[Federal Register Volume 86, Number 55 (Wednesday, March 24, 2021)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 15572-15575]
[FR Doc No: 2021-06023]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. FAA-2020-0785; Product Identifier 2020-NM-063-AD; Amendment
39-21477; AD 2021-06-10]
RIN 2120-AA64

Airworthiness Directives; The Boeing Company Airplanes

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: The FAA is adopting a new airworthiness directive (AD) for all
The Boeing Company Model 747 series airplanes and Model 767 series
airplanes. This AD was prompted by a report of an un-commanded fuel
transfer between the main and center fuel tanks. This AD prohibits
operation of an airplane with any inoperative refuel valve (fueling
shut-off valve) failed in the open position. The FAA is issuing this AD
to address the unsafe condition on these products.

DATES: This AD is effective April 28, 2021.

ADDRESSES:

Examining the AD Docket

    You may examine the AD docket on the internet at https://www.regulations.gov by searching for and locating Docket No. FAA-2020-
0785; or in person at Docket Operations between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m.,
Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays. The AD docket contains
this final rule, any comments received, and other information. The
address for Docket Operations is U.S. Department of Transportation,
Docket Operations, M-30, West Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140, 1200
New Jersey Avenue SE, Washington, DC 20590.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Douglas Mansell, Aerospace Engineer,
Propulsion Section, FAA, Seattle ACO Branch, 2200 South 216th St., Des
Moines, WA 98190; phone and fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>; email:
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Background

    The FAA issued a notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) to amend 14
CFR part 39 by adding an AD that would apply to all The Boeing Company
Model 747 series airplanes and Model 767 series airplanes. The NPRM
published in the Federal Register on September 9, 2020 (85 FR 55622).
The NPRM was prompted by a report of an un-commanded fuel transfer
between the main and center fuel tanks. The NPRM proposed to prohibit
operation of an airplane with any inoperative refuel valve (fueling
shut-off valve) failed in the open position.
    The FAA is issuing this AD to address multiple refuel valves failed
in the ``open'' position via Master Minimum Equipment List (MMEL)
dispatch allowance, which allows un-commanded fuel transfer between
fuel tanks. This condition could result in a fuel exhaustion event.

Comments

    The FAA gave the public the opportunity to participate in
developing this final rule. The following presents the comments
received on the NPRM and the FAA's response to each comment.

Support for the NPRM

    United Airlines had no objection to the NPRM. Another commenter
stated that the NPRM was justified.

Request To Identify Proposed AD as Interim Action

    Boeing requested that the proposed AD be identified as interim
action because it is working on an updated MMEL to provide modified
dispatch relief.
    The FAA agrees with the commenter's request for the reason provided
by the commenter. The FAA has revised the preamble in this final rule
to identify this AD as interim action.

Request To Clarify Certain Terminology

    Boeing requested that throughout the proposed AD the word
``secured'' be changed to ``failed'' when referring to the fuel shutoff
valves. The commenter explained that the Minimum Equipment List (MEL)
does not direct operators to secure the fuel shutoff valve open; the
MEL states that operators are allowed to operate (dispatch) an airplane
with a

valve failed (inoperative) in the open position.
    The FAA agrees with the commenter's request for the reasons
provided by the commenter. The FAA has accordingly revised the
description of the unsafe condition and AD requirements in the SUMMARY
and Background sections of this final rule, and in paragraphs (e) and
(g) of this AD.

Request for Clarification Regarding Revisions to MMEL Items for Model
747SP Series Airplanes

    A commenter requested clarification regarding revisions to MMEL
items for Model 747SP series airplanes. The commenter stated the
company he is affiliated with operates two Model 747SP series airplanes
and asked if the final instruction would require eliminating ATA 28-20
(2) through (6) from its MEL, or if those sections would be revised
with different maintenance instructions, which would allow dispatching
an airplane with only one inoperative refueling valve deactivated in
the open position, or if there would be a revision to those sections
with different maintenance instructions allowing dispatching an
airplane with inoperative refueling valves deactivated in the closed
position (for example, if the refueling valves could be manually opened
on the ground for re-fueling and then closed for flight if only the
valve's actuator is defective).
    The FAA provides the following explanations to the commenter's
questions. This AD eliminates the relief provided by the dispatch
provisions of ATA 28-20 (2), (3), (4), (5), and (6) from the Boeing 747
B-747-100/200/300/SP SERIES MMEL. This AD therefore prohibits dispatch
of an airplane with any of the subject refuel valves inoperative in the
open position, regardless of the existence of any MMEL provisions. If
the MMEL items are revised in the future, the FAA might issue global
AMOCs to provide relief for operation under specified conditions. This
AD does not change the MMEL dispatch provisions for refuel valves
inoperative in the closed position.

Request To Reduce the Compliance Time

    The Air Line Pilots Association, International (ALPA) requested
that the compliance time specified in the proposed AD be reduced from
60 days after the effective date of the AD to 15 days. The commenter
stated that operators have had sufficient time from the publication
date of the proposed AD (September 9, 2020) until the publication date
of the final rule to address the prohibition of dispatching airplanes
with more than one affected refuel valve inoperative.
    The FAA disagrees with the commenter's request. After considering
all of the available information, the FAA determined that the
compliance time, as proposed, represents an appropriate interval of
time for operators to comply with the AD, and still maintain an
adequate level of safety. In developing an appropriate compliance time,
the FAA considered the safety implications of operating an airplane
with any inoperative refuel valve. In addition, reducing the compliance
time of the proposed AD would necessitate (under the provisions of the
Administrative Procedure Act) reissuing the notice, reopening the
period for public comment, considering additional comments subsequently
received, and eventually issuing a final rule. That procedure could add
unwarranted time to the rulemaking process. In light of this, and in
consideration of the amount of time that has already elapsed since
issuance of the original notice, the FAA determined that further delay
of this AD is not appropriate. However, if additional data are
presented that would justify a shorter compliance time, the FAA may
consider further rulemaking on this issue. The FAA has not revised this
AD in regard to this issue.

Request To Include MMEL Item for Model 747-8 Passenger Airplanes

    Boeing and AMES Sarl (CAMO) requested that MMEL Item 28-21-02-01A,
``Refuel Valves,'' which applies to passenger airplanes, be included in
paragraph (h)(4) of the proposed AD. The commenters noted that in
paragraph (h)(4) of the proposed AD, only MMEL Item 28-21-01-01A,
``Refuel Valves,'' is specified, and that MMEL item is applicable only
to Model 747-8F airplanes, which are freighter airplanes.
    The FAA agrees with the commenters' requests for the reasons
provided by the commenters and has revised paragraph (h)(4) of this AD
accordingly.

Request To Remove Reference to MMEL Items for Model 767-2C Series
Airplanes

    Boeing requested that MMEL items referring to Model 767-2C series
airplanes be removed from paragraph (h)(6) of the proposed AD because
an FAA-approved MMEL document does not exist for this model. The
commenter explained that only a Dispatch Deviation Guide (DDG) has been
issued for Model 767-2C series airplanes and that the MMEL items
referenced in paragraphs (h)(6)(i) and (ii) of the proposed AD are
found only in the DDG and are not public documents; therefore it is not
appropriate to reference these MMEL items in the proposed AD.
    The FAA agrees with the commenter's request for the reasons
provided by the commenter. The FAA has removed paragraph (h)(6) of this
AD because there is no published MMEL for Model 767-2C series
airplanes.

Request To Remove References to Model KC-46A Airplanes

    Boeing requested that all text referring to Model KC-46A airplanes
be removed from the NPRM. The commenter explained that for type
certification purposes, Model KC-46A airplanes are covered under the
type certificate for Model 767-2C series airplanes.
    The FAA agrees with the commenter's request for the reason provided
by the commenter. As stated previously, paragraph (h)(6) of the
proposed AD, which provided MMEL information for Model 767-2C
airplanes, has been removed from this AD.

Request for Clarification of Affected Fuel Tanks in Paragraph (g) of
the Proposed AD

    Boeing requested that paragraph (g) of the proposed AD be revised
to clarify which fuel tanks are affected. The commenter stated that the
identified unsafe condition is not evident when an airplane is
operating using the existing DDG and MMEL relief for fuel tanks with
refuel valves that are isolated from the main manifold that provides
fuel to the wing tanks. The commenter explained that the fuel tanks
that are not affected include the auxiliary tanks and the horizontal
stabilizer tank on Model 747 series airplanes and the body fuel tanks
on Model 767-2C series airplanes.
    The FAA agrees with the commenter's request. The FAA has determined
that this clarification could reduce confusion among operators
regarding which fuel tanks are affected by the unsafe condition
identified in this AD. The FAA has revised this final rule to clarify
that this AD prohibits operation of an airplane with any inoperative
refuel valve (fueling shut-off valve) of ``the reserve tank (on Model
747 series airplanes), main tank, or center tank'' that has failed in
the open position.

Request To Revise Paragraph (g) of the Proposed AD To Prohibit Dispatch
if More Than One Refuel Valve Is Inoperative

    United Parcel Service (UPS Airlines) requested that paragraph (g)
of the proposed AD be revised to specify that dispatch of an airplane
is allowed if there is only one inoperative refuel valve. The commenter
agreed that if

multiple refuel valves were secured in the open position there could be
an un-commanded fuel transfer between fuel tanks. The commenter
explained that a review of the fuel control systems on its fleet
revealed that the fuel transfer would occur only if two valves were
open, each in a different tank. The commenter noted that if only one
valve was secured (failed) open, fuel could enter the manifold but
could not migrate into a different tank. The commenter stated that it
had contacted Boeing regarding dispatch of an airplane with one refuel
valve secured in the open position and that Boeing stated this provides
an acceptable level of safety to the proposed AD. The commenter
explained that Boeing is developing substantiating analysis to support
dispatch of an airplane with one refuel valve secured in the open
position for many of the affected airplane models.
    In addition, the commenter requested that the repair category be
specified as category B (three day deferral) because the replacement of
a refuel valve, which involves fuel tank access and requires
specialized training and additional time to properly vent the fuel
tanks, would place an undue burden on operators when another acceptable
alternative is available.
    The FAA does not agree with the commenter's requests. The FAA has
determined that the operational limitations imposed by this AD are
warranted, and adequately address the unsafe condition. Boeing has not
yet finalized or provided the FAA with its substantiating analysis to
support dispatch of an airplane with one refuel valve secured in the
open position. Boeing has indicated that in the future it might provide
updates for the applicable DDG and MMEL for each affected airplane
model to provide modified dispatch relief. The FAA has not revised this
AD in regard to this issue.

Request To Revise Paragraph (h) of the Proposed AD To Refer to MEL
Instead of MMEL

    Boeing requested that the header for paragraph (h) in the proposed
AD be changed from MMEL Items to MEL Items. The commenter also
requested that paragraphs (h)(1) through (6) be revised to refer to MEL
items instead of MMEL items. The commenter stated that these changes
would provide clarification that MEL(s) would be updated and the
wording would be consistent with that of similar ADs.
    The FAA partially agrees with the commenter's requests. The FAA
agrees with the commenter's statement that operators will need to
update their MELs to comply with the change required by this AD.
Because dispatch requirements have changed for the applicable airplane
models, the FAA disagrees with removing the reference to the identified
MMEL items because this AD does not mandate the actual change to the
applicable MMEL. This AD identifies which FAA-approved MMEL items are
affected. Operators consult the MMEL requirements when updating the
operator's existing FAA-approved MEL. The FAA has revised paragraph (h)
of this AD accordingly.

Request To Include Note 2 to Paragraph (h) of the Proposed AD

    Boeing requested that Note 2 be added to paragraph (h) of the
proposed AD stating that operators must not dispatch an airplane using
MMEL Item 28-21-01 with any of the identified valves in the inoperative
open condition. The commenter explained that this would prevent
dispatch of an airplane with fueling shutoff valves in the inoperative
open condition without requiring a reference to a specific chapter of
the MMEL.
    The FAA disagrees with the commenter's request. Not all affected
airplanes have MMEL items in section 28-21. Further, the intent of the
commenter's proposed text is adequately addressed in the provisions of
paragraph (g) of this AD, which is unchanged from the proposed AD. The
FAA has not changed this AD as a result of this comment.

Conclusion

    The FAA reviewed the relevant data, considered the comments
received, and determined that air safety and the public interest
require adopting this final rule with the changes described previously
and minor editorial changes. The FAA has determined that these minor
changes:
     Are consistent with the intent that was proposed in the
NPRM for addressing the unsafe condition; and
     Do not add any additional burden upon the public than was
already proposed in the NPRM.
    The FAA also determined that these changes will not increase the
economic burden on any operator or increase the scope of this final
rule.

MMEL Revisions

    This AD refers to items in Sections 28-20 and 28-21 of the MMEL;
\1\ those items may also be included in an operator's FAA-approved MEL.
This AD prohibits operation of the airplane under conditions currently
allowed by those items in the MMEL. The FAA plans to revise the MMEL to
remove those items in a future revision; operators would then be
required to also remove those items from their existing FAA-approved
MEL.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ The MMEL items can be found in the applicable FAA-approved
MMEL: Boeing 747 B-747-100/200/300/SP SERIES MMEL, Revision 35,
dated April 25, 2014; Boeing 747 B-747-400 LCF MMEL, Revision 3,
November 7, 2014; Boeing 747 B-747-400, B-747-400D, B-747-400F MMEL,
Revision 32, dated December 27, 2018; Boeing 747-8 MMEL, Revision 7,
dated August 25, 2017; and Boeing 767 MMEL, Revision 39, dated
October 26, 2018; which can be found on the Flight Standards
Information Management System (FSIMS) website, https://fsims.faa.gov/PICResults.aspx?mode=Publication&doctype=MMELByModel.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Interim Action

    The FAA considers this AD interim action. The manufacturer is
currently developing an updated MMEL, with substantiation, that would
allow limited relief for an inoperative open fuel shutoff valve and
mitigate the unsafe condition. Once the updated MMEL is developed,
approved, and available, the FAA might consider additional rulemaking.

Costs of Compliance

    The FAA estimates that this AD affects 750 airplanes of U.S.
registry.
    The FAA has determined that revising the operator's existing FAA-
approved MEL takes an average of 90 work-hours per operator, although
the agency recognizes that this number may vary from operator to
operator. Since operators typically incorporate MEL changes for their
affected fleet(s), the FAA has determined that a per-operator estimate
is more accurate than a per-airplane estimate. Therefore, the FAA
estimates the average total cost per operator to be $7,650 (90 work-
hours x $85 per work-hour).

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.
    The FAA is 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

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

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:

2021-06-10 The Boeing Company: Amendment 39-21477; Docket No. FAA-
2020-0785; Product Identifier 2020-NM-063-AD.

(a) Effective Date

    This airworthiness directive (AD) is effective April 28, 2021.

(b) Affected ADs

    None.

(c) Applicability

    This AD applies to all The Boeing Company airplanes,
certificated in any category, identified in paragraphs (c)(1) and
(2) of this AD.
    (1) Model 747-100, -100B, -100B SUD, -200B, -200C, -200F, -300,
-400, -400D, -400F, 747SR, 747SP, -8F, and -8 series airplanes.
    (2) Model 767-200, -300, -300F, -400ER, and -2C series
airplanes.

(d) Subject

    Air Transport Association (ATA) of America Code 28, Fuel.

(e) Unsafe Condition

    This AD was prompted by a report of an un-commanded fuel
transfer between the main and center fuel tanks. The FAA is issuing
this AD to address multiple refuel valves failed in the ``open''
position via Master Minimum Equipment List (MMEL) dispatch
allowance, which allows un-commanded fuel transfer between fuel
tanks. This condition could result in a fuel exhaustion event.

(f) Compliance

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

(g) Conditions for Prohibited Operation

    No later than 60 days after the effective date of this AD:
Operation of an airplane with any inoperative refuel valve (fueling
shut-off valve) of the reserve tank (on Model 747 series airplanes
only), main tank, or center tank that has failed in the open
position is prohibited.

(h) Minimum Equipment List (MEL) Items

    The MMEL items specified in paragraphs (h)(1) through (5) of
this AD are affected by this prohibition and therefore may affect
the operator's FAA-approved MEL.
    (1) For Model 747-100, -200, and -300 series airplanes: The
following ``Pressure Fueling System'' items.
    (i) MMEL Item 28-20 2), ``Main Tank 1 and 4 Refueling Valves.''
    (ii) MMEL Item 28-20 3), ``Main Tank 2 and 3 Refueling Valves.''
    (iii) MMEL Item 28-20 4), ``Center Tank Refueling Valves.''
    (iv) MMEL Item 28-20 5), ``Reserve Tank 1 and 4 Refueling
Valves.''
    (v) MMEL Item 28-20 6), ``Reserve Tank 2 and 3 Refueling
Valves.''
    (2) For Model 747-400LCF series airplanes: MMEL Item 28-21-1 1),
``Refuel Valves,'' second dispatch case with refueling valves
inoperative open.
    (3) For Model 747-400 series airplanes: MMEL Item 28-21-1 1),
``Refuel Valves,'' first dispatch case with refueling valves
inoperative open.
    (4) For Model 747-8 series airplanes: The following ``Refuel
Valves'' items.
    (i) MMEL Item 28-21-01-01-01A, ``Refuel Valves.''
    (ii) MMEL Item 28-21-01-02-01A, ``Refuel Valves.''
    (5) For Model 767 series airplanes (except Model 767-2C
airplanes, for which there is no published MMEL): MMEL Item 28-21-
01-01B, ``Fuel Shutoff Valves.''
    Note 1 to paragraph (h): The MMEL items specified in paragraph
(h) of this AD can be found in the applicable FAA-approved MMEL:
Boeing 747 B-747-100/200/300/SP SERIES MMEL, Revision 35, dated
April 25, 2014; Boeing 747 B-747-400 LCF MMEL, Revision 3, November
7, 2014; Boeing 747 B-747-400, B-747-400D, B-747-400F MMEL, Revision
32, dated December 27, 2018; Boeing 747-8 MMEL, Revision 7, dated
August 25, 2017; and Boeing 767 MMEL, Revision 39, dated October 26,
2018; which can be found on the Flight Standards Information
Management System (FSIMS) website, https://fsims.faa.gov/PICResults.aspx?mode=Publication&doctype=MMELByModel.

(i) Alternative Methods of Compliance (AMOCs)

    (1) The Manager, Seattle ACO Branch, 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
manager of the certification office, send it to the attention of the
person identified in paragraph (j) of this AD. Information may be
emailed to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>    (2) 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.
    (3) An AMOC that provides an acceptable level of safety may be
used for any repair, modification, or alteration required by this AD
if it is approved by The Boeing Company Organization Designation
Authorization (ODA) that has been authorized by the Manager, Seattle
ACO Branch, FAA, to make those findings. To be approved, the repair
method, modification deviation, or alteration deviation must meet
the certification basis of the airplane, and the approval must
specifically refer to this AD.

(j) Related Information

    For more information about this AD, contact Douglas Mansell,
Aerospace Engineer, Propulsion Section, FAA, Seattle ACO Branch,
2200 South 216th St., Des Moines, WA 98190; phone and fax: 206-231-
3875; email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
(k) Material Incorporated by Reference

    None.

    Issued on March 12, 2021.
Lance T. Gant,
Director, Compliance & Airworthiness Division, Aircraft Certification
Service.
[FR Doc. 2021-06023 Filed 3-23-21; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


[Federal Register: June 17, 2010 (Volume 75, Number 116)]
[Notices]
[Page 34509-34510]
[DOCID:fr17jn10-127]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-62272; File No. SR-CBOE-2010-055]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; Chicago Board Options Exchange,
Incorporated; Notice of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of Proposed
Rule Change Related to Individual Equity Options Overlying Stocks
Subject to Trading Pauses Due to Extraordinary Market Volatility

June 10, 2010.
    Pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934
(``Act''),\1\ and Rule 19b-4 thereunder,\2\ notice is hereby given that
on June 10, 2010, Chicago Board Options Exchange, Incorporated (the
``Exchange'' or ``CBOE'') filed with the Securities and Exchange
Commission (``Commission'') the proposed rule change as described in
Items I and II below, which Items have been prepared by the Exchange.
The Exchange filed the proposal as a ``non-controversial'' proposed
rule change pursuant to Section 19(b)(3)(A)(iii) of the Act \3\ and
Rule 19b-4(f)(6) thereunder.\4\ 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.
    \3\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A)(iii).
    \4\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

    The CBOE is proposing to amend its trading procedures on a pilot
basis for individual equity options overlying certain stocks. The text
of the proposed rule change is available on the Exchange's Web site
(http://www.cboe.org/Legal), at the Exchange's Office of the Secretary,
at the Commission, and on the Commission's Web site at http://
www.sec.gov.

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

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

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

1. Purpose
    The primary listing markets for U.S. stocks are in the process of
amending their rules so that they may, from time to time, issue a
trading pause for an individual stock if the price of such stock moves
10% or more from a sale in a preceding five-minute period. The Exchange
is proposing the rule change described below in consultation with U.S.
listing markets and the Commission staff to provide for uniform market-
wide trading pause standards for certain individual stocks that
experience rapid price movement and for individual equity options
overlying those stocks.\5\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ The Exchange has separately proposed a rule change for CBOE
Stock Exchange, the CBOE's stock trading facility (``CBSX''), to
provide for uniform market-wide trading pause standards for
individual stocks in the S&P 500 Index traded on CBSX. Securities
Exchange Act Release No. 62132 (May 19, 2010), 75 FR 28847 (May 24,
2010) (SR-CBOE-2010-047).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange proposes to add a new Interpretation and Policy .06 to
Rule 6.3, Trading Halts, to provide that CBOE would halt trading in the
options on a Circuit Breaker Stock, as defined below, when the primary
listing market for such stock issues a trading pause. CBOE would resume
trading in the options once trading has resumed on the primary listing
market in the underlying Circuit Breaker Stock. If, however, trading
has not resumed on the primary listing market in the underlying Circuit
Breaker Stock after ten minutes have passed since the individual stock
trading pause message has been received from the responsible single
plan processor, CBOE may resume trading in the options if at least one
other market has resumed trading in the stock.
    The proposed rule would apply to trading pauses issued by primary
listing markets in ``Circuit Breaker Stocks.'' Specifically, on a pilot
basis, set to end on December 10, 2010, Circuit Breaker Stocks would
mean the stocks included in the S&P 500 Index and such other eligible
underlying stocks as may be designated for inclusion in the pilot from
time to time by the stock markets. Thus, proposed Interpretation and
Policy .06 to Rule 6.3 would be in effect with respect to individual
equity options overlying stocks in the S&P 500 Index and individual
equity options overlying such other eligible underlying stocks as may
be designated for inclusion in the pilot.
    Upon receipt of a trading pause message from the single plan
processor responsible for consolidation of information for the stock,
the Exchange would automatically implement a trading halt in the
overlying options traded on the Exchange. During the halt, the Exchange
would maintain existing orders in the Book, continue accepting orders,
and process cancels. In this regard the Exchange notes that, consistent
with its existing rotation processes, the Exchange would accept
opening-only orders during the halt, any unfilled portion of which
would automatically cancel upon conclusion of the reopen.
    Upon reopening, a rotation shall be held in the options on CBOE in
accordance with Rule 6.2B, Hybrid Opening System (``HOSS''), unless the
Exchange concludes that a different method of reopening is appropriate
under the circumstances, including but not limited to, no rotation, an
abbreviated rotation or any other variation in the manner of the
rotation.
    Lastly, nothing in the proposed Rule shall be construed to limit
the ability of the Exchange to halt or suspend trading in any security
or securities traded on the Exchange pursuant to any other Exchange
rule or policy.
2. Statutory Basis
    The rule change proposed in this submission is consistent with the
requirements of the Act and the rules and regulations thereunder that
are applicable to a national securities exchange, and, in particular,
with the requirements of Section 6(b) of the Act.\6\ In particular, the
proposed change is consistent with Section 6(b)(5) of the Act,\7\
because it would promote just and equitable principles of trade, remove
impediments to, and perfect the mechanism of, a free and open market
and a national market system, and, in general, protect investors and
the public interest. The proposed rule change is also designed to
support the principles of Section 11A(a)(1) \8\ of the Act in that it
seeks to assure fair competition among brokers and dealers and among
exchange markets. The Exchange believes that the proposed rule meets
these requirements in that it promotes transparency and uniformity
across markets concerning decisions to pause trading in a stock and the
individual equity options overlying that stock

when there are significant price movements.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b).
    \7\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5).
    \8\ 15 U.S.C. 78k-1(a)(1).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

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

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

    The Exchange neither solicited nor received comments on the
proposal.

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

    Because the proposed rule change: (i) Does not significantly affect
the protection of investors or the public interest; (ii) Does not
impose any significant burden on competition; and (iii) does not become
operative for 30 days after the date of the filing, or such shorter
time as the Commission may designate if consistent with the protection
of investors and the public interest, provided that the self-regulatory
organization has given the Commission written notice of its intent to
file the proposed rule change at least five business days prior to the
date of filing of the proposed rule change or such shorter time as
designated by the Commission, the proposed rule change has become
effective pursuant to Section 19(b)(3)(A) of the Act \9\ and Rule 19b-
4(f)(6) thereunder.\10\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \9\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A).
    \10\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6). The Commission notes that the
Exchange has met this requirement.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    A proposed rule change filed under Rule 19b-4(f)(6) normally does
not become operative for 30 days after the date of filing.\11\ However,
Rule 19b-4(f)(6)(iii) permits the Commission to designate a shorter
time if such action is consistent with the protection of investors and
the public interest. The Exchange requested that the Commission waive
the 30-day operative delay, as specified in Rule 19b-4(f)(6)(iii),\12\
which would make the rule change effective and operative upon filing.
The Commission approved filings from the exchanges and the Financial
Industry Regulatory Authority to institute a single stock trading pause
for equity securities that experience a 10% change in price during a
five minute period.\13\ The Commission believes that waiving the 30-day
operative delay is consistent with the protection of investors and the
public interest because it will allow CBOE to halt trading for
individual equity options at the same time that the primary listing
market implements the pilot for eligible underlying stocks.\14\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \11\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6).
    \12\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6)(iii).
    \13\ See Securities Exchange Act Release Nos. 62251 and 62252
(June 10, 2010).
    \14\ For purposes only of waiving the 30-day operative delay,
the Commission has considered the proposed rule's impact on
efficiency, competition, and capital formation. See 15 U.S.C.
78c(f).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    At any time within 60 days of the filing of such proposed rule
change, the Commission may summarily abrogate such rule change if it
appears to the Commission that such action is necessary or appropriate
in the public interest, for the protection of investors, or otherwise
in furtherance of the purposes of the Act.

IV. Solicitation of Comments

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

Electronic Comments

     Use the Commission's Internet comment form (http://
www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml); or
     Send an e-mail to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Please include
File Number SR-CBOE-2010-055 on the subject line.

Paper Comments

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

All submissions should refer to File Number SR-CBOE-2010-055. This file
number should be included on the subject line if e-mail 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 the Exchange. All
comments received will be posted without change; the Commission does
not edit personal identifying information from submissions. You should
submit only information that you wish to make publicly available. All
submissions should refer to File Number SR-CBOE-2010-055 and should be
submitted on or before July 8, 2010.

    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets,
pursuant to delegated authority.\15\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \15\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Florence E. Harmon,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2010-14606 Filed 6-16-10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8010-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 76, Number 14 (Friday, January 21, 2011)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 3838-3840]
[FR Doc No: 2011-1260]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 81

[EPA-R02-OAR-2010-0688, FRL-9255-5]

Approval and Promulgation of One-Year Extension for Attaining the
1997 8-Hour Ozone Standard for the New Jersey Portion of the
Philadelphia-Wilmington-Atlantic City Moderate Nonattainment Area

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: EPA is approving an extension from June 15, 2010 to June 15,
2011 of the applicable attainment date for the New Jersey portion of
the Philadelphia-Wilmington-Atlantic City 1997 8-hour ozone
nonattainment area (Philadelphia Area), which is classified as moderate
nonattainment for the 1997 8-hour ozone national ambient air quality
standard (NAAQS). This extension is based in part on complete, quality-
assured air quality data recorded during the 2009 ozone season. In
accordance with requirements for a 1-year extension, the Philadelphia
Area's 4th highest daily 8-hour monitored ozone value during the 2009
ozone season at each monitor in the area is less than 0.084 parts per
million (ppm). EPA is revising the table with regard to the 8-hour
ozone attainment date for the New Jersey portion of the Philadelphia
Area.

DATES: Effective Date: This rule is effective on February 22, 2011.

ADDRESSES: EPA has established a docket for this action under Docket ID
No. EPA-R02-OAR-2010-0688. All documents in the docket are listed on
the http://www.regulations.gov Web site. 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, is not placed on the Internet
and will be publicly available only in hard copy form. Publicly
available docket materials are available either electronically through
http://www.regulations.gov or in hard copy at the Environmental
Protection Agency, Region II Office, Air Programs Branch, 290 Broadway,
25th Floor, New York, New York 10007-1866. This Docket Facility is open
from 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., Monday through Friday, excluding legal
holidays. The Docket telephone number is<PHONE_NUMBER>.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Paul Truchan, Air Programs Branch,
Environmental Protection Agency, 290 Broadway, 25th Floor, New York,
New York 10007-1866,<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Background

    On June 23, 2010, the State of New Jersey requested a one-year
attainment date extension for the Philadelphia Area. The Philadelphia
Area, which is classified as moderate for the 1997 8-hour ozone
National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS), consists of Cecil
County in Maryland; Bucks, Chester, Delaware, Montgomery and
Philadelphia Counties in Pennsylvania; the entire State of Delaware;
and Atlantic, Burlington, Camden, Cape May, Cumberland, Gloucester,
Mercer, Ocean, and Salem Counties in New Jersey. Since this area was
classified as a moderate ozone nonattainment area, the statutory ozone
attainment date, as prescribed by section 181(a) of the Clean Air Act
(CAA), is June 15, 2010. New Jersey requested that the attainment date
be extended to June 15, 2011.
    On November 9, 2010 (75 FR 68733), EPA proposed to approve New
Jersey's request based upon:
    (1) New Jersey has complied with all requirements and commitments
pertaining to the area in the applicable ozone implementation plan. New
Jersey's applicable ozone implementation plan can be found at 40 CFR
52.1570; and
    (2) The maximum 4th highest daily 8-hour monitored value at any
monitoring site in the Philadelphia area during the 2009 ozone season
was 0.074 ppm, which is below the 0.084 ppm criteria.

II. Comments

    EPA received one comment in response to the proposal which
supported the decision to approve an attainment date extension.

III. Final Action

    Pursuant to CAA section 181(a) and 40 CFR 51.907, EPA is approving
an attainment date extension from June 15, 2010 to June 15, 2011 for
the New Jersey portion of the Philadelphia Area, which is classified as
moderate for the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS. The table in 40 CFR 81.331
will be modified to reflect EPA's approval of New Jersey's

attainment date extension request. The table is entitled ``New Jersey--
Ozone (8-Hour Standard).''

IV. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

    Under Executive Order 12866 (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993), this
action is not a ``significant regulatory action'' and therefore is not
subject to review by the Office of Management and Budget. For this
reason, this action is also not subject to Executive Order 13211,
``Actions Concerning Regulations That Significantly Affect Energy
Supply, Distribution, or Use'' (66 FR 28355 (May 22, 2001)). This
action merely finds that an area has qualified for a one-year extension
of the attainment date of a previously established NAAQS, and imposes
no additional requirements. Accordingly, the Administrator certifies
that this rule will not have a significant economic impact on a
substantial number of small entities under the Regulatory Flexibility
Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.). Because this rule does not impose any
additional enforceable duties, it does not contain any unfunded mandate
or significantly or uniquely affect small governments, as described in
the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (Pub. L. 104-4). This rule
also 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, as specified by Executive
Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, November 9, 2000), nor will it have
substantial direct effects 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, as
specified in Executive Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10, 1999),
because it merely determines that an area has attained a Federal
standard, and does not alter the relationship or the distribution of
power and responsibilities established in the CAA. This rule also is
not subject to Executive Order 13045 (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997),
because it is not economically significant.
    This rule does not involve establishment of technical standards,
and thus, the requirements of section 12(d) of the National Technology
Transfer and Advancement Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. 272 note) do not apply.
As required by section 3 of Executive Order 12988 (61 FR 4729, February
7, 1996), in issuing this rule, EPA has taken the necessary steps to
eliminate drafting errors and ambiguity, minimize potential litigation,
and provide a clear legal standard for affected conduct. EPA has
complied with Executive Order 12630 (53 FR 8859, March 15, 1988) by
examining the takings implications of the rule in accordance with the
``Attorney General's Supplemental Guidelines for the Evaluation of Risk
and Avoidance of Unanticipated Takings'' issued under the executive
order.
    EPA has determined that this final rule will not have
disproportionately high and adverse human health or environmental
effects on minority or low-income populations because it does not
affect the level of protection provided to human health or the
environment. The rulemaking does not affect the level of protection
provided to human health or the environment because extending the
attainment date does not alter the emission reduction measures that are
required to be implemented in the New Jersey portion of the
Philadelphia-Wilmington-Atlantic City area, which is classified as
moderate nonattainment for the 1997 8-hour ozone standard. See 69 FR
23909 (April 30 2004). Additionally, if the Philadelphia-Wilmington-
Atlantic City Area were not granted an extension of its attainment
date, EPA's recourse would be to initiate a reclassification of the
Philadelphia-Wilmington-Atlantic City Area from its current
classification of moderate nonattainment to serious nonattainment,
pursuant to section 181(b)(2) of the CAA. Because the Philadelphia-
Wilmington-Atlantic City area was formerly a severe nonattainment area
under the revoked 1-hour ozone standard (see, 56 FR 56773, November 6,
1991), it is required to continue to implement severe area requirements
pursuant to EPA's interpretation of ``anti-backsliding'' provision of
section 172(e) of the CAA. See 69 FR 23973, April 30, 2004, South Coast
Air Quality Management District v. EPA, 472 F.3d 882 (D.C. Cir. 2006),
modified and rehearing den., 489 F.3d 1245 (D.C. Cir. 2007). The severe
area requirements are more stringent than both the moderate and serious
area requirements set forth in Title I, Part D, Subpart 2 of the CAA.
Therefore, even if EPA were to not grant the attainment date extension
and instead move to reclassify the area to serious nonattainment, no
additional emission reduction measures would be required to be
implemented in the Philadelphia-Wilmington-Atlantic City area through a
181(b)(2) reclassification. The extension of the attainment deadline
for the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS does not impose an information
collection burden under the provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act
of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.).
    The Congressional Review Act, 5 U.S.C. 801 et seq., as added by the
Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996, generally
provides that before a rule may take effect, the agency promulgating
the rule must submit a rule report, which includes a copy of the rule,
to each House of the Congress and to the Comptroller General of the
United States. EPA will submit a report containing this action and
other required information to the U.S. Senate, the U.S. House of
Representatives, and the Comptroller General of the United States prior
to publication of the rule in the Federal Register. A major rule cannot
take effect until 60 days after it is published in the Federal
Register. This action is not a ``major rule'' as defined by 5 U.S.C.
804(2).
    Under section 307(b)(1) of the Clean Air Act, petitions for
judicial review of this action must be filed in the United States Court
of Appeals for the appropriate circuit by March 22, 2011. Filing a
petition for reconsideration by the Administrator of this final rule
does not affect the finality of this action for the purposes of
judicial review nor does it extend the time within which a petition for
judicial review may be filed, and shall not postpone the effectiveness
of such rule or action. This action may not be challenged later in
proceedings to enforce its requirements. (See section 307(b)(2).)

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 81

    Environmental protection, Air pollution control.

    Dated: January 10, 2011.
Judith A. Enck,
Regional Administrator, Region 2.

    Part 81, chapter I, title 40 of the Code of Federal Regulations is
amended as follows:

PART 81--[AMENDED]

0
1. The authority citation for part 81 continues to read as follows:

    Authority:  42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.

0
2. In Sec.  81.331 the table entitled ``New Jersey--Ozone (8-Hour
Standard)'' revise the entry for ``Philadelphia-Wilmington-Atlantic
City, PA-NJ-MD-DE'' to read as follows:

Sec.  81.331  New Jersey.

* * * * *

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                            Designation \a\                                      Category/classification
            Designated area             ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                           Date \1\                     Type                      Date \1\                       Type
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

                                                                      * * * * * * *
Philadelphia-Wilmington-Atlantic City,
 PA-NJ-MD-DE:
    Atlantic County....................  ...........  Nonattainment...........................  ...........  Subpart 2/Moderate.\2\
    Burlington County..................  ...........  Nonattainment...........................  ...........  Subpart 2/Moderate.\2\
    Camden County......................  ...........  Nonattainment...........................  ...........  Subpart 2/Moderate.\2\
    Cape May County....................  ...........  Nonattainment...........................  ...........  Subpart 2/Moderate.\2\
    Cumberland County..................  ...........  Nonattainment...........................  ...........  Subpart 2/Moderate.\2\
    Gloucester County..................  ...........  Nonattainment...........................  ...........  Subpart 2/Moderate.\2\
    Mercer County......................  ...........  Nonattainment...........................  ...........  Subpart 2/Moderate.\2\
    Ocean County.......................  ...........  Nonattainment...........................  ...........  Subpart 2/Moderate.\2\
    Salem County.......................  ...........  Nonattainment...........................  ...........  Subpart 2/Moderate.\2\
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\a\ Includes Indian Country located in each county or area, except as otherwise specified.
\1\ This date is June 15, 2004, unless otherwise noted.
\2\ Attainment date extended to June 15, 2011.

* * * * *
[FR Doc. 2011-1260 Filed 1-20-11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


[Federal Register Volume 85, Number 249 (Tuesday, December 29, 2020)]
[Notices]
[Pages 85787-85788]
[FR Doc No: 2020-28763]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Investment Company Act Release No. 34149; File No. 812-15169]

ALPS ETF Trust, et al.

December 22, 2020.
AGENCY:  Securities and Exchange Commission (``Commission'').

ACTION:  Notice.

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

    Notice of an application for an order under section 6(c) of the
Investment Company Act of 1940 (``Act'') for an exemption from sections
2(a)(32), 5(a)(1), 22(d) and 22(e) of the Act and rule 22c-1 under the
Act, and under sections 6(c) and 17(b) of the Act for an exemption from
sections 17(a)(1) and 17(a)(2) of the Act.

Applicants: ALPS ETF Trust (the ``Trust''), ALPS Advisors, Inc. (the
``Initial Adviser''), and ALPS Portfolio Solutions Distributor, Inc.
(the ``Distributor'').

Summary of Application: Applicants request an order (``Order'') that
permits: (a) Shielded Alpha ETFs (as described in the Reference Order
(defined below)) to issue shares (``Shares'') redeemable in large
aggregations only (``creation units''); (b) secondary market
transactions in Shares to occur at negotiated market prices rather than
at net asset value; (c) certain Shielded Alpha ETFs to pay redemption
proceeds, under certain circumstances, more than seven days after the
tender of Shares for redemption; and (d) certain affiliated persons of
a Shielded Alpha ETF to deposit securities into, and receive securities
from, the Shielded Alpha ETF in connection with the purchase and
redemption of creation units. The relief in the Order would incorporate
by reference terms and conditions of the same relief of a previous
order granting the same relief sought by applicants, as that order may
be amended from time to time (``Reference Order'').\1\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ Blue Tractor ETF Trust and Blue Tractor Group, LLC,
Investment Company Act Rel. Nos. 33682 (Nov. 14, 2019) (notice) and
33710 (Dec. 10, 2019) (order). Applicants are not seeking relief
under section 12(d)(1)(J) of the Act for an exemption from sections
12(d)(1)(A) and 12(d)(1)(B) of the Act (the ``Section 12(d)(1)
Relief''), and relief under sections 6(c) and 17(b) of the Act for
an exemption from sections 17(a)(1) and 17(a)(2) of the Act relating
to the Section 12(d)(1) Relief, as granted in the Reference Order.
Accordingly, to the extent the terms and conditions of the Reference
Order relate to such relief, they are not incorporated by reference
into the Order.

Filing Date: The application was filed on October 8, 2020 and amended
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
on December 21, 2020.

Hearing or Notification of Hearing: An order granting the requested
relief will be issued unless the Commission orders a hearing.
Interested persons may request a hearing by emailing the Commission's
Secretary at<EMAIL_ADDRESS>and serving applicants with a
copy of the request by email. Hearing requests should be received by
the Commission by 5:30 p.m. on January 19, 2021, and should be
accompanied by proof of service on applicants, in the form of an
affidavit or, for lawyers, a certificate of service. Pursuant to rule
0-5 under the Act, hearing requests should state the nature of the
writer's interest, any facts bearing upon the desirability of a hearing
on the matter, the reason for the request, and the issues contested.
Persons who wish to be notified of a hearing may request notification
by emailing the Commission's Secretary at<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
ADDRESSES:  Secretary, U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission,
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Applicants: Cara B. Owen, Esq.,
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Laura J. Riegel, Senior Counsel, at
(202) 551-3038 or Trace W. Rakestraw,

Branch Chief, at<PHONE_NUMBER> (Division of Investment Management,
Chief Counsel's Office).

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The following is a summary of the
application. The complete application may be obtained via the
Commission's website by searching for the file number, or for an
applicant using the Company name box, at http://www.sec.gov/search/search.htm or by calling<PHONE_NUMBER>.

Applicants

    1. The Trust is a statutory trust organized under the laws of
Delaware and will consist of one or more series operating as a Shielded
Alpha ETFs. The Trust is registered as an open-end management
investment company under the Act. Applicants seek relief with respect
to Funds (as defined below), including an initial Fund (the ``Initial
Fund''). The Funds will operate as Shielded Alpha ETFs as described in
the Reference Order.\2\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \2\ To facilitate arbitrage, among other things, each day a Fund
would publish a basket of securities and cash that, while different
from the Fund's portfolio, is designed to closely track its daily
performance.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    2. The Initial Adviser is a corporation organized under the laws of
Colorado and will be the investment adviser to the Initial Fund.
Subject to approval by the Trust's board of trustees, an Adviser (as
defined below) will serve as investment adviser to each Fund. The
Initial Adviser is, and any other Adviser will be, registered as an
investment adviser under the Investment Advisers Act of 1940
(``Advisers Act''). The Adviser may enter into sub-advisory agreements
with other investment advisers to act as sub-advisers with respect to
the Funds (each a ``Sub-Adviser''). Any Sub-Adviser to a Fund will be
registered under the Advisers Act.
    3. The Distributor is a corporation organized under the laws of
Colorado and a broker-dealer registered under the Securities Exchange
Act of 1934, as amended, and will act as the principal underwriter of
Shares of the Funds. Applicants request that the requested relief apply
to any distributor of Shares, whether affiliated or unaffiliated with
the Adviser and/or Sub-Adviser (included in the term ``Distributor'').
Any Distributor will comply with the terms and conditions of the Order.

Applicants' Requested Exemptive Relief

    4. Applicants seek the requested Order under section 6(c) of the
Act for an exemption from sections 2(a)(32), 5(a)(1), 22(d) and 22(e)
of the Act and rule 22c-1 under the Act, and under sections 6(c) and
17(b) of the Act for an exemption from sections 17(a)(1) and 17(a)(2)
of the Act. The requested Order would permit applicants to offer Funds
that operate as Shielded Alpha ETFs. Because the relief requested is
the same as certain of the relief granted by the Commission under the
Reference Order and because the Initial Adviser has entered into a
licensing agreement with Blue Tractor Group LLC, or an affiliate
thereof, in order to offer Funds that operate as Shielded Alpha ETFs,
the Order would incorporate by reference the terms and conditions of
the same relief of the Reference Order.
    5. Applicants request that the Order apply to the Initial Fund and
to any other existing or future registered open-end management
investment company or series thereof that: (a) Is advised by the
Initial Adviser or any entity controlling, controlled by, or under
common control with the Initial Adviser (any such entity, along with
the Initial Adviser, included in the term ``Adviser''); (b) operates as
a Shielded Alpha ETF as described by the Reference Order; and (c)
complies with the terms and conditions of the Order and the terms and
conditions of the Reference Order that are incorporated by reference
into the Order (each such company or series and the Initial Fund, a
``Fund'').\3\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ All entities that currently intend to rely on the Order are
named as applicants. Any other entity that relies on the Order in
the future will comply with the terms and conditions of the Order
and the terms and conditions of the Reference Order that are
incorporated by reference into the Order.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    6. Section 6(c) of the Act provides that the Commission may exempt
any person, security or transaction, or any class of persons,
securities or transactions, from any provisions of the Act, if and to
the extent that such exemption is necessary or appropriate in the
public interest and consistent with the protection of investors and the
purposes fairly intended by the policy and provisions of the Act.
Section 17(b) of the Act authorizes the Commission to exempt a proposed
transaction from section 17(a) of the Act if evidence establishes that
the terms of the transaction, including the consideration to be paid or
received, are reasonable and fair and do not involve overreaching on
the part of any person concerned, and the transaction is consistent
with the policies of the registered investment company and the general
purposes of the Act. Applicants submit that for the reasons stated in
the Reference Order the requested relief meets the exemptive standards
under sections 6(c) and 17(b) of the Act.

    For the Commission, by the Division of Investment Management,
pursuant to delegated authority.
Eduardo A. Aleman,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2020-28763 Filed 12-28-20; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 88, Number 240 (Friday, December 15, 2023)]
[Notices]
[Pages 86890-86891]
[FR Doc No: 2023-27574]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

Combined Notice of Filings #1

    Take notice that the Commission received the following electric
corporate filings:

    Docket Numbers: EC24-19-000.
    Applicants: NMRD Data Center II, LLC, NMRD Data Center III, LLC.
    Description: Supplement to November 13, 2023 Joint Application for
Authorization Under Section 203 of the Federal Power Act of NMRD Data
Center II, LLC, et al.
    Filed Date: 12/8/23.
    Accession Number: 20231208-5196.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. ET 12/18/23.

    Take notice that the Commission received the following electric
rate filings:

    Docket Numbers: ER10-2178-042; ER10-2184-029; ER10-2192-042; ER11-
2005-027; ER11-2013-027; ER11-2014-027; ER13-1536-026.
    Applicants: Constellation Energy Generation, LLC, Cow Branch Wind
Power, LLC, CR Clearing, LLC, Wind Capital Holdings, LLC, Constellation
Energy Commodities Group Maine, LLC, CER Generation, LLC, Constellation
NewEnergy, Inc.
    Description: Triennial Market Power Analysis for Southeast Region
of Constellation NewEnergy, Inc., et al.
    Filed Date: 12/8/23.
    Accession Number: 20231208-5213.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. ET 2/6/24.

    Docket Numbers: ER22-2776-002.
    Applicants: Shelby County Energy Center, LLC.
    Description: Compliance filing: Compliance to 9 to be effective 11/
1/2022.
    Filed Date: 12/11/23.
    Accession Number: 20231211-5072.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. ET 1/2/24.

    Docket Numbers: ER22-2777-002.
    Applicants: Tilton Energy LLC.
    Description: Compliance filing: Compliance to 2124 to be effective
11/1/2022.
    Filed Date: 12/11/23.
    Accession Number: 20231211-5075.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. ET 1/2/24.

    Docket Numbers: ER23-691-002; ER23-692-002.
    Applicants: Hecate Energy Albany 2 LLC, Hecate Energy Albany 1 LLC.
    Description: Notice of Non-Material Change in Status of Hecate
Energy Albany 1 LLC, et al.
    Filed Date: 12/11/23.
    Accession Number: 20231211-5076.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. ET 1/2/24.

    Docket Numbers: ER23-1492-001.
    Applicants: Santa Paula Energy Storage, LLC.
    Description: Notice of Non-Material Change in Status of Santa Paula
Energy Storage, LLC.
    Filed Date: 12/8/23.
    Accession Number: 20231208-5197.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. ET 12/29/23.

    Docket Numbers: ER23-2952-001.
    Applicants: Wind Stream Properties, LLC.
    Description: Tariff Amendment: Wind Stream Amended MBR Application
Filing to be effective 1/1/2024.

    Filed Date: 12/8/23.
    Accession Number: 20231208-5206.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. ET 12/18/23.

    Docket Numbers: ER24-98-001.
    Applicants: PJM Interconnection, L.L.C.
    Description: Tariff Amendment: Deficiency Response on Capacity
Market Reforms Revisions in ER24-98 to be effective 12/12/2023.
    Filed Date: 12/8/23.
    Accession Number: 20231208-5201.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. ET 12/29/23.

    Docket Numbers: ER24-171-000.
    Applicants: Skysol, LLC.
    Description: Supplement to October 20, 2023 Skysol, LLC tariff
filing.
    Filed Date: 12/8/23.
    Accession Number: 20231208-5194.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. ET 12/15/23.

    Docket Numbers: ER24-615-000.
    Applicants: FirstEnergy Pennsylvania Electric Company.
    Description: 205(d) Rate Filing: 2023-12-08 Modifications to
Generation Facility Interconnection Agreement to be effective 12/31/
9998.
    Filed Date: 12/8/23.
    Accession Number: 20231208-5210.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. ET 12/29/23.

    Docket Numbers: ER24-616-000.
    Applicants: PJM Interconnection, L.L.C.
    Description: 205(d) Rate Filing: Original NSA, SA No. 7139; Queue
No. AD2-086/AE1-090 to be effective 11/10/2023.
    Filed Date: 12/11/23.
    Accession Number: 20231211-5045.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. ET 1/2/24.

    Docket Numbers: ER24-617-000.
    Applicants: Midcontinent Independent System Operator, Inc.,
American Transmission Company LLC.
    Description: 205(d) Rate Filing: Midcontinent Independent System
Operator, Inc. submits tariff filing per 35.13(a)(2)(iii: 2023-12-11_SA
4211 ATC-Rock Energy PCA to be effective 2/10/2024.
    Filed Date: 12/11/23.
    Accession Number: 20231211-5079.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. ET 1/2/24.

    Docket Numbers: ER24-618-000.
    Applicants: PJM Interconnection, L.L.C.
    Description: Compliance filing: Compliance Filing Substituting
Real-Time Values for Temporary Exceptions to be effective 11/30/2023.
    Filed Date: 12/11/23.
    Accession Number: 20231211-5081.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. ET 1/2/24.

    Docket Numbers: ER24-619-000.
    Applicants: MS Solar 5, LLC.
    Description: Baseline eTariff Filing: MS Solar 5, LLC MBR
Application Filing to be effective 2/10/2024.
    Filed Date: 12/11/23.
    Accession Number: 20231211-5086.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. ET 1/2/24.

    Docket Numbers: ER24-620-000.
    Applicants: PJM Interconnection, L.L.C.
    Description: 205(d) Rate Filing: Original NSA, Service Agreement
No. 7148; Queue No. AF1-158 to be effective 2/10/2024.
    Filed Date: 12/11/23.
    Accession Number: 20231211-5122.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. ET 1/2/24.

    The filings are accessible in the Commission's eLibrary system
(https://elibrary.ferc.gov/idmws/search/fercgensearch.asp) by querying
the docket number.
    Any person desiring to intervene, to protest, or to answer a
complaint in any of the above proceedings must file in accordance with
Rules 211, 214, or 206 of the Commission's Regulations (18 CFR 385.211,
385.214, or 385.206) on or before 5 p.m. Eastern time on the specified
comment date. Protests may be considered, but intervention is necessary
to become a party to the proceeding.
    eFiling is encouraged. More detailed information relating to filing
requirements, interventions, protests, service, and qualifying
facilities filings can be found at: http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/efiling/filing-req.pdf. For other information, call<PHONE_NUMBER>
(toll free). For TTY, call<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    The Commission's Office of Public Participation (OPP) supports
meaningful public engagement and participation in Commission
proceedings. OPP can help members of the public, including landowners,
environmental justice communities, Tribal members and others, access
publicly available information and navigate Commission processes. For
public inquiries and assistance with making filings such as
interventions, comments, or requests for rehearing, the public is
encouraged to contact OPP at<PHONE_NUMBER> or [email protected].

    Dated: December 11, 2023.
Debbie-Anne A. Reese,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2023-27574 Filed 12-14-23; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register: June 25, 2008 (Volume 73, Number 123)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Page 35932-35934]
[DOCID:fr25jn08-19]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Coast Guard

33 CFR Part 165

[Docket No. USCG-2008-0471]
RIN 1625-AA00

Safety Zone: 31st Annual Virginia Lakes Festival Fireworks Event,
John H. Kerr Lake, Clarksville, VA

AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS.

ACTION: Temporary final rule.

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

SUMMARY: The Coast Guard is establishing a 700-foot radius safety zone
on John H. Kerr Lake in the vicinity of the Highway 58 Business Bridge
in Clarksville, VA in support of the 31st Annual Virginia Lakes
Festival Fireworks Display. This action is intended to restrict vessel
traffic movement to protect mariners from the hazards associated with
the fireworks display.

DATES: This rule is effective from 9 p.m. to 10 p.m. on July 19, 2008.

ADDRESSES: Documents indicated in this preamble as being available in
the docket are part of docket USCG-2008-0471 and are available online
at www.regulations.gov. They are also available for inspection or
copying in two locations: 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; and the Sector
Hampton Roads, Norfolk Federal Building, 200 Granby St., 7th Floor,
Norfolk, VA 23510 between 9 a.m. and 2 p.m., Monday through Friday,
except Federal holidays.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: If you have questions on this
temporary rule, call LT Bill Clark, Chief Waterways Management
Division, Sector Hampton

Roads at<PHONE_NUMBER>. If you have questions on viewing the docket,
call Renee V. Wright, Program Manager, Docket Operations, telephone
202-366-9826.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Regulatory Information

    The Coast Guard is issuing this temporary final rule without prior
notice and opportunity to comment pursuant to authority under section
4(a) of the Administrative Procedure Act (APA) (5 U.S.C. 553(b)). This
provision authorizes an agency to issue a rule without prior notice and
opportunity to comment when the agency for good cause finds that those
procedures are ``impracticable, unnecessary, or contrary to the public
interest.'' Under 5 U.S.C. 553(b)(B), the Coast Guard finds that good
cause exists for not publishing a notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM)
with respect to this rule because any delay encountered in this
regulation's effective date by publishing a NPRM would be contrary to
public interest since immediate action is needed to provide for the
safety of life and property on navigable waters. Additionally, this
temporary safety zone will only be enforced for 1 hour on July 19, 2008
and should have minimal impact on vessel transits due to the fact that
vessels can safely transit through the zone when authorized by the
Captain of the Port or his representative and that they are not
precluded from using any portion of the waterway except the safety zone
area itself. For the same reasons above, under 5 U.S.C. 553(d)(3), the
Coast Guard finds that good cause exists for making this rule effective
less than 30 days after publication in the Federal Register.

Background and Purpose

    On July 19, 2008, Clarksville Lake County Chamber of Commerce of
Clarksville, VA will sponsor a fireworks display centered on the
Highway 58 Bridge in Clarksville, VA in position 36[deg]37'51'' N/
078[deg]32'50'' W (NAD 1983). Due to the need to protect mariners and
spectators from the hazards associated with the fireworks display,
vessel traffic will be temporarily restricted within 700-feet of the
fireworks launch site.

Discussion of Rule

    The Coast Guard is establishing a safety zone on specified waters
of John H. Kerr Lake within the area bounded by a 700-foot radius
circle centered on position 36[deg]37'51'' N/078[deg]32'50'' W (NAD
1983) in the vicinity of Highway 58 Business Bridge in Clarksville, VA.
This safety zone will be established in the interest of public safety
during the 31st Annual Virginia Lakes Festival Fireworks event and will
be enforced from 9 p.m. to 10 p.m. on July 19, 2008. General navigation
within the safety zone will be restricted during the specified date and
times. Except for participants and vessels authorized by the Coast
Guard Captain of the Port or his representative, no person or vessel
may enter or remain in the regulated area.

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 restricts access
to the safety zone, the effect of this rule will not be significant
because: (i) The safety zone will be in effect for a limited duration;
and (ii) the Coast Guard will make notifications via maritime
advisories so mariners can adjust their plans accordingly.

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
or anchor in this portion of John H. Kerr Lake between 9 p.m. and 10
p.m. on July 19, 2008.
    The safety zone will not have a significant economic impact on a
substantial number of small entities because the zone will only be
enforced for limited times and is of limited size. Additionally, vessel
traffic can pass safely around the zone. Before the effective period,
maritime advisories will be issued and made widely available to
waterway users.

Assistance for Small Entities

    Under section 213(a) of the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement
Fairness Act of 1996 (Pub. L. 104-121), we offer to assist small
entities in understanding the rule so that they can 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 Commandant Instruction M16475.lD
and Department of Homeland Security Management Directive 5100.1, 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,
under the instruction, that there are no factors in this case that
would limit the use of a categorical exclusion under section 2.B.2 of
the Instruction. Therefore, this rule is categorically excluded, under
figure 2-1, paragraph (34)(g), of the Instruction, from further
environmental documentation.
    A final environmental analysis checklist and a final categorical
exclusion determination will be available in the docket where indicated
under ADDRESSES.

List of Subjects in 33 CFR Part 165

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

0
For the reasons discussed in the preamble, the Coast Guard amends 33
CFR part 165 as follows:

PART 165--REGULATED NAVIGATION AREAS AND LIMITED ACCESS AREAS

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

    Authority: 33 U.S.C. 1226, 1231; 46 U.S.C. Chapter 701; 50
U.S.C. 191, 195; 33 CFR 1.05-1, 6.04-1, 6.04-6 and 160.5; Pub. L.
107-295, 116 Stat. 2064; Department of Homeland Security Delegation
No. 0170.1.

0
2. Add temporary Sec.  165.T05-0471, to read as follows:

Sec.  165.T05-0471  Safety Zone: John H. Kerr Lake, Clarksville, VA.

    (a) Location. The following area is a safety zone: All navigable
waters of the Captain of the Port Sector Hampton Roads zone, as defined
in 33 CFR 3.25-10, within 700 feet of position 36[deg]37'51'' N/
078[deg]32'50'' W (NAD 1983) on John H. Kerr Lake near Clarksville, VA.
    (b) Definition:
    (1) As used in this section; Captain of the Port Representative
means any U.S. Coast Guard commissioned, warrant or petty officer who
has been authorized by the Captain of the Port Hampton Roads, Virginia
to act on his behalf.
    (c) Regulation:
    (1) In accordance with the general regulations in Sec.  165.23 of
this part, entry into this zone is prohibited unless authorized by the
Captain of the Port Hampton Roads or his designated representatives.
    (2) The operator of any vessel in the immediate vicinity of this
safety zone shall:
    (i) Stop the vessel immediately upon being directed to do so by any
commissioned, warrant or petty officer on shore or on board a vessel
that is displaying a U.S. Coast Guard Ensign.
    (ii) Proceed as directed by any commissioned, warrant or petty
officer on shore or on board a vessel that is displaying a U.S. Coast
Guard Ensign.
    (3) The Captain of the Port Hampton Roads and the Sector Duty
Officer at Sector Hampton Roads in Portsmouth, Virginia can be
contacted at telephone number<PHONE_NUMBER> or<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    (4) The Captain of the Port Representative enforcing the safety
zone can be contacted on VHF-FM marine band radio, channel 13 (156.65
MHz) and channel 16 (156.8 MHz).
    (d) Enforcement Period: This regulation will be enforced from 9
p.m. to 10 p.m. on July 19, 2008.

    Dated: June 13, 2008.
Patrick B. Trapp,
Captain, U.S. Coast Guard, Captain of the Port, Hampton Roads.
[FR Doc. E8-14366 Filed 6-24-08; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4910-15-P