the
Commission's Office of External Affairs, at (866) 208-FERC, or on the
FERC Web site (www.ferc.gov) using the eLibrary link. Click on the
eLibrary link, click on ``General Search,'' and enter the docket number
excluding the last three digits in the Docket Number field (i.e., CP15-
558). Be sure you have selected an appropriate date range. For
assistance, please contact FERC Online Support at
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or toll free at<PHONE_NUMBER>; for TTY,
contact<PHONE_NUMBER>. The eLibrary link also provides access to the
texts of formal documents issued by the Commission, such as orders,
notices, and rulemakings.
    In addition, the Commission offers a free service called
eSubscription that allows you to keep track of all formal issuances and
submittals in specific dockets. This can reduce the amount of time you
spend researching proceedings by automatically providing you with
notification of these filings, document summaries, and direct links to
the documents. Go to www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/esubscription.asp.

    Dated: April 6, 2017.
Kimberly D. Bose,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2017-07543 Filed 4-13-17; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 77, Number 233 (Tuesday, December 4, 2012)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 71743-71746]
[FR Doc No: 2012-29149]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

17 CFR Chapter II

[Release Nos. 33-9370, 34-68309, 39-2487, IA-3506, IC-30282; File No.
S7-12-12]

List of Rules To Be Reviewed Pursuant to the Regulatory
Flexibility Act

AGENCY: Securities and Exchange Commission.

ACTION: Publication of list of rules scheduled for review.

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

SUMMARY: The Securities and Exchange Commission is publishing a list of
rules to be reviewed pursuant to Section 610 of the Regulatory
Flexibility Act. The list is published to provide the public with
notice that these rules are

scheduled for review by the agency and to invite public comment on
them.

DATES: Comments should be submitted by January 3, 2013.

ADDRESSES: Comments may be submitted by any of the following methods:

Electronic Comments

     Use the Commission's Internet comment form (http://www.sec.gov/rules/other.shtml); or
     Send an email to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Please include
File Number S7-12-12 on the subject line; or
     Use the Federal eRulemaking Portal (http://www.regulations.gov). Follow the instructions for submitting comments.

Paper Comments

     Send paper comments in triplicate to Elizabeth M. Murphy,
Secretary, Securities and Exchange Commission, 100 F Street NE.,
Washington, DC 20549-1090. All submissions should refer to File No. S7-
12-12. This file number should be included on the subject line if email
is used. To help us 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/other.shtml). Comments also are 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. All comments received will be posted without
change; we do not edit personal identifying information from
submissions. You should submit only information that you wish to make
available publicly.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Anne Sullivan, Office of the General
Counsel,<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The Regulatory Flexibility Act (``RFA''),
codified at 5 U.S.C. 600-611, requires an agency to review its rules
that have a significant economic impact upon a substantial number of
small entities within ten years of the publication of such rules as
final rules. 5 U.S.C. 610(a). The purpose of the review is ``to
determine whether such rules should be continued without change, or
should be amended or rescinded * * * to minimize any significant
economic impact of the rules upon a substantial number of such small
entities.'' 5 U.S.C. 610(a). The RFA sets forth specific considerations
that must be addressed in the review of each rule:
     The continued need for the rule;
     The nature of complaints or comments received concerning
the rule from the public;
     The complexity of the rule;
     The extent to which the rule overlaps, duplicates or
conflicts with other federal rules, and, to the extent feasible, with
state and local governmental rules; and
     The length of time since the rule has been evaluated or
the degree to which technology, economic conditions, or other factors
have changed in the area affected by the rule. 5 U.S.C. 610(c).
    The Securities and Exchange Commission, as a matter of policy,
reviews all final rules that it published for notice and comment to
assess not only their continued compliance with the RFA, but also to
assess generally their continued utility. The list below is therefore
broader than that required by the RFA, and may include rules that do
not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small
entities. Where the Commission has previously made a determination of a
rule's impact on small businesses, the determination is noted on the
list.
    The Commission particularly solicits public comment on whether the
rules listed below affect small businesses in new or different ways
than when they were first adopted. The rules and forms listed below are
scheduled for review by staff of the Commission during the next twelve
months. The list includes rules from 2001. When the Commission
implemented the Act in 1980, it stated that it ``intend[ed] to conduct
a broader review [than that required by the RFA], with a view to
identifying those rules in need of modification or even rescission.''
Securities Act Release No. 6302 (Mar. 20, 1981), 46 FR 19251 (Mar. 30,
1981).

List of Rules To Be Reviewed

    Title: Role of Independent Directors of Investment Companies.
    Citation: 17 CFR 270.2a19-3; 17 CFR 270.10e-1; 17 CFR 270.32a-4.

    Authority: 15 U.S.C. 80a-6(c), 80a-10(e), 80a-29(e), 80a-30,
80a-37(a).

    Description: Rule 2a19-3 under the Investment Company Act (``Act'')
exempts an individual from being disqualified as an independent
director of a registered investment company (``Fund'') solely because
he or she owns shares of an index fund that invests in the investment
adviser or underwriter of the Fund, or their controlling persons. The
exemption permits a director of a Fund to own shares of a registered
investment company (including the Fund on which it serves) whose
investment objective is to replicate the performance of one or more
broad-based securities indices.
    Rule 10e-1 under the Act suspends temporarily the board composition
requirements of the Act and rules thereunder, if a Fund fails to meet
those requirements by reason of the death, disqualification, or bona
fide resignation of a director. Rule 10e-1 suspends the board
composition requirements for 90 days if the board can fill the director
vacancy, or 150 days if a shareholder vote is required to fill the
vacancy.
    Rule 32a-4 under the Act exempts Funds from the Act's requirement
that shareholders vote on the selection of the Fund's independent
public accountant if the Fund (i) establishes an audit committee
composed solely of independent directors that oversees the fund's
accounting and auditing processes; (ii) adopts an audit committee
charter setting forth the committee's structure, duties, powers, and
methods of operation, or sets out similar provisions in the Fund's
charter or bylaws; and (iii) maintains a copy of such audit committee
charter.
    Prior Commission Determination Under 5 U.S.C. 604: A Final
Regulatory Flexibility Analysis was prepared in accordance with 5
U.S.C. 604 in conjunction with the adoption of Release No. IC-24816,
which was approved by the Commission on January 2, 2001. Comments on
the proposing release and any comments on the Initial Regulatory
Flexibility Analysis were considered at that time.
    Title: Rule 35d-1.
    Citation: 17 CFR 270.35d-1.

    Authority: 15 U.S.C. 80a-8, 80a-29, 80a-33, 80a-34, and 80a-37.

    Description: Rule 35d-1 under the Act requires that an investment
company with a name that suggests that the company focuses its
investments in a particular type of investment (e.g., the ABC Stock
Fund or XYZ Bond Fund), country or geographic region (e.g., The ABC
Japan Fund or The XYZ Latin America Fund), or a particular industry
(e.g., the ABC Utilities Fund or the XYZ Health Care Fund) invest at
least 80% of its assets in the type of investment suggested by the
name. Rule 35d-1 also addresses names that indicate that a Fund's
distributions are exempt from income tax or that its shares are
guaranteed or approved by the United States government.
    Prior Commission Determination Under 5 U.S.C. 604: A Final
Regulatory Flexibility Analysis was prepared in accordance with 5
U.S.C. 604 in conjunction with the adoption of Release No. IC-24828,
which was approved by the Commission on January

17, 2001. Comments on the proposing release and any comments on the
Initial Regulatory Flexibility Analysis were considered at that time.
    Title: Integration of Abandoned Offerings.
    Citation: 17 CFR 230.155, 17 CFR 230.429, 17 CFR 230.457, 17 CFR
230.477.

    Authority: 15 U.S.C. 77b, 15 U.S.C. 77f, 15 U.S.C. 77g, 15
U.S.C. 77h, 15 U.S.C. 77j, 15 U.S.C. 77s, and 15 U.S.C. 77z-3.

    Description: Rule 155 provides safe harbors for a registered
offering following an abandoned private offering, or a private offering
following an abandoned registered offering, without integrating the
registered and private offerings in either case. The rule amendments
facilitate reliance on the public-to-private safe harbor by providing
automatic effectiveness for any application to withdraw an entire
registration statement before it becomes effective, permitting filing
fees to be offset from withdrawn registration statements and providing
other technical changes to the calculation of filing fees in order to
reduce the financial risk of a registered offering that is withdrawn.
    Prior Commission Determination Under 5 U.S.C. 604: A Final
Regulatory Flexibility Analysis was prepared in accordance with 5
U.S.C. 604 in conjunction with Release No. 33-7943, approved by the
Commission on January 26, 2001, which adopted the rule and rule
amendments. Comments on the proposing release were considered at that
time. The Commission solicited comments concerning the impact on small
entities and the Regulatory Flexibility Act certification, but received
no comments.
    Title: Electronic Submission of Securities Transaction Information
by Exchange Members, Brokers, and Dealers.
    Citation: 17 CFR 240.17a-25.

    Authority: 15 U.S.C. 78a et seq.

    Description: Rule 17a-25 requires brokers and dealers to submit
electronically to the Commission, upon request, information on customer
and firm securities trading. Rule 17a-25 is designed to improve the
Commission's capacity to analyze electronic submissions of transaction
information, thereby facilitating Commission enforcement investigations
and other trading reconstructions.
    Prior Commission Determination Under 5 U.S.C. 604: A Final
Regulatory Flexibility Analysis was prepared in accordance with 5
U.S.C. 604 in conjunction with the adoption of Release No. 34-44494,
which was issued by the Commission on June 29, 2001. Comments on the
proposing release and any comments on the Initial Regulatory
Flexibility Analysis were considered at that time.
    Title: Rule 5b-3.
    Citation: 17 CFR 270.5b-3.

    Authority: 15 U.S.C. 80a-1 et seq., 80a-34(d), 80a-37, 80a-39,
unless otherwise noted.

    Description: Rule 5b-3 under the Investment Company Act permits
investment companies to treat a repurchase agreement as an acquisition
of the underlying collateral, subject to certain conditions, in
determining whether it is in compliance with the investment criteria
for diversified funds set forth in section 5(b)(1) of the Act and the
prohibition on fund acquisition of an interest in a broker-dealer in
section 12(d)(3) of the Act. Rule 5b-3 also permits an investment
company to treat the acquisition of a refunded security (which is a
debt security whose principal and interest payments are to be paid by
U.S. government securities that have been placed in an escrow account
and are pledged only to the payment of the debt security) as an
acquisition of the escrowed government securities, subject to certain
conditions, for purposes of the diversification requirements of section
5(b)(1) of the Act.
    Prior Commission Determination Under 5 U.S.C. 604: A Final
Regulatory Flexibility Analysis was prepared in accordance with 5
U.S.C. 604 in conjunction with the adoption of rule 5b-3 in Release No.
IC-25058, which was approved by the Commission on July 5, 2001.
Comments on the proposing release and any comments on the Initial
Regulatory Flexibility Analyses were considered at that time.
    Title: Registration of National Securities Exchanges Pursuant to
Section 6(g) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and Proposed Rule
Changes of Certain National Securities Exchanges and Limited Purpose
National Securities Associations.
    Citation: 17 CFR 240.6a-2, 17 CFR 240.6a-3, 17 CFR 240.6a-4, 17 CFR
240.19b-4, 17 CFR 240.19b-7, 17 CFR 249.10, 17 CFR 249.819; 17 CFR
249.822.

    Authority: 15 U.S.C. 78a et seq.

    Description: The Commission adopted Rule 6a-4 under the Exchange
Act and registration Form 1-N prescribing the requirements for
designated contract markets and derivative transaction execution
facilities to register as national securities exchanges pursuant to
Section 6(g)(1) of the Exchange Act to trade security futures products.
The Commission also adopted conforming amendments to Rules 6a-2 and 6a-
3 under the Exchange Act and Rule 202.3 of the Commission's procedural
rules. In addition, the Commission adopted Rule 19b-7, Form 19b-7, and
amendments to Rule 19b-4 and Form 19b-4 to accommodate proposed rule
changes submitted by national securities exchanges registered pursuant
to Section 6(g) of the Exchange Act and limited purpose national
securities associations registered pursuant to Section 15A(k) of the
Exchange Act. These rules and forms, and amendments to existing rules
and forms, were necessary to implement the Commodity Futures
Modernization Act of 2000.
    Prior Commission Determination Under 5 U.S.C. 605: Pursuant to 15
U.S.C. 605(b), the Chairman of the Commission certified that the
adopted rules, forms, and conforming amendments would not have a
significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities.
This certification, including the reasons therefor, was attached to
Proposing Release No. 34-44279 (May 8, 2001) as Appendix A. The
Commission solicited comments concerning the impact on small entities
and the Regulatory Flexibility Act certification, but received no
comments.
    Title: Registration of Broker-Dealers Pursuant to Section 15(b)(11)
of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934.
    Citation: 17 CFR 240.15a-10, 17 CFR 240.15b2-2, 17 CFR 15b11-1, 17
CFR Part 248, 17 CFR Part 249.

    Authority: 15 U.S.C. 78a et seq.; 15 U.S.C. 6801 et seq.

    Description: The Commission adopted the following rules to
implement provisions of the Commodity Futures Modernization Act of 2000
(``CFMA''). First, the Commission amended its broker-dealer
registration requirements and adopted a new form to implement Section
203 of the CFMA to allow futures commission merchants and introducing
brokers registered with the CFTC to register as broker-dealers by
filing a notice with the Commission for the limited purpose of
effecting transactions in security futures products. Second, the
Commission adopted an exemption from registration under Section 15(a)
of the Exchange Act to permit, subject to certain conditions, a broker-
dealer registered by notice to trade security futures products
regardless of the market on which the product was listed or traded.
Third, the Commission adopted amendments to Regulation S-P to revise
certain

provisions of Regulation S-P in light of Section 124 of the CFMA, which
made the privacy provisions of the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act applicable to
activity regulated by the CFTC. These amendments also permitted futures
commission merchants and introducing brokers registered by notice as
broker-dealers to comply with Regulation S-P by complying with the
CFTC's financial privacy rules.
    Prior Commission Determination Under 5 U.S.C. 605: Pursuant to 15
U.S.C. 605(b), the Chairman of the Commission certified that the
proposed rules, forms, and conforming amendments would not have a
significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities.
This certification, including the reasons therefore, was attached to
Proposing Release No. 34-44455 (June 20, 2001) as Appendix A. The
Commission solicited comments concerning the impact on small entities
and the Regulatory Flexibility Act certification, but received no
comments.
    Title: Method for Determining Market Capitalization and Dollar
Value of Average Daily Trading Volume; Application of the Definition of
Narrow-Based Security Index.
    Citation: 17 CFR 240.3a55-1, 17 CFR 240.3a55-2, 17 CFR 240.3a55-3.

    Authority: 15 U.S.C. 78a et seq.

    Description: The CFTC and the SEC (collectively, ``Commissions'')
adopted joint final rules to implement new statutory provisions enacted
by the Commodity Futures Modernization Act of 2000. Specifically, the
CFMA directed the Commissions to jointly specify by rule or regulation
the method to be used to determine ``market capitalization'' and
``dollar value of average daily trading volume'' for purposes of the
new definition of ``narrow-based security index,'' including exclusions
from that definition, in the Commodity Exchange Act and the Exchange
Act. The CFMA also directed the Commissions to jointly adopt rules or
regulations that set forth the requirements for an index underlying a
contract of sale for future delivery traded on or subject to the rules
of a foreign board of trade to be excluded from the definition of
``narrow-based security index.''
    Prior Commission Determination Under 5 U.S.C. 605: Pursuant to 15
U.S.C. 605(b), the Chairman of the Commission certified that the rules
would not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of
small entities. This certification was attached to Proposing Release
No. 34-44288 (May 9, 2001) as an Appendix. The Commission solicited
comments concerning the impact on small entities and the Regulatory
Flexibility Act certification, but received no comments.
    Title: Options Disclosure Document.
    Citation: 17 CFR 230.135b.

    Authority: 15 U.S.C. 77b, 15 U.S.C. 77g, 15 U.S.C. 77j, 15
U.S.C. 77s, and 15 U.S.C. 77z-3.

    Description: This rule clarifies that an options disclosure
document prepared in accordance with Commission rules under the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934 is not a prospectus and is not subject
to civil liability under Section 12(a)(2) of the Securities Act. This
amendment reduces legal uncertainty regarding whether such liability
applies to these documents by codifying a long-standing interpretive
position taken by the Division of Corporation Finance.
    Prior Commission Determination Under 5 U.S.C. 605: Pursuant to the
Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 605(b)), the Chairman of the
Commission certified at the proposal stage on July 1, 1998 in Release
No. 33-7550 that the rule revisions would not have a significant
economic impact on a substantial number of small entities. The
Commission solicited comments concerning the impact on small entities
and the Regulatory Flexibility Act certification, but received no
comments.

    Dated: November 28, 2012.

    By the Commission.

Elizabeth M. Murphy,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2012-29149 Filed 12-3-12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 78, Number 23 (Monday, February 4, 2013)]
[Notices]
[Pages 7855-7857]
[FR Doc No: 2013-02267]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration

[FMCSA Docket No. FMCSA-2012-0349]

Qualification of Drivers; Exemption Applications; Diabetes
Mellitus

AGENCY: Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration (FMCSA), DOT

ACTION: Notice of final disposition.

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

SUMMARY: FMCSA announces its decision to exempt 12 individuals from its
rule prohibiting persons with insulin-treated diabetes mellitus (ITDM)
from operating commercial motor vehicles (CMVs) in interstate commerce.
The exemptions will enable these individuals to operate CMVs in
interstate commerce.

DATES: The exemptions are effective February 4, 2013. The exemptions
expire on February 4, 2015.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Elaine M. Papp, Chief, Medical
Programs Division,<PHONE_NUMBER><EMAIL_ADDRESS>FMCSA, Room
W64-224, Department of Transportation, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE.,
Washington, DC 20590-0001. Office hours are from 8:30 a.m. to

5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Electronic Access

    You may see all the comments online through the Federal Document
Management System (FDMS) at: http://www.regulations.gov.
    Docket: For access to the docket to read background documents or
comments, go to http://www.regulations.gov and/or Room W12-140 on the
ground level of the West Building, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE.,
Washington, DC, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday,
except Federal holidays.
    Privacy Act: Anyone may search the electronic form of all comments
received into any of DOT's dockets by the name of the individual
submitting the comment (or of the person signing the comment, if
submitted on behalf of an association, business, labor union, or other
entity). You may review DOT's Privacy Act Statement for the Federal
Docket Management System (FDMS) published in the Federal Register on
December 29, 2010 (75 FR 82132), or you may visit http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/FR-2010-12-29/pdf/2010-32876.pdf.

Background

    On December 13, 2012, FMCSA published a notice of receipt of
Federal diabetes exemption applications from 12 individuals and
requested comments from the public (77 FR 74271). The public comment
period closed on January 14, 2013, and no comments were received.
    FMCSA has evaluated the eligibility of the 12 applicants and
determined that granting the exemptions to these individuals would
achieve a level of safety equivalent to or greater than the level that
would be achieved by complying with the current regulation 49 CFR
391.41(b)(3).

Diabetes Mellitus and Driving Experience of the Applicants

    The Agency established the current requirement for diabetes in 1970
because several risk studies indicated that drivers with diabetes had a
higher rate of crash involvement than the general population. The
diabetes rule provides that ``A person is physically qualified to drive
a commercial motor vehicle if that person has no established medical
history or clinical diagnosis of diabetes mellitus currently requiring
insulin for control'' (49 CFR 391.41(b)(3)).
    FMCSA established its diabetes exemption program, based on the
Agency's July 2000 study entitled ``A Report to Congress on the
Feasibility of a Program to Qualify Individuals with Insulin-Treated
Diabetes Mellitus to Operate in Interstate Commerce as Directed by the
Transportation Act for the 21st Century.'' The report concluded that a
safe and practicable protocol to allow some drivers with ITDM to
operate CMVs is feasible. The September 3, 2003 (68 FR 52441), Federal
Register notice in conjunction with the November 8, 2005 (70 FR 67777),
Federal Register notice provides the current protocol for allowing such
drivers to operate CMVs in interstate commerce.
    These 12 applicants have had ITDM over a range of 1 to 50 years.
These applicants report no severe hypoglycemic reactions resulting in
loss of consciousness or seizure, requiring the assistance of another
person, or resulting in impaired cognitive function that occurred
without warning symptoms, in the past 12 months and no recurrent (2 or
more) severe hypoglycemic episodes in the past 5 years. In each case,
an endocrinologist verified that the driver has demonstrated a
willingness to properly monitor and manage his/her diabetes mellitus,
received education related to diabetes management, and is on a stable
insulin regimen. These drivers report no other disqualifying
conditions, including diabetes-related complications. Each meets the
vision requirement at 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10).
    The qualifications and medical condition of each applicant were
stated and discussed in detail in the December 13, 2012, Federal
Register notice and they will not be repeated in this notice.

Discussion of Comments

    FMCSA received no comments in this proceeding.

Basis for Exemption Determination

    Under 49 U.S.C. 31136(e) and 31315, FMCSA may grant an exemption
from the diabetes requirement in 49 CFR 391.41(b)(3) if the exemption
is likely to achieve an equivalent or greater level of safety than
would be achieved without the exemption. The exemption allows the
applicants to operate CMVs in interstate commerce.
    To evaluate the effect of these exemptions on safety, FMCSA
considered medical reports about the applicants' ITDM and vision, and
reviewed the treating endocrinologists' medical opinion related to the
ability of the driver to safely operate a CMV while using insulin.
    Consequently, FMCSA finds that in each case exempting these
applicants from the diabetes requirement in 49 CFR 391.41(b)(3) is
likely to achieve a level of safety equal to that existing without the
exemption.

Conditions and Requirements

    The terms and conditions of the exemption will be provided to the
applicants in the exemption document and they include the following:
(1) That each individual submit a quarterly monitoring checklist
completed by the treating endocrinologist as well as an annual
checklist with a comprehensive medical evaluation; (2) that each
individual reports within 2 business days of occurrence, all episodes
of severe hypoglycemia, significant complications, or inability to
manage diabetes; also, any involvement in an accident or any other
adverse event in a CMV or personal vehicle, whether or not it is
related to an episode of hypoglycemia; (3) that each individual provide
a copy of the ophthalmologist's or optometrist's report to the medical
examiner at the time of the annual medical examination; and (4) that
each individual provide a copy of the annual medical certification to
the employer for retention in the driver's qualification file, or keep
a copy in his/her driver's qualification file if he/she is self-
employed. The driver must also have a copy of the certification when
driving, for presentation to a duly authorized Federal, State, or local
enforcement official.

Conclusion

    Based upon its evaluation of the 12 exemption applications, FMCSA
exempts Dennis W. Baseman (MN), Kathy L. Brown (IN), Charles K. Eudy
(TX), John C. Evans (IL), Thomas J. Ferry (NJ), Jeffrey C. Hanson (TX),
Jeffrey D. Kivett (IN), Bryan M. Laffin (MD), Peter W. Prime (MA),
David E. Wagner (PA), Daniel V. Williamson (MN), and Charles F.
Woodford (WI) from the ITDM requirement in 49 CFR 391.41(b)(3), subject
to the conditions listed under ``Conditions and Requirements'' above.
    In accordance with 49 U.S.C. 31136(e) and 31315 each exemption will
be valid for two years unless revoked earlier by FMCSA. The exemption
will be revoked if the following occurs: (1) The person fails to comply
with the terms and conditions of the 1/exemption; (2) the exemption has
resulted in a lower level of safety than was maintained before it was
granted; or (3) continuation of the exemption would not be consistent
with the goals and objectives of 49 U.S.C. 31136(e) and 31315. If the
exemption is still effective at the end of the 2-year period, the
person may apply to FMCSA

for a renewal under procedures in effect at that time.

    Issued on: January 18, 2013.
Larry W. Minor,
Associate Administrator for Policy.
[FR Doc. 2013-02267 Filed 2-1-13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-EX-P