[Federal Register Volume 79, Number 238 (Thursday, December 11, 2014)]
[Notices]
[Pages 73665-73670]
[FR Doc No: 2014-29005]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-73755; File Nos. SR-FICC-2014-810; SR-NSCC-2014-811;
SR-DTC-2014-812]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; Fixed Income Clearing Corporation;
National Securities Clearing Corporation; The Depository Trust Company;
Notice of Filing of Advance Notices, as Amended, To Amend and Restate
the Third Amended and Restated Shareholders Agreement, Dated as of
December 7, 2005

 December 5, 2014.
    Pursuant to Section 806(e)(1) of Title VIII of the Dodd-Frank Wall
Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act entitled the Payment,
Clearing, and Settlement Supervision Act of 2010 \1\ (``Clearing
Supervision Act'') and Rule 19b-4(n)(1)(i) \2\ under the Securities
Exchange Act of 1934, notice is hereby given that on November 5, 2014,
Fixed Income Clearing Corporation (``FICC''), National Securities
Clearing Corporation (``NSCC''), and The Depository Trust Company
(``DTC,'' together with FICC and NSCC, ``Operating Subsidiaries'')
filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (``Commission'') the
advance notices SR-FICC-2014-810, SR-NSCC-2014-811 and SR-DTC-2014-812
(``Advance Notices''), respectively, as described in Items I and II
below, which Items have been prepared primarily by the Operating
Subsidiaries. On November 17, 2014, the Operating Subsidiaries each
filed Amendments No. 1 to the Advance Notices.\3\ On November 17, 2014
FICC withdrew Amendment No. 1 and filed Amendment No. 2 to advance
notice SR-FICC-2014-810.\4\ The Commission is publishing this notice to
solicit comments on the Advance Notices, as amended, from interested
persons.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ 12 U.S.C. 5465(e)(1).
    \2\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(n)(1)(i).
    \3\ NSCC and DTC filed Amendment Nos. 1 to provide additional
description of the changes proposed in advance notices SR-NSCC-2014-
811 and SR-DTC-2014-812, respectively.
    \4\ FICC withdrew Amendment No. 1 to advance notice SR-FICC-
2014-810 due to an error in filing the amendment. FICC filed
Amendment No. 2 to advance notice SR-FICC-2014-810 in order to
provide additional description of the changes proposed in the
advance notice.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

I. Clearing Agencies' Statement of the Terms of Substance of the
Advance Notices

    The Advance Notices, as amended, were filed by the Operating
Subsidiaries in connection with the amendment and restatement of the
Third Amended and Restated Shareholders Agreement, dated as of December
7, 2005 (``Existing Shareholders Agreement''), by and among The
Depository Trust & Clearing Corporation (``DTCC''), Operating
Subsidiaries, and the other parties thereto (such Existing Shareholders
Agreement as so proposed to be amended and restated, ``Revised
Shareholders Agreement''), as more fully described below.

II. Clearing Agencies' Statement of the Purpose of, and Statutory Basis
for, the Advance Notices

    In their filings with the Commission, the Operating Subsidiaries
included statements concerning the purpose of and basis for the Advance
Notices, as amended, and discussed any comments received on the Advance
Notices, as amended. The text of these statements may be examined at
the places specified in Item IV below. The Operating Subsidiaries have
prepared summaries, set forth in sections (A) and (B) below, of the
most significant aspects of these statements.

(A) Clearing Agencies' Statement on Comments on the Advance Notices
Received From Members, Participants, or Others

    Beginning in June 2014, DTCC has conducted outreach to users of the
services and facilities of the Operating Subsidiaries in order to
provide them with advance notice of the proposed changes and the impact
on a firm-by-firm basis. The outreach efforts have included providing
individual shareholder firms with statements of their projected
potential impact. As of the date of this filing, no written comments
relating to the proposed changes have been received in response to this
outreach. The Commission will be notified of any written comments
received.

(B) Advance Notices Filed Pursuant to Section 806(e) of the Payment,
Clearing and Settlement Supervision Act

Description of Change
    The Existing Shareholders Agreement is proposed to be amended to:
(1) Update and simplify the formulas used to allocate shares of the
common stock

of DTCC (``Common Shares'') among users of the Operating Subsidiaries,
which are DTCC's registered clearing agency subsidiaries, and to
determine the purchase price of Common Shares for purposes of such
allocations and other transfers of Common Shares; (2) provide for the
requirement to purchase newly-issued Common Shares by holders of Common
Shares (``Common Share Holders'') that are required to purchase and own
Common Shares (``Mandatory Share Holders''), subject to the approval of
Mandatory Share Holders holding two-thirds of all Common Shares held by
Mandatory Share Holders; (3) provide for the repurchase of Common
Shares from Mandatory Share Holders by DTCC, in an aggregate amount up
to the aggregate amount of all newly-issued Common Shares purchased by
Mandatory Share Holders; (4) provide for the reallocation of
entitlements to own Common Shares at least once every three calendar
years, but not otherwise limiting the frequency of such reallocation;
and (5) make other conforming and technical changes as described below
and as shown on Exhibit 3 to this filing.\5\ Common Share Holders which
are permitted but not required to purchase and own Common Shares
(``Voluntary Share Holders'') would not be required to purchase any
newly-issued Common Shares or to sell any Common Shares to DTCC in
connection with such a repurchase.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ Commission notes that Exhibit 3 to the Advance Notices was
filed confidentially by the Operating Subsidiaries and is not
attached to this notice.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The proposed changes to the Existing Shareholders Agreement are the
product of a comprehensive review by DTCC of its ownership, governance
and capital structure, undertaken for the purposes of increasing the
financial resources available to support the conduct of the businesses
of the Operating Subsidiaries and enhancing regulatory risk
management.\6\ The proposed amendments are subject to the non-objection
of the Commission to the Advance Notices as well as the consent of the
Common Share Holders.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ On July 18, 2012, the Financial Stability Oversight Council
(``FSOC'') designated each of the Operating Subsidiaries a
systemically important financial market utility under Title VIII of
the Clearing Supervision Act. See FSOC 2012 Annual Report, Appendix
A, available at http://www.treasury.gov/initiatives/fsoc/Documents/2012%20Annual%20Report.pdf. Therefore, each of the Operating
Subsidiaries is required to comply with the enhanced regulatory
supervision and risk-management requirements under the Clearing
Supervision Act.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Existing Shareholders Agreement. Pursuant to the Existing
Shareholders Agreement and the rules of each of the Operating
Subsidiaries,\7\ certain members and participants are required to be
Mandatory Share Holders and parties to the Existing Shareholders
Agreement; certain members and participants are permitted, but not
required, to be Voluntary Share Holders and parties to the Existing
Shareholders Agreement; and certain members and participants are not
permitted to purchase and own Common Shares or become parties to the
Existing Shareholders Agreement.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ See DTC Rule 31 (DTCC Shareholders Agreement); NSCC Rule 64
(DTCC Shareholders Agreement); Mortgage-Backed Securities Division
of FICC (``MBSD'') Rule 39 (DTCC Shareholders Agreement); and
Government Securities Division of FICC (``GSD'') Rule 49 (DTCC
Shareholders Agreement), available at http://dtcc.com/legal/rules-and-procedures.aspx.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Section 2.01 of the Existing Shareholders Agreement provides for
the periodic reallocation of Common Shares in order to accommodate
changes in the users of the Operating Subsidiaries and changes in the
users' use of the services and facilities of the Operating
Subsidiaries. Entitlements to purchase and own Common Shares are
reallocated no more frequently than once a year and no less frequently
than once every three years. Such a reallocation is, in every case,
based on relative use of the services and facilities of the Operating
Subsidiaries over the period since the last reallocation.\8\ In each
reallocation, users (whether or not they are already Common Share
Holders) that are permitted but not required to purchase and own Common
Shares (``Voluntary Purchaser Participants'') may purchase Common
Shares in amounts commensurate with their use of the services and
facilities of the Operating Subsidiaries. Users (whether or not they
are already Common Share Holders) that are required to purchase and own
Common Shares (``Mandatory Purchaser Participants'') must purchase and
own Common Shares in amounts (i) commensurate with their use of the
services and facilities of the Operating Subsidiaries plus (ii) a pro-
rata amount of any Common Shares that Voluntary Purchaser Participants
have a right to purchase but do not elect to purchase. In each
reallocation, each Common Share Holder (whether a Voluntary Purchaser
Participant or a Mandatory Purchaser Participant) that owns more Common
Shares than its share entitlement has the obligation to sell its excess
Common Shares so that such Common Shares may be reallocated to
Voluntary Purchaser Participants that elect to purchase Common Shares
and Mandatory Purchaser Participants that are required to purchase
Common Shares, in accordance with their entitlements.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \8\ Additionally, and separately from the periodic reallocation,
Common Shares are redistributed from time to time to Common Share
Holders pursuant to Section 2.02 of the Existing Shareholders
Agreement as a result of member retirements.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Under the Existing Shareholders Agreement, the formula used to
calculate entitlements for this periodic reallocation of Common Shares
takes into account fees paid to the Operating Subsidiaries, as well as
the average market value of securities held in custody at DTC (referred
to as ``DTC long positions'') by the applicable user, in each case,
over the relevant reallocation period. Additionally, the purchase price
of each Common Share, which is calculated annually, is determined by a
formula based on the book value of DTCC less a portion of the retained
earnings of the Operating Subsidiaries.
    The Existing Shareholders Agreement further provides that Common
Share Holders have the right to elect all of the directors of DTCC
(other than two directors elected by the holders of the shares of
existing preferred stock of DTCC), and to vote on all other matters on
which shareholders are entitled to vote. The Existing Shareholders
Agreement further provides that a person elected as a director of DTCC
also serves as a director of each of the Operating Subsidiaries,
coordinating governance of DTC, NSCC, and FICC with their parent
company, DTCC.
    Proposed Amendments to the Existing Shareholders Agreement. The
Revised Shareholders Agreement would: (1) Remove the DTC long positions
from the formula used to determine the allocation of entitlements to
purchase Common Shares; (2) revise the formula for determining the
purchase price of Common Shares to reflect the tangible book value of
DTCC and eliminate any deduction of the retained earnings of the
Operating Subsidiaries; (3) provide for the purchase of newly-issued
Common Shares by Mandatory Share Holders, subject to the approval of
Mandatory Share Holders holding two-thirds of all outstanding Common
Shares held by Mandatory Share Holders; (4) provide for the repurchase
of Common Shares from Mandatory Share Holders by DTCC, in an aggregate
amount up to the aggregate amount of all newly-issued Common Shares
purchased by Mandatory Share Holders; (5) provide for the reallocation
of entitlements to own Common Shares at least once every three calendar
years, but not otherwise limiting the frequency of such reallocation;
and (6) make other conforming and technical changes as

described below and as shown on Exhibit 3 to this filing.
(1) Update Common Share Allocation Formula
    The formula used to periodically reallocate entitlements to
purchase Common Shares, defined in Section 1.01 of the Existing
Shareholders Agreement as the ``Common Share Amount,'' is historical
and, in the view of DTCC, no longer an appropriate measure of use of
the Operating Subsidiaries.
    The Common Share Amount calculation was based on the Shareholders
Agreement of DTC, which was in effect before DTC became a subsidiary of
DTCC in 1999. It was adopted to balance the interests of custodian
banks with other types of users of DTC, including broker-dealers, that
did not hold securities inventory at DTC but paid transactional fees
for services. The current formula provides that (i) 80% of the
entitlement to purchase Common Shares is based on the amount of fees
paid by a user to the Operating Subsidiaries during the period starting
on the first day of the calendar year in which the previous allocation
was made and ending on the last day of the calendar year preceding the
calendar year in which the allocation is to be made (``Allocation
Period''), and (ii) the remaining 20% of the entitlement is based on
the average market value of all securities credited to the DTC account
of that user, i.e., its DTC long positions, as of the end of the last
business day of each month during the Allocation Period.
    Today, all users of the three Operating Subsidiaries pay fees to
one or more of the Operating Subsidiaries based on usage of the
services and facilities of the Operating Subsidiaries, including fees
for DTC long positions. Accordingly, DTCC has determined that it is no
longer appropriate to factor into the calculation of share entitlements
both the market value of DTC long positions and fees paid to DTC in
respect of such DTC long positions. The Revised Shareholders Agreement
would update the formula used to periodically reallocate entitlements
to purchase Common Shares, defined in Section 1.01 of the Revised
Shareholders Agreement as the ``Common Share Allocation Amount,'' to
eliminate the market value of DTC long positions, so that the formula
would be based solely on fees paid to the Operating Subsidiaries.
    Both the composition of users of the Operating Subsidiaries as well
as the users' use of the services and facilities of the Operating
Subsidiaries have changed over time, and today the consistent metric
for measuring such use across the Operating Subsidiaries is fees paid.
Therefore, and in order to ensure that the allocations of entitlements
to purchase Common Shares continue to be proportionate to the use of
the Operating Subsidiaries, DTCC is proposing to update the formula by
removing the market value of DTC long positions, and basing the
allocations entirely on fees paid to the Operating Subsidiaries. While
custodian banks with securities holdings at DTC may be entitled (and
required) to purchase fewer Common Shares as a result of this proposal,
those Common Shares would be re-allocated to other Common Share Holders
proportionally. The proposal would adjust the overall shareholding of
Common Shares so that it is based on a uniform metric across the
Operating Subsidiaries that is representative of the current use of the
Operating Subsidiaries.
(2) Amendment of Common Share Price Formula
    As described below, two amendments are proposed to the formula for
the purchase price of Common Shares. First, the deduction of a portion
of retained earnings, a vestige of the historical development of DTCC,
would be eliminated. Second, instead of full book value, the basis of
the revised formula would be the tangible book value of DTCC. With
these changes, the value of Common Shares for purchases, sales, and
transfers should more closely reflect the liquidation value of the
enterprise.
    Under Section 1.01 of the Existing Shareholders Agreement, the
price of Common Shares, the ``Common Share Price,'' is defined by a
formula that excludes a portion of the retained earnings of the
Operating Subsidiaries from DTCC's book value. The Common Share Price
is the price used (i) in connection with purchases and sales of Common
Shares among Voluntary Purchaser Participants and Mandatory Purchaser
Participants in the periodic reallocation of Common Shares and (ii) in
connection with the transfer of the Common Shares of retiring or
disqualified Common Share Holders. The Revised Shareholders Agreement
would replace the formula contained in the Existing Shareholders
Agreement with a formula designed to reflect the tangible book value of
DTCC, i.e., the full book value of DTCC less intangible items of book
value (goodwill and intangible assets) and the liquidation preference
of the preferred stock of DTCC.\9\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \9\ Intangible items of book value used in this calculation,
i.e., goodwill and intangible assets, are shown on DTCC's
Consolidated Statement of Financial Condition, which is available on
the DTCC Web site at http://dtcc.com/legal/financial-statements.aspx.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    When DTC and NSCC became subsidiaries of DTCC, the DTC shareholders
who were DTC participants exchanged their DTC shares for DTCC Common
Shares and became Common Share Holders. At that time, no members of
NSCC (``NSCC Members'') were NSCC shareholders, so no NSCC Members
became Common Share Holders. NSCC Members were first given the
opportunity to purchase Common Shares in the year 2000 share
reallocation. It was considered unfair double-counting for NSCC Members
to purchase DTCC Common Shares in that share reallocation at a price
augmented by the retained earnings of NSCC. For this reason, the
retained earnings of NSCC were deducted from DTCC's book value in
determining the price of Common Shares. When Government Securities
Clearing Corporation and MBS Clearing Corporation (later merged to
become FICC) became subsidiaries of DTCC in 2002, this construct was
continued. Under the Existing Shareholders Agreement, the price of
Common Shares is determined by deducting the aggregate amount of the
retained earnings of each of the Operating Subsidiaries (although the
deduction of DTC retained earnings is limited to $24,007,000, an amount
representing the retained earnings of DTC as of December 31, 2001) from
the book value of the Common Shares as of December 31 of the preceding
calendar year.
    As stated, the deduction of the retained earnings of the Operating
Subsidiaries in this formula was intended to be a one-time adjustment
to address unfairness to the participants of the Operating Subsidiaries
that was tied to the corporate transactions through which each
Operating Subsidiary was integrated into the DTCC family. Therefore,
with the passage of time and the turnover in participants, the
deduction no longer serves this historical purpose, or any purpose, in
the reallocations of entitlements to purchase Common Shares that
occurred after the integration of the Operating Subsidiaries. The
proposed change is a part of the effort to update the Existing
Shareholders Agreement.
    In the Revised Shareholders Agreement, the formula for the purchase
price of Common Shares would be based on the tangible book value of

DTCC, a price that would more accurately represent the liquidation
value of DTCC, and keep the price more stable and predictable over
time. While the proposal may cause the purchase price of Common Shares
to increase somewhat, it should not materially impair the ability of
the members and participants of the Operating Subsidiaries to acquire
Common Shares.
(3) Raise Capital Through the Issue and Sale of Newly-Issued Common
Shares to Mandatory Share Holders
    In order to raise capital for business purposes, the Revised
Shareholders Agreement would provide that DTCC may sell newly-issued
Common Shares to Mandatory Share Holders on a mandatory basis. Proceeds
of the sale of these newly-issued Common Shares would be contributed by
DTCC to the Operating Subsidiaries as capital as needed so that the
Operating Subsidiaries may continue to provide efficiently for the
prompt and accurate clearance and settlement of securities transactions
in U.S. securities markets. Each issuance and required purchase of
Common Shares for this purpose would be subject to the approval of the
Mandatory Share Holders holding two-thirds of all Common Shares held by
Mandatory Share Holders. Voluntary Share Holders would not be required
or permitted to purchase these newly-issued Common Shares.
    The Operating Subsidiaries require additional capital to support
their business operations. Historically, they have operated on an at-
cost or near-cost basis and rebated any excess revenues to users of
their services. Recently, however, the Operating Subsidiaries have
experienced a greater need to increase capital to meet higher operating
costs and, as systemically important financial market utilities, to
satisfy heightened risk management requirements. DTCC has performed
extensive analyses to determine these needs, and has considered
alternative means to address them. A principal objective is maintenance
of sufficient, readily available, liquid net assets to allow the
Operating Subsidiaries to meet current and projected operating
requirements under a range of scenarios, including adverse market
conditions. An increase in fees was deemed impractical because it would
not necessarily generate sufficient resources in a reasonable time
frame and depends on transactional volumes, which may be volatile. DTCC
was also concerned with the financial burden that significant fee
increases could place on users over an extended period.
    As a user-owned and governed organization, DTCC does not have
access to public markets to raise common equity. Accordingly, the
Revised Shareholders Agreement would contain a mechanism to provide
DTCC with the ability to raise capital by selling newly-issued Common
Shares to Mandatory Share Holders on a mandatory basis, pro rata in
accordance with their shareholdings at the time of such sale. As the
principal users of the services and facilities of the Operating
Subsidiaries, Mandatory Share Holders benefit directly from the
critical clearance and settlement services provided by the Operating
Subsidiaries. Importantly, the mechanism would only be exercised with
the approval of Mandatory Share Holders holding two-thirds of all
Common Shares held by Mandatory Share Holders. Therefore, the
implementation of this mechanism for any particular amount of capital
or number of Common Shares, at any time, would require a vote of the
Mandatory Share Holders.
(4) Mandatory Repurchase of Common Shares
    The Revised Shareholders Agreement would also provide a mechanism
under which DTCC may repurchase Common Shares from Mandatory Share
Holders on a mandatory basis in an aggregate amount up to the aggregate
amount of all newly-issued Common Shares purchased by Mandatory Share
Holders. This would be at the discretion of the DTCC Board of Directors
(which includes all the same directors as the Boards of DTC, NSCC, and
FICC), to allow flexibility to return funds to Mandatory Share Holders
if the Operating Subsidiaries have capital in excess of their capital
needs.
(5) Frequency of Reallocation of Already-Issued Common Shares
    The Revised Shareholders Agreement would provide that the
reallocation of entitlements to own already issued Common Shares may
take place when determined by the DTCC Board of Directors, but no less
frequently than once every three calendar years. While the Existing
Shareholders Agreement restricts DTCC from performing this reallocation
more frequently than once a year, the proposed change would remove this
restriction in order to allow more frequent reallocations, when
appropriate. Each reallocation aligns a Common Share Holder's
entitlements to own already issued Common Shares with that firm's use
of the Operating Subsidiaries. This update will permit these alignments
to take place more frequently and ownership of Common Shares can be a
more contemporaneous reflection usage.
(6) Other Conforming and Technical Amendments to the Existing
Shareholders Agreement
    The Revised Shareholders Agreement would also include certain other
technical amendments, including conforming and clarifying changes, as
reflected on Exhibit 3 to this filing. Among those changes is an
amendment to the definition of ``Common Share Amount'' in Section 1.01
of the Existing Shareholders Agreement (called the ``Common Share
Allocation Amount'' in the Revised Shareholders Agreement), to clarify
that the calculation does not include any fees that are pass-through
fees, i.e., amounts collected by an Operating Subsidiary for the
account of a third party and paid by that Operating Subsidiary to a
third party.
    The definition of ``Settlement'' in Section 1.01 of the Existing
Shareholders Agreement will also be amended to move the time at which
settlement is effected from 5:00 p.m. New York City Time on the
Settlement Date, as such terms are defined in the Existing Shareholders
Agreement, to 4:00 p.m. New York City Time on the Settlement Date. This
is an operational change in order to align Common Share settlement
times with the routine times of end of day settlement for each of the
Operating Subsidiaries.
    A further clarifying amendment would include members of MBSD, other
than Cash-Settling Bank Members (as such term is defined in the Rules
of MBSD), within the definition of ``Mandatory Purchaser
Participants.'' As a result of the Commission's approval in 2012 of
FICC becoming a central counterparty for transactions processed and
cleared at its mortgage-backed securities division, the change would
apply to the users of MBSD the general rule that full service members,
including users of guaranteed services, of an Operating Subsidiary are
Mandatory Purchaser Participants.
    The Revised Shareholders Agreement would also amend the definition
of ``Qualified Person,'' which sets forth the types of entities that
may hold Common Shares, to exclude: (1) Federal Reserve Banks, because
it was never intended that such governmental authorities should be
required to own shares in DTCC, notwithstanding that they may use
certain services of the Operating Subsidiaries; (2) central
counterparties or central securities depositories, because these link
arrangements are for the purpose of extending clearing agency services
across borders or among closely related activities and products

but not for ownership purposes; and (3) any other financial market
infrastructure or utility that the DTCC Board of Directors determines
shall not be a ``Qualified Person.'' The Revised Shareholders Agreement
would also update the definition of ``Deliver'' to include more
convenient and contemporary methods of delivering notices, for example,
by electronic mail where appropriate. Finally, Section 2.02 is proposed
to be updated regarding the transfer of Common Shares in the event that
a Common Share Holder is no longer a Qualified Person, to provide that
the pro-rata re-distribution of those Common Shares to all other Common
Share Holders take place at the beginning of the following calendar
year rather than contemporaneously with such Common Share Holder
ceasing to be a Qualified Person, as provided in the Existing
Shareholders Agreement. This change reflects current practice and is
more practical, administratively.
Anticipated Effect on and Management of Risk
    The DTCC Board of Directors unanimously approved the proposed
amendments described in this filing. In evaluating these proposals, the
Board carefully considered the expectations and obligations that are
imposed on the Operating Subsidiaries as systemically important
financial market utilities in the national system for clearance and
settlement of securities transactions. The proposed changes would
reduce the risks presented by the Operating Subsidiaries. The proposed
change to the formula used to reallocate entitlements to purchase
Common Shares would bring this methodology up to date so that the
allocation accurately reflects the use of the services and facilities
of the Operating Subsidiaries. The proposal to update the formula used
to determine the price of Common Shares would provide an updated
pricing approach, eliminating historical adjustments that are no longer
relevant and providing a price based on tangible book value. The
proposal to provide for the issuance of additional Common Shares by
DTCC, subject to shareholder approval, for required purchase by
Mandatory Share Holders, would provide a necessary source of capital
for the protection of the Operating Subsidiaries, their members, and
the financial markets in which they operate. The proposal also includes
a mechanism under which DTCC may repurchase Common Shares from
Mandatory Share Holders on a mandatory basis, at the discretion of the
DTCC Board of Directors, so that funds may be returned to Mandatory
Share Holders that furnished additional capital through this mechanism,
for example, if, and when, there is excess capital.
    Section 805(b) of the Clearing Supervision Act states that the
objectives and principles for the risk management standards prescribed
under Section 805(a) shall be to promote robust risk management,
promote safety and soundness, reduce systemic risks, and support the
stability of the broader financial system.\10\ The proposal represents
a fair and appropriate apportionment of the business risks of the
Operating Subsidiaries among their users, and would allow DTCC to raise
capital for the Operating Subsidiaries in order to continue to carry on
their businesses in an efficient and effective manner, thereby
promoting safety and soundness of the operations of the Operating
Subsidiaries, reducing their general business risks as well as systemic
risk, and supporting stability in the U.S. securities markets and the
broader financial system. Additionally, the provision for DTCC, subject
to Mandatory Share Holder approval, to sell newly-issued Common Shares
to Mandatory Share Holders is critical to the capitalization of the
Operating Subsidiaries. Maintenance of adequate financial resources is
a key element in reducing systemic risk, and serves to limit the
contagion that could flow from an isolated disruption to the wider
financial markets. In this way, the proposal to raise capital would
also reduce systemic risk and serves to promote the prompt and accurate
clearance and settlement of securities transactions and the protection
of investors, particularly in times of market stress or crisis. The
proposed provision that would allow for the repurchase of Common Shares
from Mandatory Share Holders at the discretion of the DTCC Board of
Directors protects Mandatory Share Holders by returning funds to those
firms, for example, if, and when, there is excess capital.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \10\ 12 U.S.C. 5461(a), (b).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Finally, the proposal to allow DTCC to reallocate entitlements to
own Common Shares more frequently than once every year allows DTCC to
align ownership of Common Shares with Common Share Holders' usage of
the Operating Subsidiaries on a more contemporaneous basis, when
appropriate. This proposed change reduces the risk that Common Share
Holders own Common Shares that are no longer proportionate to their
current use of the Operating Subsidiaries.
    Implementation Timeframe. The Revised Shareholders Agreement would
become effective (1) upon the approval of the Common Share Holders; and
(2) if the Commission does not object to the Advance Notices within 60
days of the later of (i) the date the Commission receives the Advance
Notices, or (ii) the date the Commission receives any further
information it requests for consideration of the Advance Notices.

III. Date of Effectiveness of the Advance Notices, and Timing for
Commission Action

    The proposed change may be implemented if the Commission does not
object to the proposed change within 60 days of the later of (i) the
date that the proposed change was filed with the Commission or (ii) the
date that any additional information requested by the Commission is
received. The Operating Subsidiaries shall not implement the proposed
change if the Commission has any objection to the proposed change.
    The Commission may extend the period for review by an additional 60
days if the proposed change raises novel or complex issues, subject to
the Commission providing the Operating Subsidiaries with prompt written
notice of the extension. A proposed change may be implemented in less
than 60 days from the date the Advance Notices were filed, or the date
further information requested by the Commission is received, if the
Commission notifies the Operating Subsidiaries in writing that it does
not object to the proposed change and authorizes the Operating
Subsidiaries to implement the proposed change on an earlier date,
subject to any conditions imposed by the Commission.
    The Operating Subsidiaries shall post notice on DTCC's Web site of
proposed changes that are implemented.

IV. Solicitation of Comments

    Interested persons are invited to submit written data, views and
arguments concerning the foregoing, including whether the Advance
Notices are consistent with the Clearing Supervision Act. Comments may
be submitted by any of the following methods:

Electronic Comments

     Use the Commission's Internet comment form (http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml); or
     Send an email to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Please include
File Number SR-FICC-2014-810, SR-NSCC-2014-811 or SR-DTC-2014-812 on
the subject line.

Paper Comments

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

All submissions should refer to File Number SR-FICC-2014-810, SR-NSCC-
2014-811 or SR-DTC-2014-812. One of these file numbers should be
included on the subject line if email is used. To help the Commission
process and review your comments more efficiently, please use only one
method. The Commission will post all comments on the Commission's
Internet Web site (http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml). Copies of the
submission, all subsequent amendments, all written statements with
respect to the Advance Notices that are filed with the Commission, and
all written communications relating to the Advance Notices 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 10:00 a.m. and 3:00 p.m. Copies of
the filing also will be available for inspection and copying at the
principal office of the Operating Subsidiaries and on DTCC's Web site
at http://dtcc.com/legal/sec-rule-filings.aspx. All comments received
will be posted without change; the Commission does not edit personal
identifying information from submissions. You should submit only
information that you wish to make available publicly. All submissions
should refer to File Number SR-FICC-2014-810, SR-NSCC-2014-811 or SR-
DTC-2014-812 and should be submitted on or before January 2, 2015.

    By the Commission.
Kevin M. O'Neill,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2014-29005 Filed 12-10-14; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 78, Number 249 (Friday, December 27, 2013)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 78714-78716]
[FR Doc No: 2013-30482]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 97

[Docket No. 30935; Amdt. No. 3570]

Standard Instrument Approach Procedures, and Takeoff Minimums and
Obstacle Departure Procedures; Miscellaneous Amendments

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: This rule establishes, amends, suspends, or revokes Standard
Instrument Approach Procedures (SIAPs) and associated Takeoff Minimums
and Obstacle Departure Procedures for operations at certain airports.
These regulatory actions are needed because of the adoption of new or
revised criteria, or because of changes occurring in the National
Airspace System, such as the commissioning of new navigational
facilities, adding new obstacles, or changing air traffic requirements.
These changes are designed to provide safe and efficient use of the
navigable airspace and to promote safe flight operations under
instrument flight rules at the affected airports.

DATES: This rule is effective December 27, 2013. The compliance date
for each SIAP, associated Takeoff Minimums, and ODP is specified in the
amendatory provisions.
    The incorporation by reference of certain publications listed in
the regulations is approved by the Director of the Federal Register as
of December 27, 2013.

ADDRESSES: Availability of matter incorporated by reference in the
amendment is as follows:
    For Examination--
    1. FAA Rules Docket, FAA Headquarters Building, 800 Independence
Avenue SW., Washington, DC 20591;
    2. The FAA Regional Office of the region in which the affected
airport is located;
    3. The National Flight Procedures Office, 6500 South MacArthur
Blvd., Oklahoma City, OK 73169 or,

    4. The National Archives and Records Administration (NARA). For
information on the availability of this material at NARA, call 202-741-
6030, or go to: http://www.archives.gov/federal_register/code_of_federal_regulations/ibr_locations.html.
    Availability_All SIAPs are available online free of charge. Visit
nfdc.faa.gov to register. Additionally, individual SIAP and Takeoff
Minimums and ODP copies may be obtained from:
    1. FAA Public Inquiry Center (APA-200), FAA Headquarters Building,
800 Independence Avenue SW., Washington, DC 20591; or
    2. The FAA Regional Office of the region in which the affected
airport is located.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Richard A. Dunham III, Flight
Procedure Standards Branch (AFS-420)Flight Technologies and Programs
Division, Flight Standards Service, Federal Aviation Administration,
Mike Monroney Aeronautical Center, 6500 South MacArthur Blvd., Oklahoma
City, OK 73169 (Mail Address: P.O. Box 25082 Oklahoma City, OK 73125)
telephone:<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This rule amends Title 14, Code of Federal
Regulations, Part 97 (14 CFR part 97) by amending the referenced SIAPs.
The complete regulatory description of each SIAP is listed on the
appropriate FAA Form 8260, as modified by the National Flight Data
Center (FDC)/Permanent Notice to Airmen (P-NOTAM), and is incorporated
by reference in the amendment under 5 U.S.C. 552(a), 1 CFR part 51, and
Sec.  97.20 of Title 14 of the Code of Federal Regulations.
    The large number of SIAPs, their complex nature, and the need for a
special format make their verbatim publication in the Federal Register
expensive and impractical. Further, airmen do not use the regulatory
text of the SIAPs, but refer to their graphic depiction on charts
printed by publishers of aeronautical materials. Thus, the advantages
of incorporation by reference are realized and publication of the
complete description of each SIAP contained in FAA form documents is
unnecessary. This amendment provides the affected CFR sections and
specifies the types of SIAP and the corresponding effective dates. This
amendment also identifies the airport and its location, the procedure
and the amendment number.

The Rule

    This amendment to 14 CFR part 97 is effective upon publication of
each separate SIAP as amended in the transmittal. For safety and
timeliness of change considerations, this amendment incorporates only
specific changes contained for each SIAP as modified by FDC/P-NOTAMs.
    The SIAPs, as modified by FDC P-NOTAM, and contained in this
amendment are based on the criteria contained in the U.S. Standard for
Terminal Instrument Procedures (TERPS). In developing these changes to
SIAPs, the TERPS criteria were applied only to specific conditions
existing at the affected airports. All SIAP amendments in this rule
have been previously issued by the FAA in a FDC NOTAM as an emergency
action of immediate flight safety relating directly to published
aeronautical charts. The circumstances which created the need for all
these SIAP amendments requires making them effective in less than 30
days.
    Because of the close and immediate relationship between these SIAPs
and safety in air commerce, I find that notice and public procedure
before adopting these SIAPs are impracticable and contrary to the
public interest and, where applicable, that good cause exists for
making these SIAPs effective in less than 30 days.

Conclusion

    The FAA has determined that this regulation only involves an
established body of technical regulations for which frequent and
routine amendments are necessary to keep them operationally current.
It, therefore-- (1) is not a ``significant regulatory action'' under
Executive Order 12866; (2) is not a ``significant rule'' under DOT
regulatory Policies and Procedures (44 FR 11034; February 26, 1979);
and (3) does not warrant preparation of a regulatory evaluation as the
anticipated impact is so minimal. For the same reason, the FAA
certifies that this amendment will not have a significant economic
impact on a substantial number of small entities under the criteria of
the Regulatory Flexibility Act.

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 97:

    Air Traffic Control, Airports, Incorporation by reference, and
Navigation (Air).

    Issued in Washington, DC on December 6, 2013.
John Duncan,
Director, Flight Standards Service.

Adoption of the Amendment

    Accordingly, pursuant to the authority delegated to me, Title 14,
Code of Federal regulations, Part 97, 14 CFR part 97, is amended by
amending Standard Instrument Approach Procedures, effective at 0901 UTC
on the dates specified, as follows:

PART 97--STANDARD INSTRUMENT APPROACH PROCEDURES

0
1. The authority citation for part 97 continues to read as follows:

    Authority:  49 U.S.C. 106(g), 40103, 40106, 40113, 40114, 40120,
44502, 44514, 44701, 44719, 44721-44722.

Sec. Sec. 97.23, 97.25, 97.27, 97.29. 97.31, 97.33, 97.35  [Amended]

0
2. Part 97 is amended to read as follows:
    By amending: Sec.  97.23 VOR, VOR/DME, VOR or TACAN, and VOR/DME or
TACAN; Sec.  97.25 LOC, LOC/DME, LDA, LDA/DME, SDF, SDF/DME; Sec.
97.27 NDB, NDB/DME; Sec.  97.29 ILS, ILS/DME, MLS, MLS/DME, MLS/RNAV;
Sec.  97.31 RADAR SIAPs; Sec.  97.33 RNAV SIAPs; and Sec.  97.35 COPTER
SIAPs, Identified as follows:

Effective Upon Publication

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      AIRAC date           State              City                 Airport          FDC No.      FDC date                      Subject
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1/9/14...............  NC             Chapel Hill.........  Horace Williams.....       3/0359     11/26/13  VOR/DME Rwy 27, Amdt 1A.
1/9/14...............  CA             Bakersfield.........  Meadows Field.......       3/1534     11/25/13  VOR A, Orig.
1/9/14...............  PR             Aguadilla...........  Rafael Hernandez....       3/2328     11/26/13  VOR/DME or TACAN Rwy 26, Orig.
1/9/14...............  CA             Oakland.............  Metropolitan Oakland       3/7464      12/2/13  VOR Rwy 10R, Amdt 9.
                                                             Intl.
1/9/14...............  CA             Los Angeles.........  Los Angeles Intl....       3/8760     11/22/13  ILS or LOC Rwy 25L, ILS Rwy 25L (CAT II),
                                                                                ILS Rwy 25L (CAT III), Amdt 12A.
1/9/14...............  CA             Los Angeles.........  Los Angeles Intl....       3/8771     11/15/13  ILS or LOC Rwy 25L, ILS Rwy 25L (CAT II),
                                                                                ILS Rwy 25L (CAT III), Amdt 12A.

1/9/14...............  CA             Los Angeles.........  Los Angeles Intl....       3/9143     11/15/13  ILS or LOC Rwy 24R, ILS Rwy 24R (CAT II),
                                                                                ILS Rwy 24R (CAT III), Amdt 24A.
1/9/14...............  CA             Los Angeles.........  Los Angeles Intl....       3/9144     11/22/13  ILS or LOC Rwy 24R, ILS Rwy 24R (CAT II),
                                                                                ILS Rwy 24R (CAT III), Amdt 24A.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

[FR Doc. 2013-30482 Filed 12-26-13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


[Federal Register Volume 86, Number 110 (Thursday, June 10, 2021)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 30759-30761]
[FR Doc No: 2021-12037]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. FAA-2020-1183; Project Identifier 2019-SW-008-AD; Amendment
39-21565; AD 2021-11-03]
RIN 2120-AA64

Airworthiness Directives; Airbus Helicopters

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: The FAA is adopting a new airworthiness directive (AD) for
certain Airbus Helicopters Model EC 155B, EC155B1, SA-365N, SA-365N1,
AS-365N2, and AS 365 N3 helicopters, as identified in a European
Aviation Safety Agency (now European Union Aviation Safety Agency)
(EASA) AD. This AD was prompted by a report of an in-flight loss of
engine and main gearbox (MGB) cowlings. This AD requires inspecting the
MGB fixed cowling front fitting (MGB front fitting), and depending on
findings, corrective action. This AD also requires a new modification,
which is a terminating action for the inspection, as specified in an
EASA AD, which is incorporated by reference. The FAA is issuing this AD
to address the unsafe condition on these products.

DATES: This AD is effective July 15, 2021.
    The Director of the Federal Register approved the incorporation by
reference of certain publications listed in this AD as of July 15,
2021.

ADDRESSES: For EASA material incorporated by reference (IBR) in this
AD, contact the EASA, Konrad-Adenauer-Ufer 3, 50668 Cologne, Germany;
telephone +49 221 8999 000; email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>internet
www.easa.europa.eu. You may find this material on the EASA website at
https://ad.easa.europa.eu. For Airbus Helicopters service information,
contact Airbus Helicopters, 2701 N Forum Drive, Grand Prairie, TX
75052; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER> or<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax<PHONE_NUMBER>;
or at https://www.airbus.com/helicopters/services/technical-support.html. You may view this material at the FAA, Office of the
Regional Counsel, Southwest Region, 10101 Hillwood Pkwy., Room 6N-321,
Fort Worth, TX 76177. For information on the availability of this
material at the FAA, call<PHONE_NUMBER>. It is also available in the
AD docket on the internet at https://www.regulations.gov by searching
for and locating Docket No. FAA-2020-1183.

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-
1183; 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: Blaine Williams, Aerospace Engineer,
Los Angeles ACO Branch, Compliance & Airworthiness Division, 3960
Paramount Blvd., Lakewood, California 90712; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>;
email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Background

    EASA, which is the Technical Agent for the Member States of the
European Union, has issued EASA AD 2019-0008, dated January 22, 2019
(EASA AD 2019-0008) to correct an unsafe condition for certain Airbus
Helicopters (AH), formerly Eurocopter, Eurocopter France, Aerospatiale,
Model EC 155 B, EC 155 B1, SA 365 N, SA 365 N1, AS 365 N2, and AS 365
N3 helicopters.
    The FAA issued a notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) to amend 14
CFR part 39 by adding an AD that would apply to certain Model EC 155 B,
EC155B1, SA-365N, SA-365N1, AS-365N2, and AS 365 N3 helicopters. The
NPRM published in the Federal Register on March 5, 2021 (86 FR 12862).
The NPRM was prompted by reports of an in-flight loss of engine and MGB
cowlings. Subsequent investigations revealed that the MGB cowling
attachment fittings failed because of mounting stress in the MGB front
fitting and air intake bulkhead. The NPRM proposed to require
inspecting and if necessary, replacing the MGB front fitting. The NPRM
also proposed to require modifying the MGB front fitting, as specified
in an EASA AD.
    The FAA is issuing this AD to address failure of an MGB front
fitting and subsequent detachment of the MGB or engine cowlings. See
EASA AD 2019-0008 for additional background information.

Discussion of Final Airworthiness Directive

Comments

    The FAA gave the public the opportunity to participate in
developing this final rule. The FAA received no comments on the NPRM or
on the determination of the cost to the public.

Conclusion

    The FAA reviewed the relevant data and determined that air safety
and the public interest require adopting this final rule as proposed.

Related Service Information Under 1 CFR Part 51

    EASA AD 2019-0008 requires inspecting the MGB front fittings within
110 flight hours after April 14, 2017 (the effective date of EASA AD
2017-0055, dated March 31, 2017). If there is a discrepancy, the EASA
AD requires applicable corrective action(s) before next flight. EASA AD
2019-0008 also requires modification of the MGB fixed cowling
attachments within 660 flight hours or 23 months, whichever occurs
first, after the effective date described in EASA AD 2019-0008.
Accomplishing the modification constitutes a terminating action for the
required inspection.
    The FAA also reviewed Airbus Helicopters Alert Service Bulletin ASB
No. AS365-53.00.62 and ASB No. EC155-53A038, each Revision 0 and dated
December 20, 2018 (ASB AS365-53.00.62 and ASB EC155-53A038). ASB AS365-
53.00.62 applies to Model AS365-series helicopters. ASB EC155-53A038
applies to Model EC155-series helicopters. This service information
specifies replacing the front bracket, inspecting for stress of the MGB
fixed cowlings on the radiator bulkhead, and installing an additional
locking system.
    This material is reasonably available because the interested
parties have access to it through their normal course of business or by
the means identified in the ADDRESSES section.

Costs of Compliance

    The FAA estimates that this AD affects 19 helicopters of U.S.
Registry. Labor rates are estimated at $85 per work-hour. Based on
these numbers, the FAA estimates that operators may incur the following
costs in order to comply with this AD.
    Inspecting the MGB front fittings takes about 2 work-hours for an
estimated cost of $170 per helicopter and $3,230 for the U.S. fleet. If
required, replacing an MGB front fitting takes about 2 work-hours and
parts cost about $590 for an estimated total cost of $760 per fitting.
Other repairs will take up to 8 work-hours (excluding drying time) and
parts will cost a minimal amount for an estimated cost of up to $680
per helicopter.
    Modifying the MGB fixed cowling attachments takes about 5 work-
hours and parts cost about $630 for an estimated cost of $1,055 per
helicopter and $20,045 for the U.S. fleet.

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.

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:

2021-11-03 Airbus Helicopters: Amendment 39-21565; Docket No. FAA-
2020-1183; Project Identifier 2019-SW-008-AD.

(a) Effective Date

    This airworthiness directive (AD) is effective July 15, 2021.

(b) Affected Airworthiness Directives (ADs)

    None.

(c) Applicability

    This AD applies to Airbus Helicopters Model EC 155B, EC155B1,
SA-365N, SA-365N1, AS-365N2, and AS 365 N3 helicopters, certificated
in any category, as identified in European Aviation Safety Agency
(now European Union Aviation Safety Agency) (EASA) AD 2019-0008,
dated January 22, 2019 (EASA AD 2019-0008).

(d) Subject

    Joint Aircraft System Component (JASC) Code: 7110, Engine
Cowling System.

(e) Reason

    This AD was prompted by a report of an in-flight loss of main
gearbox (MGB) and engine cowlings. The FAA is issuing this AD to
address a failure of the MGB fixed cowling front fitting, and
subsequent MGB cowling or engine cowling detachment, which could
result in damage to the helicopter, loss of helicopter control, and
possible injury to persons on the ground.

(f) Compliance

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

(g) Requirements

    Except as specified in paragraph (h) of this AD: Comply with all
required actions and compliance times specified in, and in
accordance with, EASA AD 2019-0008.

(h) Exceptions to EASA AD 2019-0008

    (1) Where EASA AD 2019-0008 refers to April 14, 2017 (the
effective date of EASA AD 2017-0055, dated March 31, 2017), this AD
requires using the effective date of this AD.
    (2) Where EASA AD 2019-0008 refers to its effective date, this
AD requires using the effective date of this AD.
    (3) Where EASA AD 2019-0008 refers to flight hours (FH), this AD
requires using hours time-in-service.
    (4) Where EASA AD 2019-0008 requires the modification within 660
flight hours or 23 months, whichever occurs first, this AD requires
the modification within 660 hours time-in-service instead.
    (5) Although the service information referenced in EASA AD 2019-
0008 specifies to discard certain parts, this AD requires removing
those parts from service instead.
    (6) Where the service information referenced in EASA AD 2019-
0008 specifies to use tooling, equivalent tooling may be used.
    (7) The ``Remarks'' section of EASA AD 2019-0008 does not apply
to this AD.
    (8) Where paragraph (1) of EASA AD 2019-0008 states to,
``inspect the MGB fixed cowling front fittings in accordance with
the instructions of paragraph 1.E.2 of the applicable inspection ASB
or in accordance with the instructions of the applicable
modification ASB,'' this AD requires determining if Airbus
Helicopters Alert Service Bulletin No. 53.00.55, Revision 0, dated
March 13, 2017, or Revision 1, dated December 20, 2018, has or has
not been complied with and following the instructions, ``For
helicopters on which ALERT SERVICE BULLETIN No. 53.00.55 has not
been complied with'' or ``For helicopters on which ALERT SERVICE
BULLETIN No. 53.00.55 has been complied with,'' as applicable, in
paragraph 1.E.2, of Airbus Helicopters Alert Service Bulletin ASB
No. AS365-53.00.62 or ASB No. EC155-53A038, each Revision 0 and
dated December 20, 2018 (ASB AS365-53.00.62 or ASB EC155-53A038), as
applicable to your model helicopter.
    (9) Where paragraph (2) of EASA AD 2019-0008 states to,
``accomplish the applicable corrective action(s) in accordance with
paragraph 1.E.2 of the applicable inspection ASB or in accordance
with the instructions of the applicable modification ASB,'' this AD
requires accomplishing the applicable corrective actions by
following ASB AS365-53.00.62 or ASB EC155-53A038, as applicable to
your model helicopter.
    (10) Where paragraph 3.B.2.e.3 of the applicable modification
ASB referenced in EASA AD 2019-0008 refers to paragraph 3.B.e.3,
this AD requires referring to paragraph 3.B.3 of ASB AS365-53.00.62
or ASB EC155-53A038, as applicable to your model helicopter.

(i) Special Flight Permit

    Special flight permits, as described in 14 CFR 21.197 and
21.199, are not allowed.

 (j) Alternative Methods of Compliance (AMOCs)

    (1) The Manager, International Validation 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 International Validation Branch, send
it to the attention of the person identified in paragraph (k) 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.

(k) Related Information

    For more information about this AD, contact Blaine Williams,
Aerospace Engineer, Los Angeles ACO Branch, Compliance &
Airworthiness Division, 3960 Paramount Blvd., Lakewood, California
90712; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>; email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
(l) 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) European Aviation Safety Agency (EASA) AD 2019-0008, dated
January 22, 2019.
    (ii) Airbus Helicopters Alert Service Bulletin ASB No. AS365-
53.00.62, Revision 0, dated December 20, 2018.
    (iii) Airbus Helicopters Alert Service Bulletin ASB No. EC155-
53A038, Revision 0, dated December 20, 2018.
    (3) For EASA AD 2019-0008, contact the EASA, Konrad-Adenauer-
Ufer 3, 50668 Cologne, Germany; telephone +49 221 8999 000; email
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>internet www.easa.europa.eu. You may find this
EASA AD on the EASA website at https://ad.easa.europa.eu. For Airbus
Helicopters service information, contact Airbus Helicopters, 2701 N
Forum Drive, Grand Prairie, TX 75052; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER> or
(800) 232-0323; fax<PHONE_NUMBER>; or at https://www.airbus.com/helicopters/services/technical-support.html.
    (4) You may view this service information at the FAA, Office of
the Regional Counsel, Southwest Region, 10101 Hillwood Pkwy., Room
6N-321, Fort Worth, TX 76177. For information on the availability of
this material at the FAA, call<PHONE_NUMBER>. This material may be
found in the AD docket on the internet at https://www.regulations.gov by searching for and locating Docket No. FAA-
2020-1183.
    (5) You may view this material that is incorporated by reference
at the National Archives and Records Administration (NARA). For
information on the availability of this material at NARA, email
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or go to https://www.archives.gov/federal-register/cfr/ibr-locations.html.

    Issued on May 11, 2021.
Lance T. Gant,
Director, Compliance & Airworthiness Division, Aircraft Certification
Service.
[FR Doc. 2021-12037 Filed 6-9-21; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


[Federal Register Volume 83, Number 206 (Wednesday, October 24, 2018)]
[Notices]
[Pages 53735-53737]
[FR Doc No: 2018-23229]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration

[FMCSA Docket No. FMCSA-2018-0033]

Qualification of Drivers; Exemption Applications; Diabetes
Mellitus

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

ACTION: Notice of final disposition.

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

SUMMARY: FMCSA announces its decision to exempt 60 individuals from the
prohibition in the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Regulations (FMCSRs)
against persons with insulin-treated diabetes mellitus (ITDM) from
operating a commercial motor vehicle (CMV) in interstate commerce. The
exemptions enable these individuals with ITDM to operate CMVs in
interstate commerce.

DATES: The exemptions were applicable on August 21, 2018. The
exemptions expire on August 21, 2020.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ms. Christine A. Hydock, Chief,
Medical Programs Division,<PHONE_NUMBER>, [email protected], FMCSA,
Department of Transportation, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE, Room W64-224,
Washington, DC 20590-0001. Office hours are from 8:30 a.m. to 5 p.m.,
ET, Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays. If you have
questions regarding viewing or submitting material to the docket,
contact Docket Services, telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Public Participation

A. Viewing Documents and Comments

    To view comments, as well as any documents mentioned in this notice
as being available in the docket, go to http://www.regulations.gov.
Insert the docket number, FMCSA-2018-0033, in the keyword box, and
click ``Search.'' Next, click the ``Open Docket Folder'' button and
choose the document to review. If you do not have access to the
internet, you may view the docket online by visiting the Docket
Management Facility in Room W12-140 on the ground floor of the DOT West
Building, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE, Washington, DC 20590, between 9
a.m. and 5 p.m., ET, Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays.

B. Privacy Act

    In accordance with 5 U.S.C. 553(c), DOT solicits comments from the
public to better inform its rulemaking process. DOT posts these
comments, without edit, including any personal information the
commenter provides, to www.regulations.gov, as described in the system
of records notice (DOT/ALL-14 FDMS), which can be reviewed at
www.dot.gov/privacy.

II. Background

    On July 20, 2018, FMCSA published a notice announcing receipt of
applications from 60 individuals requesting an exemption from diabetes
requirement in 49 CFR 391.41(b)(3) and requested comments from the
public (83 FR 34653). The public comment period ended on August 20,
2018, and two comments were received.
    FMCSA has evaluated the eligibility of these applicants and
determined that granting the exemptions to these individuals would
achieve a level of safety equivalent to or greater than the level that
would be achieved by complying with the current regulation 49 CFR
391.41(b)(3).
    The physical qualification standard for drivers regarding diabetes
found in 49 CFR 391.41(b)(3) states that a person is physically
qualified to drive a CMV if that person has no established medical
history or clinical diagnosis of diabetes mellitus currently requiring
insulin for control.

III. Discussion of Comments

    FMCSA received two comments in this proceeding. Dominika Rodriguez
submitted a comment in favor of granting Paul Diokpa a Federal diabetes
exemption.
    Vicky Johnson of the Minnesota Department of Public Safety noted
the driving record of Mr. William T. Casey. On September 20, 2018,
FMCSA's office followed up with Vicky Johnson and determined that the
information does not change the agency's decision.

IV. Basis for Exemption Determination

    Under 49 U.S.C. 31136(e) and 31315, FMCSA may grant an exemption
for up to five years from the diabetes standard in 49 CFR 391.41(b)(3)
if the exemption is likely to achieve an equivalent or greater level of
safety than would be achieved without the exemption. The exemption
allows the applicants to operate CMVs in interstate commerce. FMCSA
grants exemptions from the FMCSRs for a two-year period to align with
the maximum duration of a driver's medical certification.
    The Agency's decision regarding these exemption applications is
based on the program eligibility criteria and an individualized
assessment of information submitted by each applicant. The
qualifications, experience, and medical condition of each applicant
were stated and discussed in detail in the July 20, 2018, Federal
Register notice (83 FR 34653) and will not be repeated in this notice.
    These 60 applicants have had ITDM over a range of 1 to 45 years.
These applicants report no severe hypoglycemic reactions resulting in
loss of consciousness or seizure, requiring the assistance of another
person, or resulting in impaired cognitive function that occurred
without warning symptoms, in the past 12 months and no recurrent (two
or more) severe hypoglycemic episodes in the past five years. In each
case, an endocrinologist verified that the driver has demonstrated a
willingness to properly monitor and manage his/her diabetes mellitus,
received education related to diabetes management, and is on a stable
insulin regimen. These drivers report no other disqualifying
conditions, including diabetes related complications. Each meets the
vision requirement at 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10).
    Consequently, FMCSA finds that in each case exempting these
applicants from the diabetes requirement in 49 CFR 391.41(b)(3) is
likely to achieve a level of safety equal to that existing without the
exemption.

V. Conditions and Requirements

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

VI. Preemption

    During the period the exemption is in effect, no State shall
enforce any law or regulation that conflicts with this exemption with
respect to a person operating under the exemption.

VII. Conclusion

    Based upon its evaluation of the 60 exemption applications, FMCSA
exempts the following drivers from the diabetes requirement in 49 CFR
391.41(b)(10), subject to the requirements cited above:

Michael R. Allen (IL)

Kenneth A. Bauer II (MI)
Teresia K. Beaty (IN)
Mycah M. Bliesmer (MN)
Theodore F. Brassley, Jr. (ME)
Al C. Broom (CA)
David A. Bruns (IN)
Todd W. Burdick (WI)
William T. Casey (MN)
Anthony Castano (FL)
Richard T. Cisson III (FL)
John F. Daley (RI)
Erik T. Davis (MS)
Robert J. Degrave (VA)
Paul A. Diokpa (IL)
Richard E. Dodge (OR)
Jeramy A. Elley (MT)
John A. Evenson (MN)
Gregory L. Faison (MD)
Ronald N. Falkowski (WI)
Shawn L. Floyd (IL)
Terrence M. Fontaine (MA)
David G. Foster (MI)
Daniel A. Fry (PA)
Samuel L. Gillespie (TN)
Eddie C. Hall (FL)
Jacob E. Heubner (IN)
Michael P. Johnson (MN)
Ryan J. Keys (NY)
James C. Lee, Jr. (GA)
Harold W. Lewis, Jr. (MD)
Edward T. Martin (MN)
Clavenda L. Mason (MD)
Derek A. McGinty (WI)
Pamela J. Meziere (MS)
Mark A. Miller (IN)
Donald R. Mocaby (IL)
David B. Morel (NH)
Cornelius W. Ott, Jr. (IL)
Gene H. Owens (KS)
Jarek D. Perkins (OH)
Austin S. Pihuliak (OH)
Michael P. Poisson (MI)
Carl E. Rhoads (IL)
John W. Ringbloom (PA)
Leslie M. Rinker (VA)
Rocky G. Roof (MO)
Lance U. Sapp (ND)
Dwayne E. Smith (NY)
Brian C. Smith (CA)
Alex L. Soto (CA)
Scott K. Stauffer (PA)
Jerry F. Summers (NH)
Gary R. Waldvogel (MN)
Lee H. Watkins (OH)
John D. Wenger, Jr. (MO)
David B. Whitehead (NC)
John J. Wille III (UT)
Douglas W. Winslow (IL)
Christopher S. Wright (IL)

    In accordance with 49 U.S.C. 31136(e) and 31315, each exemption
will be valid for two years from the effective date unless revoked
earlier by FMCSA. The exemption will be revoked if the following
occurs: (1) The person fails to comply with the terms and conditions of
the exemption; (2) the exemption has resulted in a lower level of
safety than was maintained prior to being granted; or (3) continuation
of the exemption would not be consistent with the goals and objectives
of 49 U.S.C. 31136(e) and 31315.

    Issued on: October 15, 2018.
Larry W. Minor,
Associate Administrator for Policy.
[FR Doc. 2018-23229 Filed 10-23-18; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 4910-EX-P


[Federal Register Volume 87, Number 28 (Thursday, February 10, 2022)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 7716-7718]
[FR Doc No: 2022-02707]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Coast Guard

33 CFR Chapter I, Subchapter N

46 CFR Parts 10, 11, 15, and 107

[Docket Number USCG-2020-0049]

Guidance Documents: Determining Whether a Floating OCS Facility
Is a Vessel or Non-Vessel; Oversight and Manning Requirements

AGENCY: Coast Guard, Department of Homeland Security (DHS).

ACTION: Notification of availability of policy.

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

SUMMARY: The Coast Guard is issuing policies that will guide Officers
In Charge, Marine Inspection (OCMIs) in determining if a Floating Outer
Continental Shelf Facility (FOF) is a vessel or a non-vessel. As a
result of these changes non-vessel FOFs will no longer receive a
Certificate of Inspection (CG Form 841), and personnel serving on these
FOFs will no longer be required to hold Merchant Mariner Credentials.
In association with these changes, the Coast Guard is canceling USCG
District 8 Policy Letter 08-2001, Licensing Requirements for Personnel
on Non-Self Propelled Floating OCS Facilities.

DATES: CG-OES Policy Letter 01-22, Determination of Whether a Floating
Outer Continental Shelf Facility (FOF) is a Vessel, and CG-MMC Policy
Letter 01-22, Merchant Mariner Credential Endorsements for Service on
Floating Outer Continental Shelf (OCS) Facilities were issued February
4, 2022.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For additional information contact
Lieutenant Commander Matthew Meacham, the U.S. Coast Guard Office of
Operating and Environmental Standards, Vessel and Facility Operating
Standards Division (CG-OES-2) at<PHONE_NUMBER>, or Mr. Luke Harden, the
U.S. Coast Guard Office of Merchant Mariner Credentialing (CG-MMC-2) at
202-372-1206.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Background

    Following recent court rulings related to Outer Continental Shelf
(OCS)

activities the Coast Guard initiated a review of the agency's Floating
OCS Facility (FOF) policies, procedures, and regulations. As part of
this review, the Coast Guard tasked the National Offshore Safety
Advisory Committee (NOSAC) with conducting a detailed review of Coast
Guard OCS regulations. In March 2018 NOSAC provided the USCG with a
final report containing recommendations on Coast Guard regulations
applicable to OCS units operating on the U.S. OCS.\1\ An OCS unit is
any domestic or foreign OCS facility, vessel, rig, platform, or other
vehicle.\2\ One type of OCS unit is a ``floating OCS facility,'' or
FOF. FOFs are buoyant facilities that are securely and substantially
moored, such that they cannot be moved without special effort.\3\ FOFs
come in many different structural configurations with varying degrees
of sea keeping capabilities. They can be either vessels or non-vessels.
Based on NOSAC's recommendations and its own internal review, the Coast
Guard determined that it needed to clarify what Coast Guard regulations
are applicable to FOFs that are not vessels.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ National Offshore Safety Advisory Committee. (2018). Final
Report for Production Industry. Available at https://homeport.uscg.mil/Lists/Content/DispForm.aspx?ID=35215&Source=/Lists/Content/DispForm.aspx?ID=35215.
    \2\ 33 CFR 140.10 (definition of ``unit'').
    \3\ 33 CFR 140.10 (definition of ``floating OCS facility'').
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Specifically the Coast Guard determined that it needed to clarify:
(1) Which FOFs are vessels and which FOF are non-vessel FOFs and (2)
that non-vessel FOFs are not subject to vessel-manning requirements.

II. Legal Authority

    The Coast Guard has broad authority to regulate FOFs under the
Outer Continental Shelf Lands Act, 43 U.S.C. 1331 et seq., and its
implementing regulations at 33 CFR chapter I, subchapter N. FOFs that
qualify as seagoing motor vessels may also be regulated by the Coast
Guard under title 46 of the United States Code and associated
implementing regulations. This document is issued in accordance with 5
U.S.C. 552(a)(1)(D) and 5 U.S.C. 553(b)(A).

III. Policies

1. When is an FOF a vessel?

    The Coast Guard is announcing the availability of: (1) CG-OES
Policy Letter 01-22, Determination of Whether a Floating Outer
Continental Shelf Facility (FOF) is a Vessel. CG-OES 01-22 outlines the
procedures for Coast Guard OCMIs to follow in order to determine if a
particular FOF is a vessel or a non-vessel.
    The term ``vessel'' is defined in the United States Code at 1
U.S.C. 3. As defined, the term captures every form of watercraft and
artificial contrivance used, or capable of being used, as a means of
transportation on water. In Lozman v. City of Riviera Beach, Fla., 568
U.S. 115 (2013), the Supreme Court of the United States held that to be
a vessel under 1 U.S.C. 3, a structure's physical ``characteristics and
activities'' need to be such that a ``reasonable observer'' would
conclude that the structure was designed to a practical degree to carry
``people or things'' on the water. Rather than relying upon any single
structural characteristic to reach its decision, the Court instead
focused on the phrase ``capable of being used as a means of
transport[.]'' Citing Stewart v. Dutra Constr. Co., 543 U.S. 481
(2005), the Court emphasized that for a structure to be considered
``capable of being used for transport'' it has to have a practical
possibility of transporting people or goods over the water, not just be
theoretically capable of doing so. This holistic test requires the fact
finder to determine if the characteristics and activities of the
structure would convince a reasonable observer that the watercraft is
designed to a practical degree to carry people or things on the water.
    In accordance with Lozman, to determine if an FOF is a vessel or a
non-vessel, OCMIs must decide whether a particular FOF was designed to
a practical degree for carrying people or things over the water. Due to
the many existing configurations of FOFs and ever-increasing technology
advancement in the energy exploration field, it is not possible to make
a blanket determination for all FOFs. Determinations need to be
conducted on a case-by-case basis. The policy letter directs OCMIs to
look at the following factors when making determinations.

    1. Whether the FOF has a mode of self-propulsion, steering
mechanisms, navigation equipment, dynamic positioning equipment, or
operating station.
    2. Whether the FOF has a traditional hull.
    3. Whether the FOF was meant to be towed into place and
``securely and substantially'' moored to the seabed for a long
period of time.
    4. Whether it takes substantial monetary investment and a long
lead-time to move the FOF from its anchored position or is capable
of emergency disconnect allowing the FOF to float free or be
underway.

    The policy letter makes clear that the above list is not exhaustive
and the existence of any one of these factors does not necessarily mean
that an FOF is a vessel. The OCMI must holistically consider all of the
facts, including taking into account the physical characteristics and
activities of the FOF, to determine if it is designed to a practical
degree for carrying people or things over water.
    In addition to being available along with other Coast Guard
guidance documents at https://www.uscg.mil/guidance, a complete copy of
CG-OES Policy Letter 01-22, Determination of Whether a Floating Outer
Continental Shelf Facility (FOF) is a Vessel is available in the docket
at https://www.regulations.gov and also at https://www.dco.uscg.mil/Our-Organization/Assistant-Commandant-for-Prevention-Policy-CG-5P/Commercial-Regulations-standards-CG-5PS/office-oes/.

2. What documentation will the Coast Guard provide an owner/operator of
a non-vessel FOF?

    The Coast Guard will no longer issue a Certificate of Inspection
(USCG Form 841) to FOFs that are not vessels. Instead, OCMIs will issue
non-vessel FOFs a Floating OCS Facility Determination Letter and a
Floating OCS Facility Certificate of Inspection (FOF COI). The Facility
Determination Letter will identify whether or not the unit is a vessel.
The FOF COI letter will identify expectations the Coast Guard has for
the inspection and maintenance of the particular non-vessel FOF, based
on existing Coast Guard regulations. See the enclosures to CG-OES
Policy Letter 01-22 for a sample Floating OCS Facility Determination
Letter and a sample Floating OCS Facility Certificate of Inspection.
    This change is being made to account for the fact that non-vessel
FOFs are not subject to inspection under 46 U.S.C. 3301 and thus do not
require a certificate of inspection under 33 U.S.C. 3309. The use of
FOF Determination Letters and FOF COI Letters in place of the USCG Form
841 is in accordance with existing Coast Guard regulations. Section
143.120 of 33 CFR requires an OCMI to issue a ``certificate of
inspection'' but does not require the use of USCG Form 841. FOFs that
are U.S. documented vessels will be issued a USCG Form 841.

3. What are the manning requirements for vessel and non-vessel FOFs?

    The OCMI's authority to place manning requirements on an FOF
depends on whether the unit is a vessel.
    Vessel FOFs. For FOFs that are U.S. documented vessels, consistent
with current practice, their Coast Guard Certificate of Inspection
(COI) (USCG Form 841) will contain the required

manning. An OCMI may require manning of vessel FOFs under 46 U.S.C.
3301 and 3306 and regulations promulgated in 46 CFR, chapter I,
subchapter B, part 15--Manning Requirements.
    Non-vessel FOFs. OCSLA does not prescribe particular manning
requirements with the exception of 43 U.S.C. 1356, which imposes U.S.
citizenship requirements to units that conduct activities under OCSLA
jurisdiction. For FOFs that are not vessels, OCMI manning authority is
limited to the regulations promulgated under 33 CFR chapter I,
subchapter N--Outer Continental Shelf Activities, which is limited to a
Person In Charge.
    In association with this clarification of requirements, the Coast
Guard is canceling: USCG District 8 Policy Letter 08-2001, Licensing
Requirements for personnel on Non-Self-Propelled Floating OCS
Facilities.

4. Credentialing of Personnel Serving on FOFs

    The Coast Guard is announcing the availability of CG-MMC Policy
Letter 01-22, Merchant Mariner Credential Endorsements for Service on
Floating Outer continental Shelf (OCS) Facilities. This letter cancels
Eighth District (D8) Policy Letter 08-2001, Licensing Requirements for
Personnel on Non-Self Propelled Floating Outer Continental Shelf (OCS)
Facilities, and outlines the new credentialing policies concerning
personnel serving on FOFs.\4\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ D8 Policy Letter 08-2001 is available at https://www.dco.uscg.mil/Portals/9/OCSNCOE/References/Policy-Letters/D8/D8-PL-08-2001.pdf?ver=XemXFtSnbUCVYl0M1brmIw%3d%3d.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Effective 30 days from the issuance of CG-MMC Policy Letter 01-22,
the Coast Guard will no longer issue original MMC officer endorsements
that are restricted to service on specific types of FOFs, referred to
as Floating Offshore Instillations (FOI) in endorsements. This applies
to the following endorsements:
     Offshore Installation Manager (Active Ballast FOI);
     Offshore Installation Manager (Passive Ballast FOI);
     Barge Supervisor (Active Ballast FOI);
     Barge Supervisor (Passive Ballast FOI);
     Ballast Control Operator (Active Ballast FOI); and
     Ballast Control Operator (Passive Ballast FOI).
    The Coast Guard will continue to issue the following original
endorsements to mariners meeting applicable service and training
requirements specified in 46 CFR part 11:
     Offshore Installation Manager (OIM) [46 CFR 11.470]:
    [cir] OIM Unrestricted;
    [cir] OIM Surface Units on Location;
    [cir] OIM Surface Units Underway;
    [cir] OIM Bottom Bearing Units on Location; and
    [cir] OIM Bottom Bearing Units Underway;
     Barge Supervisor (without restriction to specific MODU or
FOF types) [46 CFR 11.472]; and
     Ballast Control Operator (without restriction to specific
MODU or FOF types) [46 CFR 11.474].
    There are currently 47 mariners who hold one or more of the
endorsements listed above. Considering that some FOFs may be found to
be vessels, not allowing these endorsements could result in taking
something of present or potential value from the mariners who hold
them.\5\ Accordingly, the Coast Guard will continue to renew the
endorsements listed above.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ The Coast Guard does not anticipate any currently operating
FOFs will be determined to be a vessel. But, modifications to a
currently operating unit or a new unit that comes on line in the
future could be classified as a vessel.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Mariners who served aboard FOFs that have been determined to not be
vessels will need to renew their MMCs under provisions in 46 CFR
10.227(e) that are applicable to mariners who do not have evidence of
at least one year of service during the past five years. Mariners who
served on FOFs found to be vessels may use their service to renew their
endorsements under 46 CFR 10.227(e)(1).
    The Coast Guard can only credit seagoing service for qualifying for
MMC endorsements if it was obtained on a vessel.\6\ Accordingly,
service on FOFs that are not vessels will not be accepted as service
for qualifying for an original or raise of grade of an MMC endorsement.
Service on FOFs that are not vessels may only be accepted if it is
found to be ``closely related service'' as specified in 46 CFR
10.232(g) to renew an MMC.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ 46 CFR 10.107 (definition of ``seagoing service''.)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Coast Guard will discontinue approving stability and ballast
control courses and courses that substitute for a Coast Guard
administered examination that are valid only for the FOF endorsements
noted in the second paragraph of section four above. These approved
courses will not be renewed upon expiration. If a stability course or
in lieu of examination course is approved for both an endorsement being
discontinued and one or more of the endorsements described in 46 CFR
11.470, 11.472, or 11.474 the course approval will be amended to omit
meeting requirements for the FOF endorsements noted above.
    In addition to being available along with other Coast Guard
guidance documents at https://www.uscg.mil/guidance, a complete copy of
CG-MMC Policy Letter 01-22, Merchant Mariner Credential Endorsements
for Service on Floating Outer Continental Shelf (OCS) Facilities, is
available in the docket at https://www.regulations.gov and also at
https://www.dco.uscg.mil/Our-Organization/Assistant-Commandant-for-Prevention-Policy-CG-5P/Commercial-Regulations-standards-CG-5PS/Office-of-Merchant-Mariner-Credentialing/CG-MMC-2/CG-MMC-2-New-Policies/.

    Dated: February 4, 2022.
J.G. Lantz,
Director of Commercial Regulations and Standards.
[FR Doc. 2022-02707 Filed 2-9-22; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 9110-04-P


[Federal Register Volume 82, Number 247 (Wednesday, December 27, 2017)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Page 61178]
[FR Doc No: 2017-27923]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Coast Guard

33 CFR Part 117

[Docket No. USCG-2017-1109]

Drawbridge Operation Regulation; Columbia River, Vancouver, WA

AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS.

ACTION: Notice of deviation from drawbridge regulations.

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

SUMMARY: The Coast Guard has issued a temporary deviation from the
operating schedule that governs the Burlington Northern Santa Fe (BNSF)
Railway Bridge across the Columbia River, mile 105.6, at Vancouver, WA.
The deviation is necessary to accommodate replacement gears, shafts and
bearings. This deviation allows the bridge to remain in the closed-to-
navigation position during maintenance activities.

DATES: This deviation is effective from 8 a.m. to 3 p.m. on December
27, 2017.

ADDRESSES: The docket for this deviation, USCG-2017-1109 is available
at http://www.regulations.gov. Type the docket number in the ``SEARCH''
box and click ``SEARCH.'' Click on Open Docket Folder on the line
associated with this deviation.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: If you have questions on this
temporary deviation, call or email Mr. Steven Fischer, Bridge
Administrator, Thirteenth Coast Guard District; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>,
email [email protected].

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: BNSF requested that the BNSF Swing Bridge
across the Columbia River, mile 105.6, remain closed to marine vessel
traffic to install new swing gears, shafts and bearings. During this
installation period, the swing span of the bridge will be in the
closed-to-navigation position. The BNSF Swing Bridge, mile 105.6,
provides 39 feet of vertical clearance above Columbia River Datum 0.0
while in the closed position.
    The subject bridge operates in accordance with 33 CFR 117.5. This
deviation allows the swing span of the BNSF Railway Bridge across the
Columbia River, mile 105.6, to remain in the closed-to-navigation
position, and need not open for maritime traffic from 8 a.m. to 3 p.m.
on December 27, 2017. The bridge shall operate in accordance to 33 CFR
117.5 at all other times. Waterway usage on this part of the Columbia
River includes vessels ranging from large ships to commercial tug and
tow vessels to recreational pleasure craft including cabin cruisers and
sailing vessels. Vessels able to pass through the bridge in the closed-
to-navigation position may do so at any time. The bridge will not be
able to open for emergencies during this closure period, and there is
no immediate alternate route for vessels to pass. The Coast Guard will
also inform the users of the waterways through our Local and Broadcast
Notices to Mariners of the change in operating schedule for the bridge
so that vessels can arrange their transits to minimize any impact
caused by the temporary deviation.
    In accordance with 33 CFR 117.35(e), the drawbridge must return to
its regular operating schedule immediately at the end of the designated
time period. This deviation from the operating regulations is
authorized under 33 CFR 117.35.

    Dated: December 21, 2017.
Steven M. Fischer,
Bridge Administrator, Thirteenth Coast Guard District.
[FR Doc. 2017-27923 Filed 12-26-17; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 9110-04-P