[Federal Register: February 11, 2008 (Volume 73, Number 28)]
[Notices]
[Page 7788-7789]
[DOCID:fr11fe08-112]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Railroad Administration

Petition for Waiver of Compliance

    In accordance with Part 211 of Title 49 Code of Federal Regulations
(CFR), notice is hereby given that the Federal Railroad Administration
(FRA) received a request for a waiver of compliance with certain
requirements of its safety standards. The individual petition is
described below, including the party seeking relief, the regulatory
provisions involved, the nature of the relief being requested, and the
petitioner's arguments in favor of relief.

Big West Oil, LLC

[Waiver Petition Docket Number FRA-2007-0025]

    The Big West Oil, LLC (FLYJ), a Class III railroad, seeks a waiver
of compliance from the requirements of 49 CFR part 223.11 Requirements
for existing locomotives for locomotive number 1. Specifically, FLYJ
petitioned FRA for a waiver for a 600 horsepower diesel electric
locomotive, model SW-600, built by the Electro Motive Division of
General Motors in 1962. This locomotive is primarily used for
industrial switching within an enclosed facility adjacent to the Big
West Oil Refinery in Salt Lake City, Utah. The locomotive is stored
during non-operational hours within a secure area of the refinery.
    Locomotive number 1 is used on a limited basis for industrial
switching over 3.5 miles of privately owned track. There are two (2)
highway/rail crossings at grade through the industrial property with no
overpasses or bridges. The railroad operates Monday to Friday, an
average of 4 hours per day, during daylight hours, with a 10 mph speed
restriction through the industrial complex. There have been no reports
of glazing vandalism along this right-of-way since the operation of
this locomotive began in 1999.
    The petitioner believes that this locomotive can be safely operated
throughout the industrial complex with the current non-compliant
safety-type glazing. The cost to FLYJ for installation of all new
window frames and compliant FRA Types I & II glazing is significant
with only a marginal increase in safety due to the low speed.
    Interested parties are invited to participate in these proceedings
by submitting written views, data, or comments. FRA does not anticipate
scheduling a public hearing in connection with these proceedings since
the facts do not appear to warrant a hearing. If any interested party
desires an opportunity for oral comment, they should notify FRA, in
writing, before the end of the comment period and specify the basis for
their request.
    All communications concerning these proceedings should identify the
appropriate docket number (e.g., Waiver Petition Docket Number FRA-
2007-

0025) and may be submitted by any of the following methods:
    Web site: http://www.regulations.gov. Follow the online

instructions for submitting comments.
    Fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    Mail: Docket Operations Facility, U.S. Department of
Transportation, 1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE., W12-140, Washington, DC
20590.
    Hand Delivery: 1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE., Room W12-140,
Washington, DC 20590, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday,
except Federal Holidays.
    Communications received within 45 days of the date of this notice
will be considered by FRA before final action is taken. Comments
received after that date will be considered as far as practicable. All
written communications concerning these proceedings are available for
examination during regular business hours (9 a.m.-5 p.m.) at the above
facility. All documents in the public docket are also available for
inspection and copying on the Internet at the docket facility's Web
site at http://www.regulations.gov.

    Anyone is able to search the electronic form of any written
communications and comments received into any of our dockets by the
name of the individual submitting the comment (or signing the comment,
if submitted on behalf of an association, business, labor union, etc.).
You may review DOT's complete Privacy Act Statement in the Federal
Register published on April 11, 2000 (Volume 65, Number 70; Pages
19477-78).

    Issued in Washington, DC on February 4, 2008.
Grady C. Cothen, Jr.,
Deputy Associate Administrator for Safety Standards and Program
Development.
[FR Doc. E8-2393 Filed 2-8-08; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4910-06-P


[Federal Register Volume 80, Number 76 (Tuesday, April 21, 2015)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 22094-22096]
[FR Doc No: 2015-08718]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. FAA-2014-0528; Directorate Identifier 2014-NM-060-AD;
Amendment 39-18139; AD 2015-08-03]
RIN 2120-AA64

Airworthiness Directives; Bombardier, Inc. Airplanes

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), Department of
Transportation (DOT).

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: We are adopting a new airworthiness directive (AD) for certain
Bombardier, Inc. Model DHC-8-400 series airplanes. This AD was prompted
by a report that during production, an incorrect clevis was used,
resulting in improper installation onto the alternate release cable of
the main landing gear (MLG). This AD requires a detailed visual
inspection of the emergency release clevis of the MLG to determine if
an incorrect clevis has been installed, and if necessary, replacing the
clevis with a correct clevis and clevis pin. We are issuing this AD to
detect and correct improper installation of the clevis, which could
cause loss of the alternate release system and prevent the MLG from
extending and retracting, and could consequently affect the airplane's
continued safe flight and landing.

DATES: This AD becomes effective May 26, 2015.
    The Director of the Federal Register approved the incorporation by
reference of a certain publication listed in this AD as of May 26,
2015.

ADDRESSES: You may examine the AD docket on the Internet at http://www.regulations.gov/#!docketDetail;D=FAA-2014-0528 or in person at the
Docket Management Facility, U.S. Department of Transportation, Docket
Operations, M-30, West Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140, 1200 New
Jersey Avenue SE., Washington, DC.
    For service information identified in this AD, contact Bombardier,
Inc., Q-Series Technical Help Desk, 123 Garratt Boulevard, Toronto,
Ontario M3K 1Y5, Canada; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax<PHONE_NUMBER>;
email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Internet http://www.bombardier.com. You may view this referenced service information at
the FAA, Transport Airplane Directorate, 1601 Lind Avenue SW., Renton,
WA. For information on the availability of this material at the FAA,
call<PHONE_NUMBER>. It is also available on the Internet at http://www.regulations.gov by searching for and locating Docket No. FAA-2014-
0528.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ezra Sasson, Aerospace Engineer,
Airframe and Mechanical Systems Branch, ANE-171, FAA, New York Aircraft
Certification Office, 1600 Stewart Avenue, Suite 410, Westbury, NY
11590; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Discussion

    We issued a notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) to amend 14 CFR
part 39 by adding an AD that would apply to certain Model DHC-8-400
series airplanes. The NPRM published in the Federal Register on August
13, 2014 (79 FR 47393).
    Transport Canada Civil Aviation (TCCA), which is the aviation
authority for Canada, has issued Canadian Airworthiness Directive CF-
2013-40, dated December 9, 2013 (referred to after this as the
Mandatory Continuing Airworthiness Information, or ``the MCAI''), to
correct an unsafe condition for certain Model DHC-8-400 series
airplanes. The MCAI states:

    A discrepancy has been found in the Main Landing Gear (MLG)
emergency release clevis installation. During production, an
incorrect clevis was used, resulting in improper installation onto
the MLG alternate release cable. Failure of the clevis could cause
the loss of the alternate release system, preventing the MLG from
extending in the case of a failure of the normal MLG extension/
retraction system.
    This [Canadian] AD mandates the inspection for proper MLG
emergency release clevis installation, and the rectification as
required.

    The required actions for this AD include a detailed visual
inspection of the emergency release clevis of the MLG to determine if
an incorrect clevis has been installed, and if necessary, replacing the
clevis with a correct clevis and clevis pin. You may examine the MCAI
in the AD docket on the Internet at http://www.regulations.gov/#!documentDetail;D=FAA-2014-0528-0002.

Comments

    We gave the public the opportunity to participate in developing
this AD. The following presents the comment received on the NPRM (79 FR
47393, August 13, 2014) and the FAA's response to the comment.

Request To Correct a Typographical Error

    Horizon Airlines stated that the Air Transport Association (ATA) of
America Code in paragraph (d) of the NPRM (79 FR 47393, August 13,
2014) is incorrect for the MLG, and should be 32, not 31.
    We agree with the commenter. We have changed the ATA of America
Code in paragraph (d) of this AD to 32, Landing Gear.

Conclusion

    We reviewed the relevant data, considered the comment received, and
determined that air safety and the public interest require adopting
this AD with the change described previously and minor editorial
changes. We have determined that these minor changes:
     Are consistent with the intent that was proposed in the
NPRM (79 FR 47393, August 13, 2014) for correcting the unsafe
condition; and
     Do not add any additional burden upon the public than was
already proposed in the NPRM (79 FR 47393, August 13, 2014).
    We also determined that these changes will not increase the
economic burden on any operator or increase the scope of this AD.

Related Service Information Under 1 CFR Part 51

    Bombardier, Inc., has issued Service Bulletin 84-32-67, dated July
8, 2009. The service information describes a visual inspection of the
emergency release clevis of the MLG to determine if an incorrect clevis
has been installed, and if necessary, replacing the clevis with a
correct clevis and clevis pin. The actions described in this service
information are intended to correct the unsafe condition identified in
the MCAI. You can find this information at http://www.regulations.gov
by searching for and locating Docket No. FAA-2014-0528. This service
information is reasonably available; see ADDRESSES for ways to access
this service information.

Costs of Compliance

    We estimate that this AD affects 18 airplanes of U.S. registry.
    We also estimate that it will take about 2 work-hours per product
to comply with the basic requirements of this AD. The average labor
rate is $85 per work-hour. Required parts will cost about $0 per
product. Based on these figures, we estimate the cost of this AD on
U.S. operators to be $3,060, or $170 per product.
    In addition, we estimate that any necessary follow-on actions will
take about 3 work-hours and require parts costing $0, for a cost of
$255 per product. We have no way of determining the number of aircraft
that might need this action.

Authority for This Rulemaking

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

Regulatory Findings

    We determined that this AD will not have federalism implications
under Executive Order 13132. This AD will not have a substantial direct
effect on the States, on the relationship between the national
government and the States, or on the distribution of power and
responsibilities among the various levels of government.
    For the reasons discussed above, I certify that this AD:
    1. Is not a ``significant regulatory action'' under Executive Order
12866;
    2. Is not a ``significant rule'' under the DOT Regulatory Policies
and Procedures (44 FR 11034, February 26, 1979);

    3. Will not affect intrastate aviation in Alaska; and
    4. Will not have a significant economic impact, positive or
negative, on a substantial number of small entities under the criteria
of the Regulatory Flexibility Act.

Examining the AD Docket

    You may examine the AD docket on the Internet at http://www.regulations.gov/#!docketDetail;D=FAA-2014-0528; or in person at the
Docket Management Facility between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through
Friday, except Federal holidays. The AD docket contains this AD, the
regulatory evaluation, any comments received, and other information.
The street address for the Docket Operations office (telephone 800-647-
5527) is in the ADDRESSES section.

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39

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

Adoption of the Amendment

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

PART 39--AIRWORTHINESS DIRECTIVES

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

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

Sec.  39.13  [Amended]

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

2015-08-03 Bombardier, Inc.: Amendment 39-18139. Docket No. FAA-
2014-0528; Directorate Identifier 2014-NM-060-AD.

(a) Effective Date

    This AD becomes effective May 26, 2015.

(b) Affected ADs

    None.

(c) Applicability

    This AD applies to Bombardier, Inc. Model DHC-8-400, -401, and -
402 airplanes, certificated in any category, serial numbers 4001
through 4109 inclusive.

(d) Subject

    Air Transport Association (ATA) of America Code 32, Landing
Gear.

(e) Reason

    This AD was prompted by a report that during production, an
incorrect clevis was used, resulting in improper installation onto
the alternate release cable of the main landing gear (MLG). We are
issuing this AD to detect and correct improper installation of the
clevis, which could cause loss of the alternate release system and
prevent the MLG from extending and retracting, and could
consequently affect the airplane's continued safe flight and
landing.

(f) Compliance

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

(g) Inspection

    Within 2,000 flight hours or 12 months after the effective date
of this AD, whichever occurs first: Do a general visual inspection
of the emergency release clevis of the MLG to determine if an
incorrect clevis has been installed, in accordance with the
Accomplishment Instructions of Bombardier Service Bulletin 84-32-67,
dated July 8, 2009. If an incorrect clevis has been installed,
before further flight, replace the clevis with a correct clevis and
clevis pin, in accordance with the Accomplishment Instructions of
Bombardier Service Bulletin 84-32-67, dated July 8, 2009.

(h) Other FAA AD Provisions

    The following provisions also apply to this AD:
    (1) Alternative Methods of Compliance (AMOCs): The Manager, New
York Aircraft Certification Office (ACO), ANE-170, FAA, has the
authority to approve AMOCs for this AD, if requested using the
procedures found in 14 CFR 39.19. In accordance with 14 CFR 39.19,
send your request to your principal inspector or local Flight
Standards District Office, as appropriate. If sending information
directly to the New York ACO, send it to ATTN: Program Manager,
Continuing Operational Safety, FAA, New York ACO, 1600 Stewart
Avenue, Suite 410, Westbury, NY 11590; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax
516-794-5531. Before using any approved AMOC, notify your
appropriate principal inspector, or lacking a principal inspector,
the manager of the local flight standards district office/
certificate holding district office. The AMOC approval letter must
specifically reference this AD.
    (2) Contacting the Manufacturer: For any requirement in this AD
to obtain corrective actions from a manufacturer, the action must be
accomplished using a method approved by the Manager, New York ACO,
ANE-170, FAA; or Transport Canada Civil Aviation (TCCA); or
Bombardier, Inc.'s TCCA Design Approval Organization (DAO). If
approved by the DAO, the approval must include the DAO-authorized
signature.

 (i) Related Information

    Refer to Mandatory Continuing Airworthiness Information (MCAI)
Canadian Airworthiness Directive CF-2013-40, dated December 9, 2013,
for related information. This MCAI may be found in the AD docket on
the Internet at http://www.regulations.gov/#!documentDetail;D=FAA-
2014-0528-0002.

(j) Material Incorporated by Reference

    (1) The Director of the Federal Register approved the
incorporation by reference (IBR) of the service information listed
in this paragraph under 5 U.S.C. 552(a) and 1 CFR part 51.
    (2) You must use this service information as applicable to do
the actions required by this AD, unless this AD specifies otherwise.
    (i) Bombardier Service Bulletin 84-32-67, dated July 8, 2009.
    (ii) Reserved.
    (3) For service information identified in this AD, contact
Bombardier, Inc., Q-Series Technical Help Desk, 123 Garratt
Boulevard, Toronto, Ontario M3K 1Y5, Canada; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>;
fax<PHONE_NUMBER>; email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Internet
http://www.bombardier.com.
    (4) You may view this service information at the FAA, Transport
Airplane Directorate, 1601 Lind Avenue SW., Renton, WA. For
information on the availability of this material at the FAA, call
425-227-1221.
    (5) You may view this service information that is incorporated
by reference at the National Archives and Records Administration
(NARA). For information on the availability of this material at
NARA, call<PHONE_NUMBER>, or go to: http://www.archives.gov/federal-register/cfr/ibr-locations.html.

    Issued in Renton, Washington, on April 6, 2015.
John P. Piccola, Jr.,
Acting Manager, Transport Airplane Directorate, Aircraft Certification
Service.
[FR Doc. 2015-08718 Filed 4-20-15; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


[Federal Register Volume 83, Number 38 (Monday, February 26, 2018)]
[Notices]
[Pages 8261-8262]
[FR Doc No: 2018-03844]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

[FRL-9974-38-OECA]

National Environmental Justice Advisory Council; Notification of
Request for Nominations to the National Environmental Justice Advisory
Council

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Request for nominations to the National Environmental Justice
Advisory Council (NEJAC).

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

SUMMARY: The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) invites
nominations from a diverse range of qualified candidates to be
considered for appointment to its National Environmental Justice
Advisory Council (NEJAC). The NEJAC was chartered to provide advice
regarding broad, cross-cutting issues related to environmental justice.
This notice solicits nominations to fill approximately four (4) new
vacancies for terms through September, 2019. To maintain the
representation outlined by the charter, nominees will be selected to
represent: academia (2 vacancies); business and industry (1 vacancy);
and state and local government (1 vacancy). Vacancies are anticipated
to be filled by September 2018. Sources in addition to this Federal
Register Notice will be utilized in the solicitation of nominees.

DATES: Nominations should be submitted in time to arrive no later than
Friday, April 13, 2018.

ADDRESS: Submit nominations electronically with the subject line NEJAC
Membership 2018 to [email protected]. You also may submit nominations by
mail to: Karen L. Martin, NEJAC Program Manager, Office of
Environmental Justice, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 1200
Pennsylvania Avenue NW (MC 2201A), Washington, DC 20460. Non-electronic
submissions must follow the same format and contain the same
information. The Office of Environmental Justice will acknowledge
receipt of nominations.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Karen L. Martin, NEJAC Program
Manager, U.S. EPA; email: [email protected]; telephone: (202) 564-
0203; or by fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The NEJAC is a federal advisory committee
chartered under the Federal Advisory Committee Act (FACA), Public Law
92-463. EPA established the NEJAC in 1993 to provide independent
consensus advice to the EPA Administrator about a broad range of
environmental issues related to environmental justice. The NEJAC
conducts business in accordance with the Federal Advisory Committee Act
(FACA) (5 U.S.C. App. 2) and related regulations.
    The Council consists of 30 members (including a Chairperson and two
Vice-Chairpersons) appointed by EPA's Administrator. Members serve as
non-federal stakeholders representing: Six (6) from academia, four (4)
from business and industry; seven (7) from community based
organizations; six (6) from non-governmental/environmental
organizations; four (4) from state and local governments; and three (3)
from tribal governments and indigenous organizations, of which one
member serves as a liaison to the National Tribal Caucus. Members are
appointed for one (1), two (2) or three (3)-year terms with the
possibility of reappointment for another term.
    The NEJAC usually meets face-to-face twice a year, generally in the
Spring and the Fall. Additionally, members may be asked to participate
in teleconference meetings or serve on work groups to develop
recommendations, advice letters, and reports to address specific policy
issues. The average workload for members is approximately 5 to 8 hours
per month. EPA provides reimbursement for travel and other incidental
expenses associated with official government business.
    Nominations: Any interested person and/or organization may nominate
qualified individuals for membership. The EPA values and welcomes

diversity. In an effort to obtain nominations of diverse candidates,
the Agency encourages nominations of women and men of all racial and
ethnic groups. All nominations will be fully considered, but applicants
need to be aware of the specific representation sought as outlined in
the Summary above. In addition, EPA is seeking nominees with knowledge
in community sustainability, environmental financing, public health and
health disparities, solid and hazardous waste, land use and equitable
development, environmental sociology and social science. Other criteria
used to evaluate nominees will include:
     The background and experience that would help members
contribute to the diversity of perspectives on the committee (e.g.,
geographic, economic, social, cultural, educational background,
professional affiliations, and other considerations;
     demonstrated experience with environmental justice and
community sustainability issues at the national, state, or local level;
     excellent interpersonal and consensus-building skills;
     ability to volunteer time to attend meetings 2-3 times a
year, participate in teleconference meetings, attend listening sessions
with the Administrator or other senior-level officials, develop policy
recommendations to the Administrator, and prepare reports and advice
letters; and
     willingness to commit time to the committee and
demonstrated ability to work constructively and effectively on
committees.
    How To Submit Nominations: Any interested person or organization
may nominate qualified persons to be considered for appointment to this
advisory committee. Individuals are encouraged to self-nominate.
Nominations can be submitted in electronic format (preferred) following
the template available at https://www.epa.gov/environmentaljustice/nominations-nejac. To be considered, all nominations should include:
     Current contact information for the nominee, including the
nominee's name, organization (and position within that organization),
current business address, email address, and daytime telephone number.
     Brief Statement describing the nominees interest in
serving on the NEJAC.
     R[eacute]sum[eacute] and a short biography (no more than 2
paragraphs) describing the professional and educational qualifications
of the nominee, including a list of relevant activities, and any
current or previous service on advisory committees.
     Letter[s] of recommendation from a third party supporting
the nomination. Letter[s] should describe how the nominee's experience
and knowledge will bring value to the work of the NEJAC.
    Other sources, in addition to this Federal Register notice, may
also be utilized in the solicitation of nominees. To help the EPA in
evaluating the effectiveness of its outreach efforts, please tell us
how you learned of this opportunity.

    Dated: February 2, 2018.
Matthew Tejada,
Designated Federal Officer, National Environmental Justice Advisory
Council.
[FR Doc. 2018-03844 Filed 2-23-18; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


[Federal Register Volume 78, Number 251 (Tuesday, December 31, 2013)]
[Notices]
[Pages 79711-79712]
[FR Doc No: 2013-31241]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

Proposed Collection; Comment Request

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

Extension:
    Rule 17f-7, OMB Control No. 3235-0529, SEC File No. 270-470.

    Notice is hereby given that, pursuant to the Paperwork Reduction
Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501-3521) (``Paperwork Reduction Act''), the
Securities and Exchange Commission (the ``Commission'') is soliciting
comments on the collections of information summarized below. The
Commission plans to submit these existing collections of information to
the Office of Management and Budget (``OMB'') for extension and
approval.
    Rule 17f-7 (17 CFR 270.17f-7) permits a fund under certain
conditions to maintain its foreign assets with an eligible securities
depository, which has to meet minimum standards for a depository. The
fund or its investment adviser generally determines whether the
depository complies with those requirements based on information
provided by the fund's primary custodian (a bank that acts as global
custodian). The depository custody arrangement also must meet certain
conditions. The fund or its adviser must receive from the primary
custodian (or its agent) an initial risk analysis of the depository
arrangements, and the fund's contract with its primary custodian must
state that the custodian will monitor risks and promptly notify the
fund or its adviser of material changes in risks. The primary custodian
and other custodians also are required to agree to exercise at least
reasonable care, prudence, and diligence.
    The collection of information requirements in rule 17f-7 are
intended to provide workable standards that protect funds from the
risks of using foreign securities depositories while assigning
appropriate responsibilities to the fund's primary custodian and
investment adviser based on their capabilities. The requirement that
the foreign securities depository meet specified minimum standards is
intended to ensure that the depository is subject to basic safeguards
deemed appropriate for all depositories. The requirement that the fund
or its adviser must receive from the primary custodian (or its agent)
an initial risk analysis of the depository arrangements, and that the
fund's contract with its primary custodian must state that the
custodian will monitor risks and promptly notify the fund or its
adviser of material changes in risks, is intended to provide essential
information about custody risks to the fund's investment adviser as
necessary for it to approve the continued use of the depository. The
requirement that the primary custodian agree to exercise reasonable
care is intended to provide assurances that its services and the
information it provides will meet an appropriate standard of care.
    The staff estimates that each of approximately 938 investment
advisers \1\ will make an average of 8 responses annually under the
rule to address depository compliance with minimum requirements, any
indemnification or insurance arrangements, and reviews of risk analyses
or notifications. The staff estimates each response will take 6 hours,
requiring a total of approximately 48 hours for each adviser.\2\ Thus
the total annual burden associated with these requirements of the rule
is approximately 45,024 hours.\3\ The staff further estimates that
during each year, each of approximately 15 global custodians will make
an average of 4 responses to analyze custody risks and provide notice
of any material changes to custody risk under the rule. The staff
estimates that each response will take 260 hours, requiring
approximately 1,040 hours annually per global custodian.\4\ Thus the
total annual burden associated with these requirements is approximately
15,600 hours.\5\ The staff estimates that the total annual hour burden
associated with all collection of information requirements of the rule
is therefore 60,624 hours.\6\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ As of October 2013, 938 investment advisers managed or
sponsored open-end registered funds (including exchange-traded
funds) and closed-end registered funds.
    \2\ 8 responses per adviser x 6 hours per response = 48 hours
per adviser.
    \3\ 938 hours x 48 hours per adviser = 45,024 hours.
    \4\ 260 hours per response x 4 responses per global custodian =
1,040 hours per global custodian.
    \5\ 15 global custodians x 1,040 hours per global custodian =
15,600 hours.
    \6\ 45,024 hours + 15,600 hours = 60,624 hours.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The estimate of average burden hours is made solely for the
purposes of the Paperwork Reduction Act and is not derived from a
comprehensive or even a representative survey or study of the costs of
Commission rules and forms. Compliance with the collection of
information requirements of the rule is necessary to obtain the benefit
of relying on the rule's permission for funds to maintain their assets
in foreign custodians. The information provided

under rule 17f-7 will not be kept confidential. An agency may not
conduct or sponsor, and a person is not required to respond to, a
collection of information unless it displays a currently valid OMB
control number.
    Written comments are invited on: (a) Whether the proposed
collection of information is necessary for the proper performance of
the functions of the agency, including whether the information has
practical utility; (b) the accuracy of the agency's estimate of the
burden of the collection of information; (c) ways to enhance the
quality, utility, and clarity of the information collected; and (d)
ways to minimize the burden of the collection of information on
respondents, including through the use of automated collection
techniques or other forms of information technology. Consideration will
be given to comments and suggestions submitted in writing within 60
days of this publication.
    Please direct your written comments to Thomas Bayer, Chief
Information Officer, Securities and Exchange Commission, c/o Remi
Pavlik-Simon, 6432 General Green Way, Alexandria, VA 22312; or send an
email to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
    Dated: December 24, 2013.
Elizabeth M. Murphy,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2013-31241 Filed 12-30-13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


[Federal Register: January 30, 2008 (Volume 73, Number 20)]
[Notices]
[Page 5565-5568]
[DOCID:fr30ja08-80]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

[EPA-HQ-OAR-2008-0027; FRL-8522-6]

Proposed Approval of the Transuranic Waste Characterization
Program at the Hanford Site

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency.

ACTION: Notice of availability; opening of public comment period.

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

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA or we) is announcing
the availability of, and soliciting public comments for 45 days on, the
proposed approval of the radioactive, contact-handled (CH), transuranic
(TRU) waste characterization program implemented at the Hanford Site in
Richland, Washington. This waste is intended for disposal at the Waste
Isolation Pilot Plant (WIPP) in New Mexico.
    In accordance with the WIPP Compliance Criteria, EPA evaluated the
characterization of CH TRU debris and solid waste from Hanford during
an inspection conducted the week of June 4, 2007. Using the systems and
processes developed as part of the U.S. Department of Energy's (DOE's)
Carlsbad Field Office (CBFO) program, EPA verified whether DOE could
adequately characterize CH TRU waste consistent with the Compliance
Criteria. The results of EPA's evaluation of Hanford's program and its
proposed approval are described in the Agency's inspection report,
which is available for review in the public dockets listed in
ADDRESSES. We will consider public comments received on or before the
due date mentioned in DATES.
    This notice summarizes the waste characterization processes
evaluated by EPA and EPA's proposed approval. As required by 40 CFR
194.8, at the end of a 45-day comment period EPA will evaluate public
comments received, and if appropriate, finalize the reports responding
to the relevant public comments, and issue a final report and approval
letter to DOE.

DATES: Comments must be received on or before March 17, 2008.

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-
OAR-2008-0027, by one of the following methods:
     http://www.regulations.gov: Follow the on-line

instructions for submitting comments.
     E-mail: To<EMAIL_ADDRESS>     Fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>.
     Mail: Air and Radiation Docket and Information Center,
Environmental Protection Agency, Mailcode: 6102T, 1200 Pennsylvania
Ave., NW., Washington, DC 20460.
    Instructions: Direct your comments to Attn: Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-
OAR-2008-0027. The Agency's policy is that all comments received will
be included in the public docket without change and may be made
available online at http://www.regulations.gov, including any personal

information provided, unless the comment includes information claimed
to be Confidential Business Information (CBI) or other information
whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Do not submit information
that you consider to be CBI or otherwise protected through http://www.regulations.gov or e-mail. The http://www.regulations.gov Web site

is an ``anonymous access'' system, which means EPA will not know your
identity or contact information unless you provide it in the body of
your comment. If you send an e-mail comment directly to EPA without
going through http://www.regulations.gov your e-mail address will be

automatically captured and included as part of the comment that is
placed in the public docket and made available on the Internet. If you
submit an electronic comment, EPA recommends that you include your name
and other contact information in the body of your comment and with any
disk or CD ROM you submit. If EPA cannot read your comment due to
technical difficulties and cannot contact you for clarification, EPA
may not be able to consider your comment. Electronic files should avoid
the use of special characters, any form of encryption, and be free of
any defects or viruses. For additional information about EPA's public
docket visit the EPA Docket Center homepage at http://www.epa.gov/epahome/dockets.htm
.

    Docket: All documents in the docket are listed in the http://www.regulations.gov
 index. Although listed in the index, some

information is not publicly available, e.g., 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.

    These documents are also available for review in hard-copy form at
the following three EPA WIPP informational docket locations in New
Mexico: in Carlsbad at the Municipal Library, Hours: Monday-Thursday,
10 a.m.-9 p.m., Friday-Saturday, 10 a.m.-6 p.m., and Sunday, 1 p.m.-5
p.m., phone number:<PHONE_NUMBER>; in Albuquerque at the Government
Publications

Department, Zimmerman Library, University of New Mexico, Hours: vary by
semester, phone number:<PHONE_NUMBER>; and in Santa Fe at the New Mexico
State Library, Hours: Monday-Friday, 9 a.m.-5 p.m., phone number: 505-
476-9700. As provided in EPA's regulations at 40 CFR part 2, and in
accordance with normal EPA docket procedures, if copies of any docket
materials are requested, a reasonable fee may be charged for
photocopying.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Rajani Joglekar or Ed Feltcorn,
Radiation Protection Division, Center for Federal Regulations, Mail
Code 6608J, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania
Avenue, Washington, DC 20460; telephone number:<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax
number:<PHONE_NUMBER>; e-mail address:
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or<EMAIL_ADDRESS>

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. General Information

A. What Should I Consider As I Prepare My Comments For EPA?

    1. Submitting CBI. Do not submit this information to EPA through
http://www.regulations.gov or e-mail. Clearly mark the part or all of

the information that you claim to be CBI. For CBI information in a disk
or CD ROM that you mail to EPA, mark the outside of the disk or CD ROM
as CBI and then identify electronically within the disk or CD ROM the
specific information that is claimed as CBI. In addition to one
complete version of the comment that includes information claimed as
CBI, a copy of the comment that does not contain the information
claimed as CBI must be submitted for inclusion in the public docket.
Information so marked will not be disclosed except in accordance with
procedures set forth in 40 CFR part 2.
    2. Tips for Preparing Your Comments. When submitting comments,
remember to:
     Identify the rulemaking by docket number and other
identifying information (subject heading, Federal Register date and
page number).
     Follow directions--The agency may ask you to respond to
specific questions or organize comments by referencing a Code of
Federal Regulations (CFR) part or section number.
     Explain why you agree or disagree; suggest alternatives
and substitute language for your requested changes.
     Describe any assumptions and provide any technical
information and/or data that you used.
     If you estimate potential costs or burdens, explain how
you arrived at your estimate in sufficient detail to allow for it to be
reproduced.
     Provide specific examples to illustrate your concerns, and
suggest alternatives.
     Explain your views as clearly as possible, avoiding the
use of profanity or personal threats.
     Make sure to submit your comments by the comment period
deadline identified.

II. Background

    DOE is developing the WIPP, near Carlsbad in southeastern New
Mexico, as a deep geologic repository for disposal of TRU radioactive
waste. As defined by the WIPP Land Withdrawal Act (LWA) of 1992 (Pub.
L. 102-579), as amended (Pub. L. 104-201), TRU waste consists of
materials that have atomic numbers greater than 92 (with half-lives
greater than twenty years), in concentrations greater than 100
nanocuries of alpha-emitting TRU isotopes per gram of waste. Much of
the existing TRU waste consists of items contaminated during the
production of nuclear weapons, such as rags, equipment, tools, and
sludges.
    TRU waste is itself divided into two categories, based on its level
of radioactivity. Contact-handled (CH) TRU waste accounts for about 97
percent of the volume of TRU waste currently destined for the WIPP. It
is packaged in 55-gallon metal drums or in metal boxes and can be
handled under controlled conditions without any shielding beyond the
container itself. The maximum radiation dose at the surface of a CH TRU
waste container is 200 millirems per hour. CH waste primarily emits
alpha particles that are easily shielded by a sheet of paper or the
outer layer of a person's skin.
    Remote-handled (RH) TRU waste emits more radiation than CH TRU
waste and must therefore be both handled and transported in shielded
casks. Surface radiation levels of unshielded containers of remote-
handled transuranic waste exceed 200 millirems per hour. RH waste
primarily emits gamma radiation, which is very penetrating and requires
concrete, lead, or steel to block it.
    On May 13, 1998, EPA issued a final certification of compliance for
the WIPP facility. The final rule was published in the Federal Register
on May 18, 1998 (63 FR 27354). EPA officially recertified WIPP on March
29, 2006 (71 FR 18015). Both the certification and recertification
determined that WIPP complies with the Agency's radioactive waste
disposal regulations at 40 CFR part 191, subparts B and C, and is
therefore safe to contain TRU waste.
    The final WIPP certification decision includes conditions that (1)
prohibit shipment of TRU waste for disposal at WIPP from any site other
than the Los Alamos National Laboratories (LANL) until the EPA
determines that the site has established and executed a quality
assurance program, in accordance with Sec. Sec.  194.22(a)(2)(i),
194.24(c)(3), and 194.24(c)(5) for waste characterization activities
and assumptions (Condition 2 of Appendix A to 40 CFR part 194); and (2)
(with the exception of specific, limited waste streams and equipment at
LANL) prohibit shipment of TRU waste for disposal at WIPP (from LANL or
any other site) until EPA has approved the procedures developed to
comply with the waste characterization requirements of Sec.
194.22(c)(4) (Condition 3 of Appendix A to 40 CFR part 194). The EPA's
approval process for waste generator sites is described in Sec.  194.8
(revised July 2004).
    Condition 3 of the WIPP Certification Decision requires EPA to
conduct independent inspections at DOE's waste generator/storage sites
of their TRU waste characterization capabilities before approving their
program and the waste for disposal at the WIPP. EPA's inspection and
approval process gives EPA (a) discretion in establishing technical
priorities, (b) the ability to accommodate variation in the site's
waste characterization capabilities, and (c) flexibility in scheduling
site WC inspections.
    As described in section 194.8(b), EPA's baseline inspections
evaluate each WC process component (equipment, procedures, and
personnel training/experience) for its adequacy and appropriateness in
characterizing TRU waste destined for disposal at WIPP. During an
inspection, the site demonstrates its capabilities to characterize TRU
waste(s) and its ability to comply with the regulatory limits and
tracking requirements under Sec.  194.24. A baseline inspection may
describe any limitations on approved waste streams or waste
characterization processes [Sec.  194.8(b)(2)(iii)]. In addition, a
baseline inspection approval must specify what subsequent WC program
changes or expansion should be reported to EPA [Sec.  194.8(b)(4)]. The
Agency is required to assign Tier 1 (T1) and Tier 2 (T2) to the
reportable changes depending on their potential impact on data quality.
A T1 designation requires that the site must notify EPA of proposed
changes to the approved components of an individual WC process (such as
radioassay equipment or personnel), and EPA must also approve the
change before it can be implemented. A WC element with a T2

designation allows the site to implement changes to the approved
components of individual WC processes (such as visual examination
procedures) but requires EPA notification. The Agency may choose to
inspect the site to evaluate technical adequacy before approval. EPA
inspections conducted to evaluate T1 or T2 changes are follow-up
inspections under the authority of Sec.  194.24(h). In addition to the
follow-up inspections, if warranted, EPA may opt to conduct continued
compliance inspections at TRU waste sites with a baseline approval
under the authority of Sec.  194.24(h).
    The site inspection and approval process outlined in Sec.  194.8
requires EPA to issue a Federal Register notice proposing the baseline
compliance decision, docket the inspection report for public review,
and seek public comment on the proposed decision for a period of 45
days. The report must describe the WC processes EPA inspected at the
site, as well as their compliance with Sec.  194.24 requirements.

III. Proposed Baseline Compliance Decision

    EPA has performed a baseline inspection of CH TRU waste
characterization (WC) activities at Hanford (EPA Inspection No. EPA-
HAN-6.07-8). The purpose of EPA's inspection was to verify that the
waste characterization program implemented at Hanford for
characterizing CH TRU, retrievably-stored, debris and solid waste is
technically adequate and meets the regulatory requirements at 40 CFR
194.24.
    During the inspection, EPA evaluated the adequacy of the site's WC
programs for two CH TRU waste categories, debris (S5000) and solids
(S3000), to be disposed of at the WIPP. The Agency examined the
following activities:
     Acceptable knowledge (AK) for CH TRU debris waste (S5000)
and solid waste (S3000) and AK for CH, repackaged debris waste (S5000)
from the Plutonium Finishing Plant (PFP).
     Visual examination (VE) in lieu of real-time radiography
(RTR) for CH TRU debris waste (S5000) and solid waste (S3000) and
Visual Examination Technique (VET) for CH, repackaged debris waste from
the PFP.
     RTR for CH TRU debris waste (S5000) and solid waste
(S3000).
     Nondestructive assay (NDA) systems at the Waste Receiving
and Processing (WRAP) Facility for characterizing debris (S5000) and
solid (S3000) wastes: the Gamma Energy Analysis Units A and B (GEA A
and GEA B); the Pajarito Imaging Passive Active Neutron Units A and B
(IPAN A and IPAN B); and the Super High Efficiency Neutron Counter A
(SHENCA).
     NDA systems at the plutonium Finishing Plant (PFP) for
characterizing debris waste (S5000): Calorimeters AR-1, AR-5, P-13, P-
14 and Q-1 in conjunction with the Room 172 Segmented Gamma Scanner
Assay System (SGSAS).
     WIPP Waste Information System (WWIS) for tracking the
components of CH retrievably-stored TRU debris waste (S5000) and solid
waste (S3000).
    During the inspection, Hanford personnel stated that load
management will never be performed at the site and EPA did not evaluate
this aspect during the inspection [see section 8.1(5) of the inspection
report]. Therefore, this proposed approval does not include load
management for Hanford.
    The EPA inspection team determined that the Hanford WC program for
CH TRU waste was technically adequate. EPA is proposing to approve the
Hanford CH TRU WC program in the configuration observed during this
inspection and described in this report and the attached checklists
(Attachments A.1 through A.9). This proposed approval includes the
following:
    (1) The AK process for CH TRU debris and solid wastes and for
newly-generated debris wastes.
    (2) The WRAP GEA Units A and B for assaying solid and debris
wastes.
    (3) The WRAP IPAN Units A and B for assaying solid and debris
waste.
    (4) The WRAP SHENCA system for assaying solid and debris wastes.
    (5) The PFP Calorimeters AR-1, AR-5, P-13, P-14 and Q-1 in
conjunction with the Room 172 SGSAS for assaying debris wastes.
    (6) The nondestructive examination (NDE) process of RTR for solid
and debris wastes.
    (7) VE in lieu of the RTR process for retrievably-stored solid and
debris wastes and VET of newly-generated debris wastes.
    (8) The WWIS process for tracking of waste contents of solid and
debris wastes Hanford must report and receive EPA approval of any Tier
1 (T1) changes to the Hanford WC activities from the date of the
baseline inspection, and must notify EPA regarding Tier 2 (T2) changes
according to Table 1, below. It is worth noting that Table 1 in this
report closely follows the format used in the previous CH baseline
approval report of Los Alamos National Laboratory--Central
Characterization Project (LANL-CCP) (see EPA Docket No. A-98-49, II-A4-
88). This format departs from what was used in baseline inspection
reports and EPA site approval letters prior to LANL-CCP in several
ways, as detailed in the LANL-CCP report and repeated here. The most
important of these differences involves presentation of the T2
elements. In previous reports, there were two T2 columns that have been
merged into a single T2 column for Hanford. The T2 column entries have
also been modified to better reflect the 40 CFR 194.24(h) requirements
that the site provide notification regarding the completion or
availability of specific T2 elements, whereas the previous tables
stated that the site must actually provide the T2 elements (document or
procedure revisions, etc.). This approach is similar to the tiering
tables used in EPA reports for sites characterizing remote-handled TRU
waste. Additionally, there are other minor word changes to the table
for the sake of legibility.

  Table 1. Tiering of TRU WC Processes Implemented by Hanford Based on
            June 4-7 and 27, 2007 On-Site Baseline Inspection
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                  Hanford WC T1         Hanford WC T2
     WC process elements             changes              changes*
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Acceptable Knowledge (AK)     Implementation of     Notification to EPA
 and Load Management.          load management; AK   upon completion of
                               (5).                  AK Accuracy
                                                     Reports; AK (2).
                              New waste streams     Notification to EPA
                               created as a result   upon completion of
                               of combining or       updates to or
                               separating            substantive
                               previously distinct   modifications****of
                               waste streams; AK     the following:
                               (6).                 --AK Summaries/Waste
                                                     Stream Profile
                                                     Forms (WSPFs) and
                                                     AK Documentation
                                                     Reports; AK (16)
                                                    --AK-NDA
                                                     Communication
                                                     changes; AK (3)
                                                    --Changes to site
                                                     procedure WMP
                                                     4<IP_ADDRESS>; AK (4).
                              Categories of waste   Notification to EPA
                               not approved under    upon generation of
                               this baseline         new WSPFs, AK
                               inspection (e.g.,     summaries and AK
                               soil/gravel, newly-   documentation
                               generated solids      reports; AK (16).
                               including K Basin
                               waste); AK (16).
Nondestructive Assay (NDA)..  New equipment or      Notification to EPA
                               physical              upon completion of
                               modifications to      changes to software
                               approved              for approved
                               equipment**; NDA      equipment,
                               (1)***.               operating range(s)
                              Extension or changes   and site procedures
                               to approved           that require CBFO
                               calibration range     approval; NDA
                               for approved          (2)***.
                               equipment; NDA
                               (2)***.
Real-Time Radiography (RTR).  N/A.................  Notification to EPA
                                                     upon the following:
                                                    --Implementation of
                                                     new equipment or
                                                     substantive
                                                     changes****to
                                                     approved equipment;
                                                     RTR (1)
                                                    --Completion of
                                                     changes to site
                                                     procedures
                                                     requiring CBFO
                                                     approval; RTR (2).
Visual Examination (VE) and   N/A.................  Notification to EPA
 Visual Examination                                  upon the following:
 Technique (VET).                                   --Completion of
                                                     changes to site VE
                                                     and VET procedures
                                                     requiring CBFO
                                                     approval; VE (1)
                                                     and VET (1)
                                                    --Addition of new
                                                     Summary Category
                                                     Group (SCG) or
                                                     waste stream(s); VE
                                                     (2) and VET (2).
WIPP Waste Information        Implementation of     Notification to EPA
 System (WWIS).                load management;      upon the completion
                               WWIS (4).             of changes to WWIS
                                                     procedure(s)
                                                     requiring CBFO
                                                     approval; WWIS (1).
------------------------------------------------------------------------
* Upon receiving EPA approval in this action, Hanford will report all T2
  changes to EPA at the end of each fiscal year quarter.
** Modifications to approved equipment include all changes with the
  potential to affect NDA data relative to waste isolation and exclude
  minor changes, such as the addition of safety-related equipment.
*** These are discussed in Sections (1) and (2) of the section for each
  NDA system, i.e., 8.2.1 for WRAP GEA Units A & B, 8.2.2 for WRAP IPAN
  Units A & B, 8.2.3 for WRAP SHENCA and 8.2.4 for PFP Calorimeters and
  the Room 172 SGSAS.
**** Substantive changes means changes with the potential to impact the
  site's waste characterization activities or documentation thereof,
  excluding changes that are solely related to Environmental Safety &
  Health (ES&H), nuclear safety, the Resource Conservation and Recovery
  Act (RCRA) or are editorial in nature.

IV. Availability of the Baseline Inspection Report for Public Comment

    EPA has placed the report discussing the results of the Agency's
inspection of the Hanford Site in the public docket as described in
ADDRESSES. In accordance with 40 CFR 194.8, EPA is providing the public
45 days to comment on these documents. The Agency requests comments on
the proposed approval decision, as described in the inspection report.
EPA will accept public comment on this notice and supplemental
information as described in section 1.B. above. EPA will not make a
determination of compliance before the 45-day comment period ends. At
the end of the public comment period, EPA will evaluate all relevant
public comments and revise the inspection report as necessary. If
appropriate, the Agency will then issue a final approval letter and
inspection report, both of which will be posted on the WIPP Web site.
    Information on the certification decision is filed in the official
EPA Air Docket, Docket No. A-93-02 and is available for review in
Washington, DC, and at the three EPA WIPP informational docket
locations in New Mexico (as listed in ADDRESSES). The dockets in New
Mexico contain only major items from the official Air Docket in
Washington, DC, plus those documents added to the official Air Docket
since the October 1992 enactment of the WIPP LWA.

    Dated: January 18, 2008.
Elizabeth Cotsworth,
 Director, Office of Radiation and Indoor Air.
 [FR Doc. E8-1658 Filed 1-29-08; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


[Federal Register Volume 79, Number 31 (Friday, February 14, 2014)]
[Notices]
[Pages 9033-9034]
[FR Doc No: 2014-03356]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration

[Docket No. FMCSA 2013-0348]

Agency Information Collection Activities; Revision of a Currently
Approved Collection: Practices of Household Goods Brokers

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

ACTION: Notice and request for comments.

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

SUMMARY: In accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, FMCSA
announces its plan to submit the Information Collection Request (ICR)
described below to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for its
review and approval and invites public comment. FMCSA requests approval
to revise an ICR titled ``Practices of Household Brokers'' to no longer
include one-time costs previously incurred by brokers to come into
compliance with 49 CFR part 371, and to update other wage related costs
that have changed since the last approval. This ICR is necessary to
support the requirements of subpart B of 49 CFR part 371 and FMCSA's
responsibility to ensure consumer protection in the transportation of
household goods (HHG). On November 13, 2013, FMCSA published a Federal
Register notice allowing for a 60-day comment period on this ICR. The
agency received no comments in response to that notice.

DATES: Please send your comments to this notice by March 17, 2014. OMB
must receive your comments by this date to act quickly on the ICR.

ADDRESSES: All comments should reference Federal Docket Management
System (FDMS) Docket Number FMCSA-2013-0348. Interested persons are
invited to submit written comments on the proposed information
collection to the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, Office
of Management and Budget. Comments should be addressed to the attention
of the Desk Officer, Department of Transportation/Federal Motor Carrier
Safety Administration, and sent via electronic mail to oira--
submission@

omb.eop.gov, faxed to<PHONE_NUMBER>, or mailed to the Office of
Information and Regulatory Affairs, Office of Management and Budget,
Docket Library, Room 10102, 725 17th Street NW., Washington, DC 20503.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr. Brodie Mack, Commercial
Enforcement and Investigations Division, Household Goods Team Leader,
U. S. Department of Transportation, Federal Motor Carrier Safety
Administration, West Building 6th Floor, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE.,
Washington, DC 20590-0001. Telephone:<PHONE_NUMBER>; email
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
    Title: Practices of Household Goods Brokers.
    OMB Control Number: 2126-0048.
    Type of Request: Revision of a currently approved collection.
    Respondents: Brokers of Household Goods.
    Estimated Number of Respondents: 690.
    Estimated Time per Response: 15 minutes per day x 240 workdays for
household goods broker transactions; 8 hours per year x 125 new
entrants for separate accounting system; 20 hours per year x 690
brokers of household goods for Web site/ad modifications; 10 hours per
year x 690 brokers of household goods for creating a list of carriers;
0.5 hours per month x 12 months x 690 brokers of household goods for
confirming required information; 0.083 hour per year x 20,000
explanations; 4 hours per year x 5 agreements x 690 brokers of
household goods for annual agreements through turnover; and 10 hours
per year x 690 brokers of household goods for disclosure and records.
    Expiration Date: February 28, 2014.
    Frequency of Response: On occasion.
    Estimated Total Annual Burden: 89,607 hours.
    Background: FMCSA, in response to Title IV, Subtitle B of the Safe,
Accountable, Flexible, Efficient, Transportation Equity Act: A Legacy
for Users (SAFETEA-LU) (Pub. L. 109-59) and a petition for rulemaking
from the American Moving and Storage Association (AMSA), amended 49 CFR
part 371, existing regulations for brokers, with a Final Rule titled,
``Brokers of Household Goods Transportation by Motor Vehicles, (75 FR
72987), November 29, 2010, providing additional consumer protection
responsibilities for brokers of HHG.
    Section 4212 of SAFETEA-LU directs the Secretary to require HHG
brokers to provide individual shippers with the following information
whenever a broker has contact with a shipper or potential shipper:
    1. The broker's USDOT number.
    2. The FMCSA booklet titled ``Your Rights and Responsibilities When
You Move.''
    3. A list of all authorized motor carriers providing transportation
of HHG used by the broker and a statement that the broker is not a
motor carrier providing transportation of HHG.
    FMCSA, as the result of a rulemaking that took effect November 29,
2010, amended 49 CFR part 371 by adding subpart B, specific consumer
protection requirements for HHG brokers. The collection of information
required by this rulemaking assists shippers in their business dealings
with interstate HHG brokers. The information collected is used by
prospective shippers to make informed decisions about contracts and
services ordered, executed, and settled. The HHG broker is often the
primary contact for individual shippers and in the best position to
educate shippers and prepare them for a successful move. The
information collected makes that possible. To combat deceptive business
practices, this helps enforcement personnel better protect consumers by
verifying that shippers are receiving information they are entitled to
by regulation.
    HHG brokers are required to provide individual shippers the ``Your
Rights and Responsibilities When You Move'' booklet and the ``Ready to
Move'' brochure. They have the option of providing paper copies or
presenting the information through a link on their Internet Web site.
The broker is required to document with signed receipts that the
individual shipper was provided those materials. HHG brokers are also
required to provide the list of HHG motor carriers for which it would
arrange transportation to move a potential individual shipper's HHG,
and that broker's identification information:
    1. Assigned USDOT number; and
    2. Address.

Public Comments Invited

    FMCSA requests that you comment on any aspect of this information
collection, including: (1) Whether the proposed collection is necessary
for FMCSA to perform its functions, (2) the accuracy of the estimated
burden, (3) ways for the FMCSA to enhance the quality, usefulness, and
clarity of the collected information, and (4) ways that the burden
could be minimized without reducing the quality of the collected
information. The agency will summarize or include your comments in the
request for OMB's clearance of this information collection.

    Issued under the authority delegated in 49 CFR 1.87 on: February
6, 2014.
G. Kelly Leone,
Associate Administrator, Office of Research and Information Technology
and Chief Information Officer.
[FR Doc. 2014-03356 Filed 2-13-14; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-EX-P


[Federal Register: July 31, 2009 (Volume 74, Number 146)]
[Notices]
[Page 38250-38252]
[DOCID:fr31jy09-116]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-60377; File No. SR-FINRA-2009-031]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; Financial Industry Regulatory
Authority, Inc.; Order Approving Proposed Rule Change as Amended,
Relating to the Reporting of Over-the-Counter Transactions in Equity
Securities Executed Outside Normal Market Hours

July 23, 2009.

I. Introduction

    On May 8, 2009, Financial Industry Regulatory Authority, Inc.
(``FINRA'') (f/k/a National Association of Securities Dealers, Inc.
(``NASD'')) filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission
(``Commission''), pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the Securities
Exchange Act of 1934 (``Act'') \1\ and Rule 19b-4 thereunder,\2\ a
proposed rule change to amend FINRA trade reporting rules relating to
over-the-counter transactions in equity securities executed outside
normal market hours to (1) require that any trades executed during the
hours that a FINRA Facility (the Alternative Display Facility
(``ADF''), a Trade Reporting Facility (``TRF'') or the OTC Reporting
Facility (``ORF'')) is closed be reported within 15 minutes of the
opening of the Facility, i.e., 8:15 a.m. Eastern Time; and (2) conform
the trade reporting requirements applicable to ``outside normal market
hours'' transacations across FINRA Facilities. On May 29, 2009, FINRA
filed Amendment No. 1 to the proposed Rule Change. The proposed rule
change was published for comment in the Federal Register on June 9,
2009.\3\ The Commission received no comment letters on the proposed
rule change.

This order approves the proposed rule change as amended.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1).
    \2\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4.
    \3\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 60022 (June 1,
2009), 74 FR 27361 (``Notice'').
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

II. Description of the Proposed Rule Change

    FINRA is proposing to amend the trade reporting rules \4\ to
require that trades executed during the hours that the FINRA Facility
is closed be reported within 15 minutes of the opening of the facility
(i.e., 8:15 a.m. Eastern Time for all FINRA Facilities). Specifically,
members would be required to report as follows: (1) Trades executed
between midnight and 8 a.m. must be reported by 8:15 a.m. on trade
date, and (2) trades executed between the close of the FINRA Facility
(i.e., either 6:30 p.m. or 8 p.m.) and midnight must be reported on an
``as/of'' basis the following business day by 8:15 a.m. These trades
would be designated with the unique trade report modifier to denote
their execution outside normal market hours. Any such trades not
reported by 8:15 a.m. would be marked with the ``outside normal market
hours trade reported late'' modifier.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ See Rules 6282(a)(2)(B); 6380A(a)(2)(C) and (D);
6380B(a)(2)(C) and (D); and 6622(a)(3)(C).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    FINRA also is proposing certain amendments to conform the
requirements for reporting ``outside normal market hours'' trades
across FINRA Facilities. First, under current rules and system
functionality, members are not permitted to submit to the FINRA/Nasdaq
TRF and ORF a trade report with the ``outside normal market hours''
modifier during normal market hours. For example, if a member executes
a trade at 9:29:00 a.m. and reports the trade at 9:30:15 a.m. (in
compliance with the 90-second reporting requirement under FINRA rules),
the FINRA/Nasdaq TRF and ORF will reject the trade report; the trade
cannot be reported, and will not be disseminated, until after 4 p.m. By
contrast, the ADF and FINRA/NYSE TRF permit the submission of trade
reports with the ``outside normal market hours'' modifier throughout
the day. With this change, the trade described in the example above can
be reported to the ADF or FINRA/NYSE TRF and disseminated at 9:30:15
a.m.
    Accordingly, FINRA is proposing to amend Rules 6380A(a)(2)(A) and
(a)(2)(C) relating to the FINRA/Nasdaq TRF and Rules 6622(a)(3)(A) and
(a)(3)(C)(i) relating to the ORF to delete the requirement that
``outside normal market hours'' transactions that are not reported by
9:30 a.m. be reported after 4 p.m. The proposed amendments are
identical to the text of current Rules 6282(a)(2)(A) and (a)(2)(B)(i)
relating to the ADF.
    Additionally, FINRA is proposing conforming changes to Rules
6380B(a)(2)(A) and (C) relating to the FINRA/NYSE TRF. Today, members
submit trade reports with the ``outside normal market hours'' modifier
to the FINRA/NYSE TRF throughout the day. However, FINRA stated that
when the rules for this TRF were originally adopted, these provisions
inadvertently were based on the rules relating to the FINRA/Nasdaq TRF,
rather than the ADF. Thus, FINRA stated that the proposed amendments
for the FINRA/NYSE TRF do not represent a departure from current member
reporting practices and systems functionality.\5\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ See Notice, supra, note 3.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In this regard, FINRA also is proposing to amend Rules
6380A(a)(2)(D), 6380B(a)(2)(D) and 6622(a)(3)(C)(ii) to require
expressly that ``as/of'' reports submitted pursuant to these provisions
include the unique trade report modifier, as specified by FINRA, to
denote their execution outside normal market hours. The proposed
amendments conform to the text of current Rule 6282(a)(2)(C)(ii).
    Second, FINRA is proposing to amend Rules 6282(a), 6380A(a),
6380B(a) and 6622(a) to consolidate the provisions relating to late
trade reporting and make clear that trades that are required to be
reported on trade date, but are not reported on trade date, must be
reported on an ``as/of'' basis on a subsequent date (T+N) and shall be
designated as late. This requirement applies to trades executed during
normal market hours, as well as those ``outside normal market hours''
trades that are required by rule to be reported on trade date (i.e.,
trades executed between midnight and 9:30 a.m. and between 4 p.m. and
the close of the FINRA Facility at either 6:30 or 8 p.m.). The proposed
amendments also would make clear the requirement that ``outside normal
market hours'' trades that are required to be reported on an ``as/of''
basis the following business day (T+1), but are not reported T+1, must
be reported on a subsequent date (T+N) and shall be designated as
late.\6\ Accordingly, FINRA is proposing to amend Rules 6380A(a)(2)(B),
6380B(a)(2)(B) and 6622(a)(3)(B) to delete the duplicative requirement
that transactions not reported by 8 p.m. on trade date must be reported
on an ``as/of'' basis the following business day (T+1).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ FINRA is proposing to amend paragraph (a)(1) and adopt new
paragraph (a)(6) of Rule 6282 to conform to Rules 6380A(a)(4),
6380B(a)(4) and 6622(a)(5).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Third, FINRA is proposing certain technical, non-material changes
to conform the text of the rules relating to the reporting of trades
executed outside normal market hours across FINRA Facilities. For
example, FINRA is proposing to amend Rule 6282(a)(2) relating to the
ADF and Rule 6622(a)(3) relating to the ORF to delete the specific
references to the ``.T'' trade report modifier. This conforms to the
trade reporting rules relating to the TRFs, as well as the other
provisions of the ADF trade reporting rules, which do not refer to
specific trade report modifier labels.\7\ Additionally, FINRA is
proposing to renumber the subparagraphs in Rule 6282(a)(2) relating to
the ADF and Rule 6622(a)(3) relating to the ORF to conform to the
numbering of the subparagraphs in Rules 6380A(a)(2) and 6380B(a)(2)
relating to the TRFs.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ See, e.g., Rules 6282(a)(4), 6380A(a)(2) and (5) and
6380B(a)(2) and (5).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

III. Discussion and Findings

    After careful review, the Commission finds that the proposed rule
change is consistent with the requirements of the Act and the rules and
regulations thereunder applicable to a national securities
association.\8\ In particular, the Commission finds that the proposed
rule change is consistent with the provisions of Section 15A(b)(6) of
the Act,\9\ 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.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \8\ In approving this proposal, the Commission has considered
the proposed rule's impact on efficiency, competition, and capital
formation. See 15 U.S.C. 78c(f).
    \9\ 15 U.S.C. 78o-3(b)(6).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Commission believes that the proposed rule change will enhance
market transparency by ensuring that these ``outside normal market
hours'' trades are reported and disseminated closer to the actual
execution time rather than reported at some later time during the
trading day. As a result, market participants will have better
information about the time of execution for such trades. For example,
under current rules, a trade with the ``outside normal market hours''
modifier that is reported and disseminated at 9:20 a.m. could have been
executed and reported real-time at 9:20 a.m., or it could have been
executed at some point between midnight and the opening of the FINRA
Facility at 8 a.m. There is currently nothing to distinguish a trade
executed and reported at 9:20 a.m. from a trade executed between
midnight and 8 a.m.

and reported at 9:20 a.m. Under the proposed rule change, a trade
executed between midnight and 8 a.m. that is reported at 9:20 a.m.
would be marked late, thus distinguishing it from a trade executed and
reported real-time at 9:20 a.m. The Commission believes that this
change will enhance market transparency by eliminating systematically
imposed delays in the reporting of ``outside normal market hours''
trades to the FINRA/Nasdaq TRF and ORF.
    The Commission believes that by conforming the reporting
requirements and systems functionality with respect to ``outside normal
market hours'' trades across FINRA Facilities, the proposed rule change
will promote more consistent trade reporting by members and a more
complete and accurate audit trail.\10\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \10\ The Commission notes that in connection with these changes
to the trade reporting rules FINRA is also moving language from Rule
6282(a)(1) to Rule 6282(a)(6) concerning patterns or practices of
late trade reporting. Rule 6282(a)(1) currently states that ``[a]
pattern or practice of late trade reporting without exceptional
circumstances shall be considered conduct inconsistent with high
standards of commercial honor and just equitable principles of trade
violation of Rule 2010.'' The change FINRA is proposing would
replace the word ``shall'' with ``may,'' and applies the lower
standard not only to a pattern or practice of late trade reporting
outside of normal market hours, but to a pattern or practice of late
trade reporting during normal market hours. Rule 6282 concerns
transactions reported only to TRACS, and FINRA has informed the
Commission staff that the change is designed to make the rule
consistent with the FINRA/NASDAQ, FINRA/NYSE, and OTC Trade
Reporting Facilities, all of which currently have the identical
language to proposed Rule 6282(a)(6). Telephone call between
Stephanie Dumont, Senior Vice President and Director of Capital
Markets Policy, FINRA, and Kathy England, Assistant Director,
Commission, May 29, 2009. The Commission expects FINRA to continue
pursuing violations of its trade reporting rules and to continue, as
appropriate, charging violations of Rule 2010 (Standards of
Commercial Honor and Principles of Trade). The Commission notes that
it has routinely upheld appeals from FINRA disciplinary actions when
FINRA has charged respondents with violations of Rule 2010 based
solely on an underlying violation of another SRO rule. See e.g.,
Stephen J. Gluckman, 54 S.E.C. 175, 185 (1999), Exchange Act Release
No. 41628 (July 20, 1999).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

IV. Conclusion

    It is therefore ordered, pursuant to Section 19(b)(2) of the
Act,\11\ that the proposed rule change (SR-FINRA-2009-031), as amended,
be, and hereby is, approved.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \11\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(2).

    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets,
pursuant to delegated authority.\12\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

Florence E. Harmon,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. E9-18270 Filed 7-30-09; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 8010-01-P