[Federal Register Volume 86, Number 3 (Wednesday, January 6, 2021)]
[Notices]
[Page 556]
[FR Doc No: 2020-29290]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Federal Emergency Management Agency

[Internal Agency Docket No. FEMA-4424-DR; Docket ID FEMA-2020-0001]

Ohio; Amendment No. 2 to Notice of a Major Disaster Declaration

AGENCY: Federal Emergency Management Agency, DHS.

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: This notice amends the notice of a major disaster declaration
for the State of Ohio (FEMA-4424-DR), dated April 8, 2019, and related
determinations.

DATES: This change occurred on December 28, 2020.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Dean Webster, Office of Response and
Recovery, Federal Emergency Management Agency, 500 C Street SW,
Washington, DC 20472,<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The Federal Emergency Management Agency
(FEMA) hereby gives notice that pursuant to the authority vested in the
Administrator, under Executive Order 12148, as amended, Joseph Cirone,
of FEMA is appointed to act as the Federal Coordinating Officer for
this disaster.
    This action terminates the appointment of Steven W. Johnson as
Federal Coordinating Officer for this disaster.

The following Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance Numbers (CFDA)
are to be used for reporting and drawing funds: 97.030, Community
Disaster Loans; 97.031, Cora Brown Fund; 97.032, Crisis Counseling;
97.033, Disaster Legal Services; 97.034, Disaster Unemployment
Assistance (DUA); 97.046, Fire Management Assistance Grant; 97.048,
Disaster Housing Assistance to Individuals and Households In
Presidentially Declared Disaster Areas; 97.049, Presidentially
Declared Disaster Assistance--Disaster Housing Operations for
Individuals and Households; 97.050, Presidentially Declared Disaster
Assistance to Individuals and Households--Other Needs; 97.036,
Disaster Grants--Public Assistance (Presidentially Declared
Disasters); 97.039, Hazard Mitigation Grant.

Pete Gaynor,
Administrator, Federal Emergency Management Agency.
[FR Doc. 2020-29290 Filed 1-5-21; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 9111-23-P


[Federal Register Volume 81, Number 199 (Friday, October 14, 2016)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Page 71016]
[FR Doc No: 2016-24922]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration

49 CFR Parts 382 and 383

RIN 2126-AB95

General Technical, Organizational, Conforming, and Correcting
Amendments to the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Regulations; Correction

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

ACTION: Correcting amendment.

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

SUMMARY: The Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration corrects an
inadvertent error in the October 4, 2016 final rule ``General
Technical, Organizational, Conforming, and Correcting Amendments to the
Federal Motor Carrier Safety Regulations.'' Due to an error, the rule
unintentionally did not include the word ``and'' at the end of the next
to last condition for a farm vehicle driver to take advantage of the
farm vehicle driver exceptions to commercial driver's license standards
and alcohol and drug testing requirements. Today's correction makes it
clear that all four conditions in each farm vehicle driver exception
must be met in order for the exception to be used.

DATES: Effective: October 13, 2016.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr. David Miller, Federal Motor
Carrier Safety Administration, Regulatory Development Division, 1200
New Jersey Avenue SE., Washington, DC 20590-0001, by telephone at (202)
366-5370. Office hours are from 9:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m. e.t., Monday
through Friday, except Federal holidays.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The Federal Motor Carrier Safety
Administration published a document in the Federal Register on October
4, 2016 (81 FR 68336). This correction updates the amendments published
on October 4, 2016. In rule FR Doc. 2016-22996, published on October 4,
2016 (81 FR 68336).

List of Subjects

49 CFR Part 382

    Administrative practice and procedure, Alcohol abuse, Drug abuse,
Drug testing, Highway safety, Motor carriers, Penalties, Safety,
Transportation.

49 CFR Part 383

    Administrative practice and procedure, Alcohol abuse, Drug abuse,
Highway safety, Motor carriers.

    Accordingly, 49 CFR part 382 is corrected by making the following
correcting amendments:

PART 382--CONTROLLED SUBSTANCES AND ALCOHOL USE AND TESTING

0
1. The authority citation for part 382 continues to read as follows:

    Authority: 49 U.S.C. 31133, 31136, 31301 et seq., 31502; sec.
32934 of Public Law 112-141, 126 Stat. 405, 830; and 49 CFR 1.87.

0
2. In Sec.  382.103, revise paragraph (d)(3)(i)(C) to read as follows:

Sec.  382.103  Applicability.* * * * *

    (d) * * *
    (3) * * *
    (i) * * *
    (C) Not used in the operations of a for-hire motor carrier, except
for an exempt motor carrier as defined in Sec.  390.5 of this
subchapter; and
* * * * *

PART 383--COMMERCIAL DRIVER'S LICENSE STANDARDS; REQUIREMENTS AND
PENALTIES

0
3. The authority citation for part 383 continues to read as follows:

    Authority: 49 U.S.C. 521, 31136, 31301 et seq., and 31502; secs.
214 and 215 of Public Law 106-159, 113 Stat. 1748, 1766, 1767; sec.
1012(b) of Public Law 107-56, 115 Stat. 272, 297, sec. 4140 of
Public Law 109-59, 119 Stat. 1144, 1746; sec. 32934 of Public Law
112-141, 126 Stat. 405, 830; sec. 7208 of Public Law 114-94, 129
Stat. 1312, 1593; and 49 CFR 1.87.

0
4. In Sec.  383.3, revise paragraph (d)(1)(iii) to read as follows:

Sec.  383.3   Applicability.

* * * * *
    (d) * * *
    (1) * * *
    (iii) Not used in the operations of a for-hire motor carrier,
except for an exempt motor carrier as defined in Sec.  390.5 of this
subchapter; and
* * * * *

    Issued on: October 6, 2016.
Larry W. Minor,
Associate Administrator for Policy.
[FR Doc. 2016-24922 Filed 10-13-16; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 4910-EX-P


[Federal Register Volume 85, Number 60 (Friday, March 27, 2020)]
[Notices]
[Page 17327]
[FR Doc No: 2020-06462]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Docket No. AC20-72-000]

Black Hills Shoshone Pipeline, LLC; Notice of Petition for Waiver

    Take notice that on March 19, 2020, Black Hills Shoshone Pipeline,
LLC filed a petition for a new two-year waiver of the requirement that
an independent certified public accountant attest to the conformity of
the content set out in Black Hills Shoshone's FERC Form No. 2-A,
reflecting activity for 2019.\1\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ 18 CFR 158.11.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Any person desiring to intervene or to protest this filing must
file in accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of the Commission's Rules of
Practice and Procedure (18 CFR 385.211, 385.214). Protests will be
considered by the Commission in determining the appropriate action to
be taken, but will not serve to make protestants parties to the
proceeding. Any person wishing to become a party must file a notice of
intervention or motion to intervene, as appropriate. Such notices,
motions, or protests must be filed on or before the comment date.
Anyone filing a motion to intervene or protest must serve a copy of
that document on the Petitioner.
    The Commission encourages electronic submission of protests and
interventions in lieu of paper using the eFiling link at http://www.ferc.gov. Persons unable to file electronically should submit an
original and 5 copies of the protest or intervention to the Federal
Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street NE, Washington, DC
20426.
    This filing is accessible on-line at http://www.ferc.gov, using the
eLibrary link and is available for review in the Commission's Public
Reference Room in Washington, DC. There is an eSubscription link on the
website that enables subscribers to receive email notification when a
document is added to a subscribed docket(s).
    For assistance with any FERC Online service, please email
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or call<PHONE_NUMBER> (toll free). For
TTY, call<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    Comments: 5:00 p.m. Eastern Time on April 22, 2020.

    Dated: March 23, 2020.
Kimberly D. Bose,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2020-06462 Filed 3-26-20; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 76, Number 138 (Tuesday, July 19, 2011)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 42542-42545]
[FR Doc No: 2011-18043]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Coast Guard

33 CFR Part 100

[Docket No. USCG-2011-0306]
RIN 1625-AA08

Special Local Regulations for Marine Events, Bogue Sound;
Morehead City, NC

AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS.

ACTION: Temporary final rule.

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

SUMMARY: The Coast Guard is establishing Special Local Regulations for
``The Crystal Coast Grand Prix'' powerboat race, to be held on the
waters of Bogue Sound, adjacent to Morehead City, North Carolina. This
Special Local Regulation is necessary to protect spectators and vessels
from hazards associated with powerboat races. This regulation will
close a portion of the waters of Bogue Sound to vessel traffic during
the boat race.

DATES: This rule is effective August 20-21, 2011.

ADDRESSES: Comments and material received from the public, as well as
documents mentioned in this preamble as being available in the docket,
are part of docket USCG-2011-0306 and are available online by going to
http://www.regulations.gov, inserting USCG-2011-0306 in the ``Keyword''
box, and then clicking ``Search.'' This material is also available for
inspection or copying at the Docket Management Facility (M-30), U.S.
Department of Transportation, West Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140,
1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE., Washington, DC 20590, between 9 a.m. and 5
p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: If you have questions on this rule,
call or e-mail BOSN3 Joseph M. Edge, Coast Guard Sector North Carolina,
Coast Guard; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>, e-mail<EMAIL_ADDRESS>If
you have questions on viewing the docket, call Renee V. Wright, Program
Manager, Docket Operations, telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>.

Regulatory Information

    On May 27, 2011, we published a notice of proposed rulemaking
(NPRM) entitled Special Local Regulations for Marine Events, Bogue
Sound; Morehead City, North Carolina in the Federal Register (76 FR
30887). We received no comments on the proposed rule. No public meeting
was requested, and none was held.

Background and Purpose

    On August 20-21, 2011 from 10 a.m. to 4 p.m. East Coast Extreme
Corporation will sponsor ``The Crystal Coast Grand Prix'' powerboat
race on the waters of Bogue Sound adjacent to Morehead City, North
Carolina. This special local regulation is necessary to ensure the
safety of vessels and spectators from hazards associated with the
powerboat race. The Captain of the Port North Carolina has determined
powerboat races in close proximity to watercraft and infrastructure
pose significant risk to public safety and property. The likely
combination of large numbers of recreational vessels, powerboats
traveling at high speeds, and large numbers of spectators in close
proximity to the water could easily result in serious injuries or
fatalities. Establishing a special local regulation that prohibits
vessels or persons from entering the race course and surrounding area
will help ensure the safety of persons and property at this event and
help minimize the associated risk.
    The special local regulation will encompass the waters of Bogue
Sound, adjacent to Morehead City from the southern tip of Sugar Loaf
Island approximate position latitude 34[deg]42'45'' N, longitude
076[deg]42'48'' W, thence westerly to Morehead City Channel Daybeacon 7
(LLNR 38620), thence southwesterly along the channel line to Bogue
Sound Light 4 (LLNR 38770), thence southerly to Causeway Channel
Daybeacon 2 (LLNR 28720), thence southeasterly to Money Island
Daybeacon 1 (LLNR 38645), thence easterly to Eight and One Half Marina
Daybeacon 2 (LLNR 38685), thence easterly to the westernmost shoreline
of Brant island approximate position latitude 34[deg]42'36'' N,
longitude 076[deg]42'11'' W, thence northeasterly along the shoreline
to Tombstone Point approximate position latitude 34[deg]42'14'' N,
longitude 076[deg]41'20'' W, thence southeasterly to Morehead City
Channel Lighted Buoy 23 (LLNR 29455), thence easterly to approximate
position latitude 34[deg]41'25'' N, longitude 076[deg]41'22'' W, thence
northerly along the shoreline to approximate position latitude
34[deg]43'00'' N, longitude 076[deg]41'25'' W, thence westerly to the
North Carolina State Port Facility, thence westerly along the State
Port to the southwest corner approximate position latitude
34[deg]42'55'' N, longitude 076[deg]42'12'' W, thence westerly to the
southern tip of Sugar Loaf Island the point of origin. This regulated
area encompasses the entire race course located on Bogue Sound near
Morehead City, North Carolina. All geographic coordinates are North
American Datum 1983 (NAD 83).

Discussion of Comments and Changes

    There were no comments and no changes made.

Regulatory Analyses

    We developed this rule after considering numerous statutes and
executive orders related to rulemaking. Below we summarize our analyses
based on 13 of these statutes or executive orders.

Regulatory Planning and Review

    This rule is not a significant regulatory action under section 3(f)
of Executive Order 12866, Regulatory Planning and Review, and does not
require an assessment of potential costs and benefits under section
6(a)(3) of that Order. The Office of Management and Budget has not
reviewed it under that Order.
    Although this regulation will restrict access to the area, the
effect of this rule will not be significant because the regulated area
will be in effect for a limited time, from 10 a.m. to 4 p.m., on August
20-21, 2011. The Coast Guard will give advance notification via
maritime advisories so mariners can adjust their plans accordingly, and
the regulated area will apply only to the section of Bogue Sound
adjacent to Morehead City. Coast Guard vessels enforcing this regulated
area can be contacted on marine band radio VHF-FM channel 16 (156.8
MHz).

Small Entities

    Under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601-612), we have
considered whether this rule would have a significant economic impact
on a substantial number of small entities. The term ``small entities''
comprises small businesses, not-for-profit organizations that are
independently owned and operated and are not dominant in their fields,
and governmental jurisdictions with populations of less than 50,000.
    The Coast Guard certifies under 5 U.S.C. 605(b) that this rule will
not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small
entities. This rule will affect the following entities, some of which
may be small entities: The owners or operators of vessels intending to
transit the specified portion of Bogue Sound from 10 a.m. to 4 p.m. on
August 20-21, 2011.
    This rule would not have a significant economic impact on a
substantial number of small entities for the following reasons. This
rule will only be in effect for six hours each day for two days total.
The regulated area applies only to the section of Bogue Sound adjacent
to Morehead City and traffic may be allowed to pass through the
regulated area with the permission of the Coast Guard Patrol Commander.
Before the enforcement period, we will issue maritime advisories so
mariners can adjust their plans accordingly.
    If you think that your business, organization, or governmental
jurisdiction qualifies as a small entity and that this rule would have
a significant economic impact on it, please submit a comment (see
ADDRESSES) explaining why you think it qualifies and how and to what
degree this rule would economically affect it.

Assistance for Small Entities

    Under section 213(a) of the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement
Fairness Act of 1996 (Pub. L. 104-121), in the NPRM we offered to
assist small entities in understanding the rule so that they could
better evaluate its effects on them and participate in the rulemaking
process.
    Small businesses may send comments on the actions of Federal
employees who enforce, or otherwise determine compliance with, Federal
regulations to the Small Business and Agriculture Regulatory
Enforcement Ombudsman and the Regional Small Business Regulatory
Fairness Boards. The Ombudsman evaluates these actions annually and
rates each agency's responsiveness to small business. If you wish to
comment on actions by employees of the Coast Guard, call 1-888-REG-FAIR
(1-888-734-3247). The Coast Guard will not retaliate against small
entities that question or complain about this rule or any policy or
action of the Coast Guard.

Collection of Information

    This rule calls for no new collection of information under the
Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501-3520).

Federalism

    A rule has implications for federalism under Executive Order 13132,
Federalism, if it has a substantial direct effect on State or local
governments and would either preempt State law or impose a substantial
direct cost of compliance on them. We have analyzed this rule under
that Order and have determined that it does not have implications for
federalism.

Unfunded Mandates Reform Act

    The Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (2 U.S.C. 1531-1538)
requires

Federal agencies to assess the effects of their discretionary
regulatory actions. In particular, the Act addresses actions that may
result in the expenditure by a State, local, or tribal government, in
the aggregate, or by the private sector of $100,000,000 or more in any
one year. Though this rule will not result in such an expenditure, we
do discuss the effects of this rule elsewhere in this preamble.

Taking of Private Property

    This rule will not effect a taking of private property or otherwise
have taking implications under Executive Order 12630, Governmental
Actions and Interference with Constitutionally Protected Property
Rights.

Civil Justice Reform

    This rule meets applicable standards in sections 3(a) and 3(b)(2)
of Executive Order 12988, Civil Justice Reform, to minimize litigation,
eliminate ambiguity, and reduce burden.

Protection of Children

    We have analyzed this rule under Executive Order 13045, Protection
of Children from Environmental Health Risks and Safety Risks. This rule
is not an economically significant rule and does not create an
environmental risk to health or risk to safety that may
disproportionately affect children.

Indian Tribal Governments

    This rule does not have tribal implications under Executive Order
13175, Consultation and Coordination with Indian Tribal Governments,
because it does not have a substantial direct effect on one or more
Indian tribes, on the relationship between the Federal Government and
Indian tribes, or on the distribution of power and responsibilities
between the Federal Government and Indian tribes.

Energy Effects

    We have analyzed this rule under Executive Order 13211, Actions
Concerning Regulations That Significantly Affect Energy Supply,
Distribution, or Use. We have determined that it is not a ``significant
energy action'' under that order because it is not a ``significant
regulatory action'' under Executive Order 12866 and is not likely to
have a significant adverse effect on the supply, distribution, or use
of energy. The Administrator of the Office of Information and
Regulatory Affairs has not designated it as a significant energy
action. Therefore, it does not require a Statement of Energy Effects
under Executive Order 13211.

Technical Standards

    The National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act (NTTAA) (15
U.S.C. 272 note) directs agencies to use voluntary consensus standards
in their regulatory activities unless the agency provides Congress,
through the Office of Management and Budget, with an explanation of why
using these standards would be inconsistent with applicable law or
otherwise impractical. Voluntary consensus standards are technical
standards (e.g., specifications of materials, performance, design, or
operation; test methods; sampling procedures; and related management
systems practices) that are developed or adopted by voluntary consensus
standards bodies.
    This rule does not use technical standards. Therefore, we did not
consider the use of voluntary consensus standards.

Environment

    We have analyzed this rule under Department of Homeland Security
Management Directive 023-01 and Commandant Instruction M16475.lD, which
guide the Coast Guard in complying with the National Environmental
Policy Act of 1969 (NEPA) (42 U.S.C. 4321-4370f), and have concluded
this action is one of a category of actions which do not individually
or cumulatively have a significant effect on the human environment.
This rule is categorically excluded, under figure 2-1, paragraph
(34)(h) and (35)(a), of the Instruction. This rule involves
implementation of regulations within 33 CFR Part 100 that apply to
organized marine events on the navigable waters of the United States
that may have potential for negative impact on the safety or other
interest of waterway users and shore side activities in the event area.
This special local regulation is necessary to provide for the safety of
the general public and event participants from potential hazards
associated with movement of vessels near the event area. An
environmental analysis checklist and a categorical exclusion
determination are available in the docket where indicated under
ADDRESSES.

List of Subjects in 33 CFR Part 100

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

    For the reasons discussed in the preamble, the Coast Guard proposes
to amend 33 CFR part 100 as follows:

PART 100--SAFETY OF LIFE ON NAVIGABLE WATERS

0
1. The authority citation for part 100 continues to read as follows:

    Authority: 33 U.S.C. 1233

0
2. Add a temporary Sec.  100.35T05-0306 to read as follows:

Sec.  100.35T05-0306  Special Local Regulation; Crystal Coast Grand
Prix; Morehead City, NC.

    (a) Regulated area. The following location is a regulated area: All
waters of Bogue Sound, adjacent to Morehead City from the southern tip
of Sugar Loaf Island approximate position latitude 34[deg]42'45'' N,
longitude 076[deg]42'48'' W, thence westerly to Morehead City Channel
Daybeacon 7 (LLNR 38620), thence southwesterly along the channel line
to Bogue Sound Light 4 (LLNR 38770), thence southerly to Causeway
Channel Daybeacon 2 (LLNR 28720), thence southeasterly to Money Island
Daybeacon 1 (LLNR 38645), thence easterly to Eight and One Half Marina
Daybeacon 2 (LLNR 38685), thence easterly to the westernmost shoreline
of Brant island approximate position latitude 34[deg]42'36'' N,
longitude 076[deg]42'11'' W, thence northeasterly along the shoreline
to Tombstone Point approximate position latitude 34[deg]42'14'' N,
longitude 076[deg]41'20'' W, thence southeasterly to Morehead City
Channel Lighted Buoy 23 (LLNR 29455), thence easterly to approximate
position latitude 34[deg]41'25'' N, longitude 076[deg]41'22'' W, thence
northerly along the shoreline to approximate position latitude
34[deg]43'00'' N, longitude 076[deg]41''25'' W, thence westerly to the
North Carolina State Port Facility, thence westerly along the State
Port to the southwest corner approximate position latitude
34[deg]42'55'' N, longitude 076[deg]42'12'' W, thence westerly to the
southern tip of Sugar Loaf Island the point of origin. All coordinates
reference North American Datum 1983 (NAD 83).
    (b) Definitions: (1) Coast Guard Patrol Commander means a
commissioned, warrant, or petty officer of the U.S. Coast Guard who has
been designated by the Commander, Coast Guard Sector North Carolina.
    (2) Official Patrol means any vessel assigned or approved by
Commander, Coast Guard Sector North Carolina with a commissioned,
warrant, or petty officer on board and displaying a Coast Guard ensign.
    (3) Participant means all vessels participating in the ``The
Crystal Coast Grand Prix'' powerboat race under the auspices of the
Marine Event Permit issued to the event sponsor and

approved by Commander, Coast Guard Sector North Carolina.
    (4) Spectator means all persons and vessels not registered with the
event sponsor as participants or official patrol.
    (c) Special local regulations: (1) The Coast Guard Patrol Commander
may forbid and control the movement of all vessels in the vicinity of
the regulated area. When hailed or signaled by an official patrol
vessel, a vessel approaching the regulated area shall immediately
comply with the directions given. Failure to do so may result in
termination of voyage and citation for failure to comply.
    (2) The Coast Guard Patrol Commander may terminate the event, or
the operation of any support vessel participating in the event, at any
time it is deemed necessary for the protection of life or property. The
Coast Guard may be assisted in the patrol and enforcement of the
regulated area by other Federal, State, and local agencies.
    (3) Vessel traffic, not involved with the event, may be allowed to
transit the regulated area with the permission of the Patrol Commander.
Vessels that desire passage through the regulated area shall contact
the Coast Guard Patrol Commander on VHF-FM marine band radio for
direction. Only participants and official patrol vessels are allowed to
enter the regulated area.
    (4) All Coast Guard vessels enforcing the regulated area can be
contacted on marine band radio VHF-FM channel 16 (156.8 MHz) and
channel 22 (157.1 MHz). The Coast Guard will issue marine information
broadcast on VHF-FM marine band radio announcing specific event date
and times.
    (d) Enforcement period: This section will be enforced from 10 a.m.
to 4 p.m. on August 20-21, 2011.

    Dated: July 5, 2011.
T.M. Cummins,
Commander, U.S. Coast Guard, Acting Captain of the Port North Carolina.
[FR Doc. 2011-18043 Filed 7-18-11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 9110-04-P


[Federal Register: April 2, 2007 (Volume 72, Number 62)]
[Notices]
[Page 15690-15692]
[DOCID:fr02ap07-64]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

[EPA-HQ-OPPT-2006-0398; FRL-8109-6]

Release of Brochure on Current Best Practices to Prevent Asbestos
Exposure Among Brake and Clutch Repair Workers

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: EPA is announcing the release of the final brochure entitled,
Current Best Practices for Preventing Asbestos Exposure Among Brake and
Clutch Repair Workers. On August 24, 2006, EPA released a draft version
of the brochure for a 60-day public comment

period. After reviewing and, where appropriate, incorporating public
comments on the draft brochure, EPA is now issuing the final brochure.
The brochure is intended to provide information for automotive
professionals and home mechanics on preventing exposure to brake and
clutch dust that may contain asbestos fibers. A copy of the new
brochure can be found at http://www.epa.gov/asbestos. This brochure

replaces the existing 1986 document entitled, Guidance for Preventing
Asbestos Disease Among Auto Mechanics (EPA-560-OPTS-86-002), commonly
referred to as the ``Gold Book.''

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For general information contact: Colby
Lintner, Regulatory Coordinator, Environmental Assistance Division
(7408M), Office of Pollution Prevention and Toxics, Environmental
Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave., NW., Washington, DC 20460-
0001; telephone number:<PHONE_NUMBER>; e-mail address:
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
    For technical information contact: Robert Courtnage, National
Program Chemicals Division (7404T), Office Pollution Prevention and
Toxics, Environmental Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave., NW.,
Washington, DC 20460-0001; telephone number:<PHONE_NUMBER>; e-mail
address<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or Tom Simons, National Program
Chemicals Division (7404T), Office Pollution Prevention and Toxics,
Environmental Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave., NW.,
Washington, DC 20460-0001; telephone number:<PHONE_NUMBER>; e-mail
address<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. General Information

A. Does this Action Apply to Me?

    You may be potentially affected by this action if you conduct
automotive repair work. Individuals covered by this action may include
those in the professional automotive repair industry, State and local
government employees who perform brake and clutch work in States
without Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA)-approved
State plans, and people performing do-it-yourself automotive repair. In
addition, those involved in the manufacture and/or import of automotive
brake and clutch products that may contain asbestos, as well as those
involved in regulatory compliance, may be affected by the notice. This
listing is not intended to be exhaustive, but rather provides a guide
for readers regarding entities likely to be affected by this action.
Other types of entities not listed in this unit also could be affected.
To determine whether you or your business may be affected by this
action, you should carefully examine the applicability provisions in 29
CFR 1910.1001, specifically paragraph (f)(3) and Appendix F, or 40 CFR
part 763, subpart G. If you have any questions regarding the
applicability of this action to a particular entity, consult either
technical person listed under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT.

B. How Can I Get Copies of this Document and Other Related Information?

    1. Docket. EPA has established a docket for this action under
docket identification (ID) number EPA-HQ-OPPT-2006-0398. All documents
in the docket are listed in the docket's index available at http://www.regulations.gov.
 Although listed in the index, some information is

not publicly available, e.g., Confidential Business Information (CBI)
or other information whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Certain
other material, such as copyrighted material, will be publicly
available only in hard copy. Publicly available docket materials are
available electronically at http://www.regulations.gov, or, if only

available in hard copy, at the OPPT Docket. The OPPT Docket is located
in the EPA Docket Center (EPA/DC) at Rm. 3334, EPA West Bldg., 1301
Constitution Ave., NW., Washington, DC. The EPA/DC Public Reading Room
hours of operation are 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., Monday through Friday,
excluding Federal holidays. The telephone number of the EPA/DC Public
Reading Room is<PHONE_NUMBER>, and the telephone number for the OPPT
Docket is<PHONE_NUMBER>. Docket visitors are required to show
photographic identification, pass through a metal detector, and sign
the EPA visitor log. All visitor bags are processed through an X-ray
machine and subject to search. Visitors will be provided an EPA/DC
badge that must be visible at all times in the building and returned
upon departure.
    2. Electronic access. You may access this Federal Register document
electronically through the EPA Internet under the ``Federal Register''
listings at http://www.epa.gov/fedrgstr.

II. What Action is the Agency Taking?

    EPA is announcing the release of the final brochure entitled,
Current Best Practices for Preventing Asbestos Exposure Among Brake and
Clutch Repair Workers. EPA released and published in the Federal
Register of August 24, 2006 (71 FR 50060) (FRL-8086-6) a draft of the
brochure for a 60-day public comment period. After reviewing and, where
appropriate, incorporating public comments into the brochure, EPA is
now issuing the final brochure. The brochure provides information for
automotive professionals, including State and local government
employees, and home mechanics on preventing exposure to brake and
clutch dust that may contain asbestos fibers. The brochure summarizes
work practices that can help to reduce or eliminate asbestos exposure,
and identifies pertinent OSHA regulatory requirements for professional
automotive mechanics, which are found at 29 CFR 1910.1001, specifically
paragraph (f)(3) and Appendix F. Also discussed in this brochure is
EPA's Worker Protection Rule, found at 40 CFR part 763, subpart G,
which contains requirements identical to the OSHA regulatory
requirements and is mandatory for State and local government employees
who perform brake and clutch work in States without OSHA-approved State
plans. EPA believes that home mechanics, who are not subject to the
OSHA or EPA standards, also may benefit from the information discussed
in the brochure regarding the OSHA and EPA work practice standards and
the additional advice provided on steps home mechanics can consider
taking to prevent possible asbestos exposure when working with
asbestos-containing friction products. A copy of the final brochure is
available at http://www.epa.gov/asbestos. This brochure replaces the

existing 1986 document entitled, Guidance for Preventing Asbestos
Disease Among Auto Mechanics (EPA-560-OPTS-86-002), commonly referred
to as the ``Gold Book.''
    Asbestos is the common name given to a number of naturally
occurring mineral fibers that are known for their high tensile
strength, resistance to heat, and chemical stability. Because of these
properties, asbestos has been used in a wide range of manufactured
goods, including roofing shingles, ceiling and floor tiles, paper and
cement products, textiles, and coatings and friction products such as
automobile clutch, brake, and transmission parts. If products
containing asbestos are disturbed, thin, lightweight asbestos fibers
can be released into the air. Persons breathing the air may then inhale
asbestos fibers. Continued exposure can increase the amount of fibers
deposited in the lung. Fibers embedded in the lung tissue over time may
result in lung diseases such as

asbestosis, lung cancer, or mesothelioma. It can take from 10 to 40
years or more for symptoms of an asbestos-related condition to appear.
Smoking increases the risk of developing illness from asbestos
exposure.
    During the 60-day comment period beginning on August 24, 2006, EPA
received a number of comments on the draft brochure. After considering
those comments, EPA has modified the brochure in the following ways:
     EPA has added language to the brochure that explains that
asbestos-related disease can take 10 to 40 years or more for symptoms
of an asbestos-related condition to appear.
     EPA has incorporated language referring to information
resources that are available to consumers, including Material Safety
Data Sheets (MSDS), labels, and information from the product
manufacturer, to aid in determining whether brake or clutch components
contain asbestos.
     EPA has incorporated information from OSHA's recent Safety
and Health Information Bulletin (SHIB) addressing brake and clutch
repair, which notes the difficulty of distinguishing asbestos-
containing brake and clutch components from non-asbestos brake and
clutch components. A copy of the OSHA SHIB may be found at http://www.osha.gov/dts/shib/shib072606.html.
 EPA also has included a

reference to the OSHA SHIB in the final brochure.
     EPA has added a reference to the spray can/solvent method
of controlling the spread of brake and clutch dust, since it is an
equivalent alternative asbestos control method approved by OSHA under
29 CFR 1910.1001, specifically paragraph (f)(3) and Appendix F.
     EPA included advice similar to OSHA's advice (in the
recent OSHA SHIB) that individuals who perform brake or clutch work
change into clean clothes before going inside the home, that they wash
soiled clothes separately, and that bystanders, as well as food and
drink, be kept out of the work area to minimize exposure to others.
     EPA clarified that employers of professional automotive
technicians must ensure that asbestos waste is disposed of properly
pursuant to the OSHA regulations and recommended that home mechanics
(who are not subject to OSHA regulations) double-bag asbestos waste and
dispose of it following appropriate local regulations to minimize
exposure.
    EPA believes this final brochure provides the public and workers
involved in brake and clutch repair work with a simple, easy-to-
understand summary of the OSHA work practice standards, which are
mandatory for certain professional automotive mechanics, and provides a
discussion of the possible health effects associated with asbestos
exposure that is sufficient. The brochure is not intended to provide
comprehensive technical information regarding work practices, nor is it
a comprehensive assessment of the possible health effects that might
arise if one is exposed to asbestos in performing brake and clutch
repair work. Finally, the brochure is not a substitute for any
applicable legal requirements or regulations. Thus, the brochure does
not impose legally binding requirements on any party, including EPA,
States, or the regulated community. Interested professional mechanics
engaged in commercial brake and clutch repair are encouraged to contact
OSHA regarding compliance with the mandatory work practice standards
highlighted in this brochure (http://www.osha.gov). Similarly,

interested State and local government employees who perform brake and
clutch work in States without OSHA-approved State plans are encouraged
to contact EPA regarding compliance with EPA's Worker Protection Rule.
Finally, home mechanics may contact EPA with any specific questions not
addressed in the brochure by visiting the EPA asbestos website at
http://www.epa.gov/asbestos, or by calling the Toxic Substances Control

Act Assistance Information Service (TAIS) at<PHONE_NUMBER>.

List of Subjects

    Environmental protection, Asbestos, Automotive brake and clutch
repair, Health.

    Dated: March 23, 2007.
Wendy C. Hamnett,
Acting Assistant Administrator, Office of Prevention, Pesticides and
Toxic Substances.
[FR Doc. E7-6057 Filed 3-30-07; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6560-50-S


[Federal Register Volume 77, Number 5 (Monday, January 9, 2012)]
[Notices]
[Pages 1119-1124]
[FR Doc No: 2012-84]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-66080; File No. SR-FINRA-2011-073]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; Financial Industry Regulatory
Authority, Inc.; Notice of Filing of Proposed Rule Change Relating to
Establishing a Governmental Accounting Standards Board Accounting
Support Fee

 January 3, 2012.
    Pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934
(the ``Act'') \1\ and Rule 19b-4 thereunder,\2\ notice is hereby given
that on December 19, 2011, Financial Industry Regulatory Authority,
Inc. (``FINRA'') filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission
(``SEC'' or ``Commission'') the proposed rule change as described in
Items I, II, and III below, which Items have been prepared by FINRA.
The Commission is publishing this notice to solicit comments on the
proposed rule change from interested persons.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

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

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

    FINRA is proposing to adopt Section 14 to Schedule A of the FINRA
By-Laws to establish an accounting support fee to adequately fund the
annual budget of the Governmental Accounting Standards Board
(``GASB'').
    The text of the proposed rule change is available on FINRA's Web
site at http://www.finra.org, at the principal office of FINRA and at
the Commission's Public Reference Room.

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

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

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

1. Purpose
    The GASB was established in 1984 by agreement of the Financial
Accounting Foundation (``FAF'') and ten national associations of state
and local government officials as an independent organization that
establishes and improves standards of accounting and financial
reporting for U.S. state and local governments.\3\ The GASB is
recognized by governments, the accounting industry, and the capital
markets as the source for the development and publication of the
generally accepted accounting principles (``GAAP'') for state and local
governments.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ The GASB is not a government entity. It is an operating
component of the FAF, which is a private-sector, not-for-profit
entity. Funding for the GASB comes in part from sales of
publications and in part from state and local governments and the
municipal bond community. Its standards are not Federal laws or
regulations, and the GASB does not have enforcement authority. See
Facts About GASB, http://gasb.org.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act
(``Dodd-Frank Act'') was signed into law by President Obama on July 21,
2010.\4\ As added by Section 978 of the Dodd-Frank Act, Section 19(g)
of the Securities Act of 1933 (``Securities Act'') gives the SEC the
authority to require a national securities association to establish a
reasonable annual accounting support fee to adequately fund the annual
budget of the GASB (``GASB Accounting Support Fee'') and to draft the
rules and procedures necessary to equitably assess the GASB Accounting
Support Fee on the association's members.\5\ On May 11, 2011, the SEC
exercised this authority and issued an order requiring FINRA to
establish (a) a reasonable annual accounting support fee to adequately
fund the annual budget of the GASB; and (b) rules and procedures, in
consultation with the principal organizations representing State
governors, legislators, local elected officials, and State and local
finance officers, to provide for the equitable allocation, assessment,
and collection of the accounting support fee from its members, and the
remittance of all such accounting support fees to the FAF.\6\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ See Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection
Act, Pub. L. 111-203, 124 Stat. 1376 (2010).
    \5\ See 15 U.S.C. 77s(g). For purposes of the GASB Accounting
Support Fee, the annual budget of the GASB is the annual budget
reviewed and approved according to the internal procedures of the
FAF. See 15 U.S.C. 77s(g)(2). FINRA anticipates that the GASB's
annual budget will include an administrative fee to FINRA. The
administrative fee is intended to cover FINRA's costs associated
with calculating, assessing, and collecting the GASB Accounting
Support Fee, and the amount will be negotiated with the FAF each
year. For the initial year, the administrative fee will be $50,000.
    \6\ Securities Exchange Act Release No. 64462 (May 11, 2011), 76
FR 28247 (May 16, 2011).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In response to the SEC's order of May 11, 2011, FINRA is proposing
new Section 14 (Accounting Support Fee for Governmental Accounting
Standards Board) to Schedule A of the FINRA By-Laws to establish the
GASB Accounting Support Fee. After considering multiple ways to assess
the GASB Accounting Support Fee on its members and issuing Regulatory
Notice 11-28 requesting comment on the GASB Accounting Support Fee, the
proposed rule change assesses the fee based on members' municipal
securities trading volume reported to the Municipal Securities
Rulemaking Board (``MSRB''). FINRA believes that basing the GASB
Accounting Support Fee on reliable and timely reporting data will
ensure the accuracy of the fee and that using transaction data to
apportion the fee will result in a fair and equitable assessment across
FINRA members. However, because FINRA is statutorily prohibited from
collecting amounts in excess of GASB's recoverable annual budgeted
expenses and because a transaction-based fee is inherently variable due
to the unpredictability of transaction volume, FINRA is proposing a
quarterly assessment based on GASB's annual budget.\7\ Under proposed
Section 14, the GASB Accounting Support Fee will be allocated among
FINRA members on a quarterly basis based on municipal securities
transactions reported to the MSRB. Specifically, each calendar quarter,
each FINRA member would be required to pay an assessment to FINRA of
its portion of one quarter of the annual GASB Accounting Support Fee
amount that reflects the member's portion of the total par value of
municipal securities transactions reported by FINRA members to the MSRB
under MSRB Rule G-14(b) \8\ in the previous calendar quarter. For
example, if GASB's recoverable annual budgeted expenses for a given
year were $10 million, FINRA would collect $2.5 million from its
members each quarter. Each member's fee would be based on the member's
proportion of municipal securities transactions (based on the par value
of reported transactions, not their price) reported by all FINRA
members to the MSRB in the previous calendar quarter.\9\ Thus, for
example, if a member reported transactions to the MSRB in a given
quarter that accounted for 10% of the total par value amount of
transactions reported by all FINRA members during the quarter, the
member's assessment would be 10% of one quarter of GASB's annual budget
(in the above example, the member's quarterly assessment would be
$250,000 (i.e., 10% of $2.5 million)).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ Section 19(g)(4) of the Securities Act, as added by the
Dodd-Frank Act, prohibits FINRA from collecting GASB Accounting
Support Fees for a fiscal year in excess of GASB's recoverable
annual budgeted expenses. See 15 U.S.C. 77s(g)(4).
    \8\ MSRB Rule G-14(b) sets out municipal securities transaction
reporting requirements.
    \9\ If a member does not engage in reportable municipal
securities transactions during a particular calendar quarter, the
member would not be subject to the GASB Accounting Support Fee for
that quarter.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    To exclude members with de minimis transactions in municipal
securities in a given quarter from being assessed the fee, FINRA is
proposing that members with a quarterly assessment of less than $25
would not be charged the fee for that quarter. Any amounts originally
assessed to those members would be reallocated among the members with
an assessment that quarter of $25 or more based on the member's portion
of the total par value of municipal securities transactions reported by
FINRA members to the MSRB.
    As required by Section 19(g) of the Securities Act, any GASB
Accounting Support Fees collected by FINRA will be remitted to the FAF
\10\ and used to

support the efforts of the GASB to establish standards of financial
accounting and reporting applicable to state and local governments.\11\
In accordance with Section 19(g)(5)(B) of the Securities Act,
collection of the GASB Accounting Support Fee shall not be construed to
provide the SEC or FINRA direct or indirect oversight of the budget or
technical agenda of the GASB or to affect the setting of GAAP by the
GASB.\12\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \10\ See 15 U.S.C. 77s(g)(1).
    \11\ See 15 U.S.C. 77s(g)(3). Specifically, FINRA anticipates
establishing a separate bank account specifically for the GASB
Accounting Support Fee and will coordinate with the FAF to establish
a process by which FINRA will wire the funds into the FAF account
for the GASB Accounting Support Fee. Given the separate bank
account, FINRA will provide monthly account reconciliations and
accounts receivable aging reports, which will be reviewed by FINRA
management each month and will be available for review by FAF and
GASB management upon request.
    \12\ See 15 U.S.C. 77s(g)(5)(B).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    As FINRA noted in Regulatory Notice 11-28, because some firms may
seek to pass the GASB Accounting Support Fee onto customers engaged in
municipal securities transactions, FINRA proposes to publish a
Regulatory Notice each year disclosing the total annual GASB Accounting
Support Fee FINRA will collect for that year. In this annual Notice,
FINRA also anticipates setting out an estimated fee rate (per $1,000
par value) based on the GASB recoverable annual budgeted expenses
reported to FINRA for that year and historical municipal security trade
reporting volumes so that firms will have some basis on which to
establish a fee should they choose to do so. The Notice will also
remind any firms choosing to pass along the fee of the need for proper
disclosure of the GASB Accounting Support Fee, including, if
applicable, the fact that the fee is an estimate and that the firm
ultimately may pay more or less than the fee charged to the customer.
In addition, any disclosure used by the firm cannot be misleading and
must comport with FINRA rules, including just and equitable principles
of trade, as well as any applicable MSRB rules.
    The effective date of the proposed rule change will be the date of
SEC approval. The initial fees assessed on members will be based on
trading activity reported in the calendar quarter during which the SEC
approves the proposed rule change. For example, if the proposed rule
change is approved on February 1, 2012, FINRA will bill members based
on trading activity from January 1, 2012, to March 31, 2012, to cover
one quarter of GASB's 2012 budget. As a result, depending on the date
of SEC approval, the proposed GASB fee may only cover a portion of the
2012 GASB budget.
2. Statutory Basis
    The proposed rule change is being filed in response to the SEC's
order of May 11, 2011, which was issued pursuant to Section 19(g) of
the Securities Act. Section 19(g) gives the SEC the authority to
require a national securities association to establish a reasonable
annual accounting support fee to adequately fund the annual budget of
the GASB and to draft the rules and procedures necessary to equitably
assess the GASB Accounting Support Fee on the association's members. On
May 11, 2011, the SEC exercised this authority and issued an order
requiring FINRA to establish (a) a reasonable annual accounting support
fee to adequately fund the annual budget of the GASB; and (b) rules and
procedures, in consultation with the principal organizations
representing State governors, legislators, local elected officials, and
State and local finance officers, to provide for the equitable
allocation, assessment, and collection of the accounting support fee
from its members, and the remittance of all such accounting support
fees to the FAF.
    FINRA believes that the proposed rule change is consistent with the
provisions of Section 15A(b)(5) of the Act,\13\ which requires, among
other things, that FINRA rules provide for the equitable allocation of
reasonable dues, fees and other charges among members and issuers and
other persons using any facility or system that FINRA operates or
controls. FINRA believes that, given the restrictions in Section 19(g)
of the Securities Act regarding the specific amount FINRA must collect,
a quarterly transaction-based assessment with a limited exception for
firms with a de minimis amount of reportable municipal securities
transactions is a fair and equitable manner to assess the fee. FINRA
also believes that the $25 per quarter exemption threshold strikes an
appropriate balance between exempting those firms with truly de minimis
transactions and not imposing an undue burden on other firms to recover
the amount that would be assessed on the exempt firms.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \13\ 15 U.S.C. 78o-3(b)(5).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

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

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

    The proposed rule change was published for comment in Regulatory
Notice 11-28 (June 2011). A copy of the Regulatory Notice is attached
as Exhibit 2a to the proposed rule change. The comment period expired
on August 1, 2011. FINRA received eleven comment letters in response to
the Regulatory Notice.\14\ A list of the comment letters received in
response to the Regulatory Notice is attached as Exhibit 2b to the
proposed rule change. Copies of the comment letters received in
response to the Regulatory Notice are attached as Exhibit 2c to the
proposed rule change. Of the eleven comment letters received, five were
generally in favor of the proposed rule change and six were generally
opposed.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \14\ See Letter from Brown & Brown Financial Services, Inc.,
dated July 5, 2011 (``B&B''); letter from Third Party Marketers
Association, dated July 26, 2011 (``3PM''); letter from NPB
Financial Group, LLC, dated July 27, 2011 (``NPB''); letter from
City of Bay City, Michigan, dated July 28, 2011 (``Bay City'');
letter from Bond Dealers of America, dated August 1, 2011 (``BDA'');
letter from Government Finance Officers Association, dated August 1,
2011 (``GFOA''); letter from National Association of State Auditors,
Comptrollers and Treasurers, dated August 1, 2011 (``NASACT'');
letter from Roosevelt & Cross Incorporated, dated August 1, 2011
(``R&C''); letter from Securities Industry and Financial Markets
Association, dated August 1, 2011 (``SIFMA''); letter from National
Association of Independent Broker/Dealers, dated August 2, 2011
(``NAIBD''); letter from Hartfield Titus & Donnelly, LLC, dated
August 11, 2011 (``HT&D'').
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Several commenters expressed the view that broker-dealers, and
specifically FINRA members, should not be forced to shoulder the entire
burden of funding the GASB because many other market participants,
issuers, and other people who benefit from GASB accounting standards
are not registered broker-dealers or FINRA members.\15\ For example,
one commenter stated that ``many other end users of GASB's accounting
and financial reporting standards * * * get a `free ride' under FINRA's
proposed methodology.'' \16\ Another commenter suggested that a
proportionate share of the revenue necessary to fund the GASB come from
municipal financial advisors, which are registered with the SEC and the
MSRB, although not always with FINRA.\17\ Another commenter suggested
that the MSRB, rather than FINRA, should

administer the fee because bank dealers are members of the MSRB but are
not members of FINRA.\18\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \15\ See BDA, HT&D, NAIBD, SIFMA, R&C.
    \16\ See SIFMA. The commenter specifically identified non-debt
issuing municipalities, financial advisors, banks, bank dealers,
insurance companies, rating agencies, mutual funds, legislative/
governmental staff, and taxpayer organizations. See also HT&D.
    \17\ See NAIBD.
    \18\ See SIFMA.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Although FINRA recognizes the concerns raised by the commenters
regarding the specification of FINRA members as the funding source for
the GASB, Section 19(g) of the Securities Act, under which the SEC
issued its order, substantially limits the parameters of the GASB
Accounting Support Fee. Section 19(g)(1)(B) of the Securities Act
provides that the SEC may require a registered national securities
association \19\ to assess and collect the accounting support fee
``from the members of the association.'' \20\ Consequently, the order
issued by the SEC pursuant to Section 19(g) of the Securities Act
requires FINRA to collect the GASB Accounting Support Fee from its
members, and FINRA has no authority to collect the fee from non-FINRA
members.\21\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \19\ FINRA is the only national securities association
registered with the Commission.
    \20\ 15 U.S.C. 77s (g)(1)(B).
    \21\ FINRA estimates that over 95 percent of municipal
transactions reported to the MSRB are reported by FINRA members.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Three commenters expressed concern that there was no independent
oversight of the GASB's annual budget and asserted that this lack of
oversight provides no incentive for transparency or fiscal
discipline.\22\ One commenter noted that the recent Government
Accountability Office report on the GASB \23\ observed that some
stakeholders ``were concerned with the level and nature of GASB's
expenditures--such as the amounts spent on staff salaries and office
space--as well as a perceived lack of transparency associated with its
budget process.'' \24\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \22\ See BDA, HT&D, SIFMA.
    \23\ See Report of the United States Government Accountability
Office, Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform Act: Role of the Governmental
Accounting Standards Board in Municipal Securities Markets and its
Past Funding (January 18, 2011), available at http://www.gao.gov/new.items/d11267r.pdf.
    \24\ See SIFMA.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The commenters are correct that although FINRA has been ordered to
assess and collect the GASB Accounting Support Fee, FINRA has no
authority under Section 19(g) of the Securities Act to review the
GASB's budget. In fact, Section 19(g)(5)(B)(i) of the Securities Act
specifically provides that collection of the GASB Accounting Support
Fee does not provide FINRA with any direct or indirect oversight of the
budget or technical agenda of the GASB.\25\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \25\ See 15 U.S.C. 77s(g)(5)(B)(i).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    One commenter \26\ suggested that FINRA has not met the statutory
requirement in Section 19(g)(1)(B) of the Securities Act that it
consult with certain groups when establishing the rules and procedures
regarding the GASB Accounting Support Fee.\27\ The commenter claims
that ``FINRA did not consult with any state and local government
associations before submitting a notice for public comment regarding
the rules and procedures for establishing the GASB fee.'' The commenter
also asserts that ``Section 978 of the [Dodd-Frank Act] expressly
requires prior consultation with the `principal organizations
representing State governors, legislators, local elected officials, and
State and local finance officers.' ''
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \26\ See GFOA.
    \27\ Section 19(g)(1)(B) of the Securities Act states that the
Commission may require FINRA to ``establish * * * rules and
procedures, in consultation with the principal organizations
representing State governors, legislators, local elected officials,
and State and local finance officers, to provide for the equitable
allocation, assessment, and collection of the [GASB Accounting
Support Fee].'' 15 U.S.C. 77s(g)(1)(B).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Contrary to the commenter's conclusion that FINRA failed to consult
with the specified organizations, FINRA departed from its standard
practice and provided nineteen different organizations representing
State governors, legislators, local elected officials, and State and
local finance officers with a draft of Regulatory Notice 11-28 before
the Notice was published for public comment.\28\ In addition, after
receipt of the GFOA comment letter, FINRA participated in a conference
call with representatives of GFOA, NASACT, NASBO, and the NGA where
those groups reiterated the issues set forth in the GFOA and NASACT
comment letters. Moreover, FINRA's publication of a Regulatory Notice
requesting comment on a proposal before it is filed with the SEC is
itself an additional form of consultation. Indeed, two organizations
representing state and local finance officers submitted formal comment
letters expressing their views on the proposal.\29\ To provide a
further opportunity for all interested parties (including those
organizations specified in Section 19(g) of the Securities Act) to
raise any concerns and express their views, FINRA has elected to file
the proposed rule change for full notice and comment under Section
19(b) of the Act.\30\ Given the multiple forms of consultation that
have taken place regarding the proposed rule change, FINRA has met the
consultation requirements set forth in Section 19(g) of the Securities
Act.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \28\ Specifically, on Thursday, June 9, 2011, FINRA provided a
draft of the Regulatory Notice to representatives of the National
Governors Association (``NGA''); the Council of State Governments;
the National Conference of State Legislatures; the National
Association of Counties; the U.S. Conference of Mayors; the National
League of Cities; the Association of Government Accountants; the
Government Finance Officers Association; the International City/
County Management Association; the National Association of State
Auditors, Comptrollers and Treasurers (``NASACT''); the National
Association of State Budget Officers (``NASBO''); the National
Association of State Retirement Administrators; the Native American
Finance Officers Association; the National Federation of Municipal
Analysts; the Association of Local Government Auditors; the National
Association of State Treasurers; the National Council of State
Housing Agencies; the National Association of Local Housing
Financing Agencies; and the Council of Infrastructure Financing
Authorities. The Notice was posted publicly on June 16, 2011.
    \29\ See GFOA, NASACT.
    \30\ Section 19(b)(3)(A) of the Act and Rule 19b-4(f)(2)
thereunder permit FINRA to file a proposed rule change for immediate
effectiveness if the proposed rule change establishes or changes a
due, fee, or other charge. See 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A); 17 CFR
240.19b-4(f)(2).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    One commenter questioned the administrative fee GASB will pay to
FINRA for calculating, assessing, and collected the GASB Accounting
Support Fee.\31\ As FINRA noted in Regulatory Notice 11-28, FINRA has
negotiated an administrative fee with the FAF of $50,000 for the
initial year that the GASB Accounting Support Fee is in place that is
intended to cover FINRA's estimated costs associated with calculating,
assessing, and collecting the GASB Accounting Support Fee. The
commenter asserted that the fee was ``unwarranted'' because ``FINRA
already has a process for collecting its own Trading Activity Fee from
broker dealers, and could easily amend this process to include the GASB
Accounting Support Fee.'' \32\ The commenter also suggested that the
MSRB could administer the fee for minimal costs if FINRA moves forward
with a fee based on underwritings or transactions.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \31\ See SIFMA.
    \32\ See SIFMA.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The commenter's statements are misplaced, and FINRA disagrees that
the fee is unwarranted. The commenter's analogy to FINRA's Trading
Activity Fee (``TAF'') is inappropriate for several reasons.
    First, FINRA does not believe that the use of a self-reporting
model like the TAF is appropriate for the GASB Accounting Support
Fee.\33\ FINRA believes that the transaction information available
through the MSRB serves as a

more timely and reliable source of transaction information than self-
reported aggregate quarterly data calculated by the various members
subject to the fee. Moreover, FINRA believes that requiring self-
reporting could increase compliance costs for firms and increase costs
to FINRA. As proposed, FINRA will rely on transaction data that is
already reported by members to the MSRB (i.e., there will be no
increased compliance efforts necessary for members since, as discussed
below, FINRA does not believe that the calculations members currently
undertake for reporting the TAF would be the same as those for the GASB
Accounting Support Fee). For FINRA, a self-reporting model raises two
primary complications. First, FINRA would need to audit members to
ensure that their self-reporting was accurate and timely, which could
increase FINRA's costs in administering the fee. Second, Section 19(g)
of the Securities Act requires FINRA to collect exact amounts, thus
creating an inability to remedy potential over- or under-payments by
members that self-report erroneous data.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \33\ The TAF is self-reported to FINRA by members on a monthly
basis on the clearing firm level. See Trading Activity Fee FAQ
Q100.5, available at http://www.finra.org/taf/faq.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Second, FINRA does not believe that the exceptions from the TAF
should apply to the assessment of the GASB Accounting Support Fee, and
the TAF is currently charged only to the sell side of a transaction.
Although municipal securities subject to MSRB reporting requirements
are generally subject to the TAF, the TAF rules contain exceptions for
certain transactions (e.g., primary market transactions). The goal of
the GASB Accounting Support Fee assessment is to equitably allocate a
specific amount of money among participants in the municipal securities
market; consequently, FINRA believes it is not appropriate to exclude
any subset of reportable transactions from factoring into the fee
assessment for purposes of allocating the GASB Accounting Support
Fee.\34\ In addition, and as discussed below, FINRA does not believe it
is appropriate to charge only one side of a transaction when two
members are involved and are required to report the transaction to the
MSRB.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \34\ See Schedule A to the FINRA By-Laws Sec.  1(b).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    For the foregoing reasons, FINRA does not believe that the TAF
would serve as an appropriate model in assessing the GASB Accounting
Support Fee. In addition, the amount of the administrative fee to FINRA
was negotiated with the FAF and based on estimated costs to FINRA,
including initial start-up technology costs, administrative costs, and
the costs of personnel and other resources needed to process and
implement the fee. FINRA anticipates that the amount of the
administrative fee will be reviewed and evaluated each year by FINRA
and by the FAF in light of FINRA's experience in assessing and
collecting the GASB Accounting Support Fee and in the context of actual
costs incurred by FINRA. Following the review, the amount of the
administrative fee will be increased or decreased if necessary.
    Commenters expressed opposing views on FINRA's proposal to base the
GASB Accounting Support Fee on transactions in municipal securities
reported to the MSRB. Although several commenters believed the proposed
assessment method was reasonable and equitable,\35\ other commenters
opposed a transaction-based assessment.\36\ Among the objections to the
proposal, commenters stated that an assessment based on trade reporting
volume would disproportionately affect lead underwriters \37\ and
brokers' brokers \38\ and would result in broker-to-broker transactions
being assessed multiple times.\39\ In addition, one commenter noted
that the proposal ``makes no distinction between bonds issued by GASB
obligors, bonds issued by FASB obligors and bonds with obligors who
follow neither set of standards.'' \40\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \35\ See 3PM, NASACT, Bay City.
    \36\ See HT&D, R&C, SIFMA.
    \37\ See R&C.
    \38\ See HT&D, SIFMA.
    \39\ See SIFMA. The commenter noted that in broker-to-broker
transactions, both brokers report the trade to the MSRB.
    \40\ SIFMA.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    After considering the objections raised by the commenters, FINRA
continues to believe that a proportionate fee based on reported trading
volume remains a reasonable and fair method to allocate the GASB
Accounting Support Fee. As noted above, FINRA believes that using
reported transaction data to calculate the fee ensures that the fee is
based on accurate, reliable information. Because the fee is assessed on
a proportionate basis, rather than being assessed each time a
transaction is reported to the MSRB (e.g., a fixed fee charged on each
reported transaction like those charged in connection with reporting
trades to a FINRA trade reporting facility \41\), there are not
multiple assessments on broker-to-broker transactions. Rather, both
brokers reporting the same trade will have the volume of that trade
factored into their share of total trade reporting volume for that
quarter. The goal of the assessment is to equitably allocate a specific
amount of money among participants in the municipal securities market;
consequently, FINRA believes it is appropriate that both brokers in a
broker-to-broker transaction be considered as participating in that
market with respect to such a transaction, rather than only use one
side of the trade in calculating the fee (e.g., charging only the
broker on the sell side). For similar reasons, FINRA also believes that
the proposal does not disproportionately affect lead underwriters or
brokers' brokers; to the extent such firms have high trading volumes
reported to the MSRB under applicable reporting rules, FINRA believes
that this accurately reflects those firms' participation in the
municipal securities markets, whether those firms act as underwriters,
brokers' brokers, or simply as buyers or sellers of municipal
securities.\42\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \41\ See, e.g., FINRA Rules 7620A, 7710.
    \42\ FINRA notes that basing the GASB Accounting Support Fee on
underwriting, rather than transactions, would increase the burden on
lead underwriters and would disproportionately affect those market
participants engaged in underwriting activities rather than in
trading in the secondary market. Moreover, basing the fee on
underwriting would wholly exempt secondary market participants from
paying the fee and would be assessed only on future municipal issues
and would ``grandfather'' in previous issues. FINRA does not believe
this is a more equitable way to assess the fee than a transaction-
based approach.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    FINRA also declines to distinguish between issues based on whether
the obligor has followed FASB standards, GASB standards, or neither.
This information is not required to be reported to the MSRB, is not
available on an automated basis, and it would be impractical for FINRA
to attempt to maintain a comprehensive and accurate listing of those
issues where the obligor has followed GASB standards.
    Several commenters expressed views concerning the application of
the GASB Accounting Support Fee to small firms and the exemption
proposed in Regulatory Notice 11-28 for firms with a quarterly
assessment of less than $25. Two commenters suggested that FINRA
increase the quarterly threshold from $25 to $1,000,\43\ and one
commenter suggested that ``smaller firms'' be exempt from the fee.\44\
In contrast, one FINRA member suggested that any firm with a stake in
GASB accounting standards should be charged a small assessment, even if
the firm had no assessable transactions in a given quarter.\45\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \43\ See 3PM, NAIBD.
    \44\ See BDA. The commenter did not define ``smaller firms'' and
stated that it was not in a position to recommend a figure for the
exemption because it did not have trading data available to it.
    \45\ See NPB.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    FINRA proposed a quarterly minimum threshold of $25 in order to
exempt from the GASB Accounting

Support Fee those firms that do a de minimis amount of trading activity
in municipal securities in a given quarter. There are approximately
1,100 FINRA members eligible to conduct business in municipal
securities, and FINRA estimates that a de minimis threshold of $25 per
quarter would eliminate approximately 600 firms--approximately 55
percent of firms--per quarter from paying the fee. FINRA estimates that
raising the level to $1,000 per quarter would exempt approximately 90
percent of the firms reporting transactions to the MSRB from the fee
each quarter.
    As discussed above, FINRA is required to collect a specific amount
of money each year to adequately fund the annual budget of the GASB.
Because of this unique requirement, unlike other fees assessed by
FINRA, any amount that one member is exempt from paying must be
assessed on other members so that FINRA can meet its statutory
obligation and collect the total amount needed to adequately fund the
GASB's annual budget. Consequently, FINRA believes that a de minimis
threshold of $25 per quarter achieves a fair and reasonable balance
between exempting those members that do a small amount of trading in
municipal securities and ensuring that other members are not
shouldering a disproportionate amount of the GASB Accounting Support
Fee and being allocated amounts significantly above their proportion of
reported trading activity. For the same reasons FINRA is not increasing
the quarterly exemption amount, FINRA also declines to adopt an across-
the-board ``small firm exemption.''
    In Regulatory Notice 11-28, FINRA noted that ``some firms may seek
to pass the GASB Accounting Support Fee on to customers engaged in
municipal securities transactions.'' This was an acknowledgement that,
in many instances, members pass through FINRA fees and assessments to
their customers. Some commenters expressed concern that members could
pass the fee on to issuers of municipal securities and asked FINRA to
clarify or mandate that members could not pass the fee along to
issuers.\46\ Other commenters suggested that FINRA make it easier for
members to pass the fee along to customers, including issuers.\47\ One
commenter suggested that the GASB Accounting Support Fee should be
structured as an underwriting assessment because ``[p]rinciples of
fundamental fairness would dictate dealers be allowed to pass through
any GASB support fee to municipal bond issuers instead of or in
addition to investors.'' \48\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \46\ See Bay City, GFOA, NASACT.
    \47\ See BDA, SIFMA.
    \48\ SIFMA.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    As discussed above, FINRA continues to believe that an equitable
way to structure the fee is through a quarterly assessment based on
trading volume with an exception for members whose assessment in a
particular quarter would be less than $25. FINRA has long recognized
that members pass fees through to the customers whose transactions
generate those fees, and FINRA rules generally do not address the
commercial allocation of fees between members and their customers,
provided such fees are fair, reasonable, and accurately disclosed.
Although FINRA is not encouraging members to pass all or part of the
GASB Accounting Support Fee to their customers, that decision is
ultimately one for each member, subject to the conditions and
requirements noted. FINRA also declines to give a blanket exemption for
issuers of municipal securities whose transactions may result in an
increase to a member's allocation of the GASB Accounting Support Fee.
FINRA notes, however, that transactions from a municipal securities
issuer to an underwriter are not reported to the MSRB and thus would
not generally be counted toward a member's quarterly assessment.\49\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \49\ To the extent commenters are concerned that FINRA members
acting as underwriters for municipal securities may increase their
underwriting fees to recoup part of the assessment, FINRA generally
considers fee negotiations between an issuer and an underwriter to
be within each party's business decision-making process.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

    Within 45 days of the date of publication of this notice in the
Federal Register or within such longer period (i) as the Commission may
designate up to 90 days of such date if it finds such longer period to
be appropriate and publishes its reasons for so finding or (ii) as to
which the self-regulatory organization consents, the Commission will:
    (A) By order approve or disapprove such proposed rule change, or
    (B) Institute proceedings to determine whether the proposed rule
change should be disapproved.

IV. Solicitation of Comments

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

Electronic Comments

     Use the Commission's Internet comment form (http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml); or
     Send an email to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Please include
File Number SR-FINRA-2011-073 on the subject line.

Paper Comments

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

All submissions should refer to File Number SR-FINRA-2011-073. This
file number should be included on the subject line if email is used. To
help the Commission process and review your comments more efficiently,
please use only one method. The Commission will post all comments on
the Commission's Internet Web site (http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml). Copies of the submission, all subsequent amendments, all
written statements with respect to the proposed rule change that are
filed with the Commission, and all written communications relating to
the proposed rule change between the Commission and any person, other
than those that may be withheld from the public in accordance with the
provisions of 5 U.S.C. 552, will be available for Web site viewing and
printing in the Commission's Public Reference Room, 100 F Street, NE.,
Washington, DC 20549, on official business days between the hours of 10
a.m. and 3 p.m. Copies of such filing also will be available for
inspection and copying at the principal office of FINRA. All comments
received will be posted without change; the Commission does not edit
personal identifying information from submissions. You should submit
only information that you wish to make available publicly. All
submissions should refer to File Number SR-FINRA-2011-073 and should be
submitted on or before January 30, 2012.

    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets,
pursuant to delegated authority.\50\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \50\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Elizabeth M. Murphy,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2012-84 Filed 1-6-12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


[Federal Register: March 7, 2007 (Volume 72, Number 44)]
[Notices]
[Page 10198-10199]
[DOCID:fr07mr07-81]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Docket No. RP07-311-000]

Northern Border Pipeline Company; Notice Of Tariff Filing

March 1, 2007.
    Take notice that on February 27, 2007, Northern Border Pipeline
Company (Northern Border) tendered for filing as part of its FERC Gas
Tariff, First Revised Volume No. 1, the tariff sheets attached to the
filing, to become effective April 1, 2007.
    Any person desiring to intervene or to protest this filing must
file in accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of the Commission's Rules of
Practice and Procedure (18 CFR 385.211 and 385.214). Protests will be
considered by the Commission in determining the appropriate action to
be taken, but will not serve to make protestants parties to the
proceeding. Any person wishing to become a party must file a notice of
intervention or motion to intervene, as appropriate. Such notices,
motions, or protests must be filed in accordance with the provisions of
Section 154.210 of the Commission's regulations (18 CFR 154.210).
Anyone filing an intervention or protest must serve a copy of that
document on the Applicant. Anyone filing an intervention or protest on
or before the intervention or protest date need not serve motions to
intervene or protests on persons other than the Applicant.
    The Commission encourages electronic submission of protests and
interventions in lieu of paper using the ``eFiling'' link at http://www.ferc.gov.
 Persons unable to file electronically should submit an

original and 14 copies of the protest or intervention to the Federal
Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street, NE., Washington, DC
20426.
    This filing is accessible on-line at http://www.ferc.gov, using the

``eLibrary'' link and is available for review in the Commission's
Public Reference Room in Washington, DC. There is an ``eSubscription''
link on the Web site that enables subscribers to receive e-mail
notification when a document is added to a subscribed

docket(s). For assistance with any FERC Online service, please e-mail
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or call<PHONE_NUMBER> (toll free). For

TTY, call<PHONE_NUMBER>.

Magalie R. Salas,
Secretary.
 [FR Doc. E7-3999 Filed 3-6-07; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6717-01-P