[Federal Register Volume 85, Number 168 (Friday, August 28, 2020)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 53152-53156]
[FR Doc No: 2020-18930]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. FAA-2020-0201; Product Identifier 2020-NM-007-AD; Amendment
39-21208; AD 2020-17-03]
RIN 2120-AA64

Airworthiness Directives; Airbus SAS Airplanes

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

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: The FAA is adopting a new airworthiness directive (AD) for
certain Airbus SAS Model A318-111, -112, -121, and -122 airplanes;
Model A319-111, -112, -113, -114, -115, -131, -132, and -133 airplanes;
Model A320-211, -212, -214, -216, -231, -232, and -233 airplanes; and
Model A321-111, -112, -131, -211, -212, -213, -231, and -232 airplanes.
This AD was prompted by reports of fatigue cracks on continuity
fittings at the lower framing of the front windshield on airplanes on
which a certain production modification has been embodied. Additional
analysis showed that certain certification requirements for damage
tolerance and fatigue are not met on airplanes in a certain post-
production modification configuration. This AD requires repetitive high
frequency eddy current (HFEC) inspections of the central node
windshield area for cracking, and applicable corrective actions if
cracking is found, as specified in a European Union Aviation Safety
Agency (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 October 2, 2020.
    The Director of the Federal Register approved the incorporation by
reference of a certain publication listed in this AD as of October 2,
2020.

ADDRESSES: For 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 IBR material on the EASA website
at https://ad.easa.europa.eu. You may view this IBR material at the
FAA, Airworthiness Products Section, Operational Safety Branch, 2200
South 216th St., Des Moines, WA. 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-
0201.

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-
0201; 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: Sanjay Ralhan, Aerospace Engineer,
Large Aircraft Section, International Validation Branch, FAA, 2200
South 216th St., Des Moines, WA 98198; telephone and fax<PHONE_NUMBER>;
email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Discussion

    The EASA, which is the Technical Agent for the Member States of the
European Union, has issued EASA AD 2020-0005, dated January 13, 2020
(``EASA AD 2020-0005'') (also referred to as the Mandatory Continuing
Airworthiness Information, or ``the MCAI''), to correct an unsafe
condition for certain Airbus SAS Model A318-111, -112, -121, and -122
airplanes; Model A319-111, -112, -113, -114, -115, -131, -132, and -133
airplanes; Model A320-211, -212, -214, -215, -216, -231, -232, and -233
airplanes; and Model A321-111, -112, -131, -211, -212, -213, -231, and
-232 airplanes. Model A320-215 airplanes are not certified by the FAA
and are not included on the U.S. type certificate data sheet; this AD
therefore does not include those airplanes in the applicability.
    The FAA issued a notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) to amend 14
CFR part 39 by adding an AD that would apply to certain Airbus SAS
Model A318-111, -112, -121, and -122 airplanes; Model A319-111, -112, -
113, -114, -115, -131, -132, and -133 airplanes; Model A320-211, -212,
-214, -216, -231, -232, and -233 airplanes; and Model A321-111, -112, -
131, -211, -212, -213, -231, and -232 airplanes. The NPRM published in
the Federal Register on March 20, 2020 (85 FR 16011). The NPRM was
prompted by reports of fatigue cracks on continuity fittings at the
lower framing of the front windshield on airplanes on which a certain
production modification has been embodied. Additional analysis showed
that certain certification requirements for damage tolerance and
fatigue are not met on airplanes in a certain post-production
modification configuration. The NPRM proposed to require repetitive
HFEC inspections of the central node windshield area for cracking, and
applicable corrective actions if cracking is found, as specified in an
EASA AD.
    The FAA is issuing this AD to address fatigue cracks on continuity
fittings at the lower framing of the front windshield on airplanes on
which Airbus Production Modification 22058 (which is included in Airbus
Modification 21999) has been embodied. Additional analysis showed that
certain certification requirements for damage tolerance and fatigue are
not met on airplanes in a post-production Modification 22058
configuration. The FAA is issuing this AD to address this condition,
which could lead to failure of the continuity fittings at the lower
node of the windshield central frame, possibly resulting in
decompression of the airplane and injury to occupants. See the MCAI for
additional background information.

Comments

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

Request To Allow Alternative Repair Methods

    United Airlines requested that for the threshold inspection,
instead of using the inspection procedures specified in Airbus Service
Bulletin A320-53-1331, dated January 14, 2019 (``Airbus SB A320-53-
1331''), the final rule allow operators to substitute previous repairs
done using the procedures in Airworthiness Limitation Item (ALI) task
531129 [special detailed inspection of center node continuity fittings
and windshield on the left-hand and right-hand sides] of the Airbus
Model A318/A319/A320/A321 Airworthiness Limitations Section (ALS), and
procedures for ongoing repairs that contain unique inspection programs,
which are described in Airbus SB A320-53-1331. The commenter stated
that this would prevent discrepancies when operators did threshold
inspections using the procedures described in Airbus SB A320-53-1331.
The commenter noted that the inspection procedures in Airbus SB A320-
53-1331 are based on an assumption that the area of inspection has not
been repaired.
    In addition, the commenter remarked that paragraph (2) of EASA AD
2020-0005 partially addresses the issue of inspections done in areas
that were previously repaired. The commenter pointed out that paragraph
(2) of EASA AD 2020-0005 addresses only the central lower node
continuity fittings but that the required inspection involves both the
windshield frame and central lower node continuity fittings. The
commenter explained that the central lower node fittings are a portion
of the general lower windshield frame attachment inspection area. The
commenter stated that it has airplanes with reinforcement repairs on
the windshield frame and that those repairs were developed by Airbus.
The commenter shared that the repair design approval sheet (RDAS)
provided by Airbus stated ``impact to ALI 531129'' since the repair
reinforced and covered the windshield frame pockets. The commenter
concluded that a new inspection method and inspection intervals were
defined in that RDAS.
    Furthermore, the commenter noted that windshield replacement is a
substantial cost and burden to operators, and alternative repairs are
highly desirable to reduce the cost of a windshield frame and
continuity fitting repair.
    Although the FAA acknowledges the commenter's concern about window
replacement costs, the agency disagrees with the commenter's request.
The FAA is not aware of a global RDAS, issued under Airbus SAS's EASA
Design Organization Approval, that is applicable to the entire U.S.-
registered airplane fleet. The RDAS issued to United Airlines is
specific to the configuration of the airplanes in United Airlines'
fleet. Therefore, the FAA cannot revise corrective actions relative to
the unsafe condition identified in this AD for the entire U.S.-
registered fleet based on the United Airlines' fleet configuration,
which was altered by certain previously approved repairs. Paragraph
(i)(1) of this AD states that operators may use the procedures found in
14 CFR 39.19 to request an alternative method of compliance (AMOC) if
an airplane's configuration does not allow compliance with the
requirements of an AD.
    In addition, paragraph (7) of EASA AD 2020-0005 specifies that
accomplishment of inspections using ALI task 531129, as specified in
table 1 to paragraph (1) of EASA AD 2020-0005, is acceptable for
compliance with

the requirements of paragraph (1) of EASA AD 2020-0005 for only the
first inspection that is required after the effective date of that EASA
AD.
    EASA, the State of Design Authority for these airplane models,
conducted a risk assessment, along with a cost benefit analysis, and
developed corrective actions that are required to mitigate the risk of
the unsafe condition addressed in EASA AD 2020-0005. The FAA finds that
the service information specified in EASA AD 2020-0005, including the
modification procedure in Airbus Service Bulletin A320-53-1329, dated
December 21, 2018 (``Airbus SB A320-53-1329''), is necessary to address
the unsafe condition. The purpose of the actions specified in Airbus SB
A320-53-1329 is to prevent cracks on the front windshield frame and
continuity fitting by installing reinforced parts. Therefore, the FAA
has not revised this AD regarding this issue.

Conclusion

    The FAA reviewed the relevant data, considered the comment
received, and determined that air safety and the public interest
require adopting this final rule as proposed, except for 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.

Related IBR Material Under 1 CFR Part 51

    EASA AD 2020-0005 describes procedures for repetitive HFEC
inspections of the central node windshield area for cracking, and
applicable corrective actions if cracking is found. The corrective
actions include modification or repair. 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 1,203 airplanes of U.S.
registry. The FAA estimates the following costs to comply with this AD:

                                     Estimated Costs for Required Actions *
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                Cost per       Cost on U.S.
                          Labor cost                              Parts cost        product         operators
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
19 work-hours x $85 per hour = $1,615........................              $0           $1,615       $1,942,845
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* Table does not include estimated costs for reporting.

    The FAA estimates that it would take about 1 work-hour per product
to comply with the reporting requirement in this AD. The average labor
rate is $85 per hour. Based on these figures, the FAA estimates the
cost of reporting the inspection results on U.S. operators to be
$102,255, or $85 per product.
    The FAA estimates the following costs to do any necessary on-
condition modifications that would be required based on the results of
any required actions. The FAA has no way of determining the number of
aircraft that might need these on-condition modifications:

             Estimated Costs of On-Condition Modifications *
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                             Cost per
              Labor cost                   Parts cost        product
------------------------------------------------------------------------
1,122 work-hours x $85 per hour =             $316,043         $411,413
 $95,370..............................
------------------------------------------------------------------------
* The FAA has received no definitive data that would enable the agency
  to provide cost estimates for the on-condition repairs specified in
  this AD.

Paperwork Reduction Act

    A federal agency may not conduct or sponsor, and a person is not
required to respond to, nor shall a person be subject to penalty for
failure to comply with a collection of information subject to the
requirements of the Paperwork Reduction Act unless that collection of
information displays a current valid OMB control number. The control
number for the collection of information required by this AD is 2120-
0056. The paperwork cost associated with this AD has been detailed in
the Costs of Compliance section of this document and includes time for
reviewing instructions, as well as completing and reviewing the
collection of information. Therefore, all reporting associated with
this AD is mandatory. Comments concerning the accuracy of this burden
and suggestions for reducing the burden should be directed to
Information Collection Clearance Officer, Federal Aviation
Administration, 10101 Hillwood Parkway, Fort Worth, TX 76177-1524.

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 (AD):

2020-17-03 Airbus SAS: Amendment 39-21208; Docket No. FAA-2020-0201;
Product Identifier 2020-NM-007-AD.

(a) Effective Date

    This AD is effective October 2, 2020.

(b) Affected ADs

    None.

(c) Applicability

    This AD applies to Airbus SAS Model airplanes specified in
paragraphs (c)(1) through (4) of this AD, certificated in any
category, as identified in European Union Aviation Safety Agency
(EASA) AD 2020-0005, dated January 13, 2020 (``EASA AD 2020-0005'').
    (1) Model A318-111, -112, -121, and -122 airplanes.
    (2) Model A319-111, -112, -113, -114, -115, -131, -132, and -133
airplanes.
    (3) Model A320-211, -212, -214, -216, -231, -232, and -233
airplanes.
    (4) Model A321-111, -112, -131, -211, -212, -213, -231, and -232
airplanes.

(d) Subject

    Air Transport Association (ATA) of America Code 53, Fuselage.

(e) Reason

    This AD was prompted by reports of fatigue cracks on continuity
fittings at the lower framing of the front windshield on airplanes
on which Airbus Production Modification 22058 (which is included in
Airbus Modification 21999) has been embodied. Additional analysis
showed that certain certification requirements for damage tolerance
and fatigue are not met on airplanes in a post-production
Modification 22058 configuration. The FAA is issuing this AD to
address this condition, which could lead to failure of the
continuity fittings at the lower node of the windshield central
frame, possibly resulting in decompression of the airplane and
injury to occupants.

(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 2020-0005.

(h) Exceptions to EASA AD 2020-0005

    (1) Where EASA AD 2020-0005 refers to its effective date, this
AD requires using the effective date of this AD.
    (2) The ``Remarks'' section of EASA AD 2020-0005 does not apply
to this AD.
    (3) Paragraph (8) of EASA AD 2020-0005 specifies to report
inspection results to Airbus within a certain compliance time. For
this AD, report inspection results at the applicable time specified
in paragraph (h)(3)(i) or (ii) of this AD.
    (i) If the inspection was done on or after the effective date of
this AD: Submit the report within 90 days after the inspection.
    (ii) If the inspection was done before the effective date of
this AD: Submit the report within 90 days after the effective date
of this AD.

(i) Other FAA AD Provisions

    The following provisions also apply to this AD:
    (1) Alternative Methods of Compliance (AMOCs): The Manager,
Large Aircraft Section, 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 Large Aircraft Section, International Validation
Branch, send it to the attention of the person identified in
paragraph (j) of this AD. Information may be emailed to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>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.
    (2) Contacting the Manufacturer: For any requirement in this AD
to obtain instructions from a manufacturer, the instructions must be
accomplished using a method approved by the Manager, Large Aircraft
Section, International Validation Branch, FAA; or EASA; or Airbus
SAS's EASA Design Organization Approval (DOA). If approved by the
DOA, the approval must include the DOA-authorized signature.
    (3) Required for Compliance (RC): For any service information
referenced in EASA AD 2020-0005 that contains RC procedures and
tests: Except as required by paragraph (i)(2) of this AD, RC
procedures and tests must be done to comply with this AD; any
procedures or tests that are not identified as RC are recommended.
Those procedures and tests that are not identified as RC may be
deviated from using accepted methods in accordance with the
operator's maintenance or inspection program without obtaining
approval of an AMOC, provided the procedures and tests identified as
RC can be done and the airplane can be put back in an airworthy
condition. Any substitutions or changes to procedures or tests
identified as RC require approval of an AMOC.
    (4) Paperwork Reduction Act Burden Statement: A federal agency
may not conduct or sponsor, and a person is not required to respond
to, nor shall a person be subject to a penalty for failure to comply
with a collection of information subject to the requirements of the
Paperwork Reduction Act unless that collection of information
displays a current valid OMB Control Number. The OMB Control Number
for this information collection is 2120-0056. Public reporting for
this collection of information is estimated to be approximately 1
hour per response, including the time for reviewing instructions,
searching existing data sources, gathering and maintaining the data
needed, and completing and reviewing the collection of information.
All responses to this collection of information are mandatory as
required by this AD. Send comments regarding this burden estimate or
any other aspect of this collection of information, including
suggestions for reducing this burden to Information Collection
Clearance Officer, Federal Aviation Administration, 10101 Hillwood
Parkway, Fort Worth, TX 76177-1524.

(j) Related Information

    For more information about this AD, contact Sanjay Ralhan,
Aerospace Engineer, Large Aircraft Section, International Validation
Branch, FAA, 2200 South 216th St., Des Moines, WA 98198; telephone
and fax<PHONE_NUMBER>; email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
(k) 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 Union Aviation Safety Agency (EASA) AD 2020-0005,
dated January 13, 2020.
    (ii) [Reserved]
    (3) For information about EASA AD 2020-0005, 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.
    (4) You may view this material at the FAA, Airworthiness
Products Section, Operational Safety Branch, 2200 South 216th St.,
Des Moines, WA. For information on the availability of this material
at the FAA, call

206-231-3195. 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-2020-0201.
    (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 August 6, 2020.
Lance T. Gant,
 Director, Compliance & Airworthiness Division, Aircraft Certification
Service.
[FR Doc. 2020-18930 Filed 8-27-20; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


[Federal Register Volume 87, Number 97 (Thursday, May 19, 2022)]
[Notices]
[Pages 30553-30555]
[FR Doc No: 2022-10762]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration

[Docket No. FMCSA-2014-0352]

Commercial Driver's License Standards: Recreation Vehicle
Industry Association Application for Exemption

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

ACTION: Notice of renewal of exemption; request for comments.

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

SUMMARY: FMCSA announces its decision to provisionally renew a 2017
exemption from the Federal commercial driver's license (CDL)
requirements for drivers who deliver certain newly manufactured
motorhomes and recreational vehicles (RVs) to dealers or

trade shows before retail sale (driveaway operations). The Recreation
Vehicle Industry Association (RVIA) requested that the exemption be
renewed because compliance with the CDL requirements prevents its
members from implementing more efficient operations due to a shortage
of CDL drivers. The exemption renewal is for 5 years and covers
employees of all driveaway companies, RV manufacturers, and RV dealers
transporting RVs between manufacturing sites and dealer locations and
for movements prior to first retail sale. Drivers engaged in driveaway
deliveries of RVs with gross vehicle weight ratings of 26,001 pounds or
more will not be required to have a CDL as long as the RVs have actual
gross vehicle weights or gross combination weights that do not meet or
exceed 26,001 pounds, and any RV trailers towed by other vehicles weigh
10,000 pounds or less at the time of transportation. RVs that have a
gross vehicle weight or gross combined weight exceeding 26,000 pounds
are not covered by the exemption.

DATES: This renewed exemption is effective April 6, 2022 and expires on
April 6, 2027. Comments must be received on or before June 21, 2022.

ADDRESSES: You may submit comments bearing the Federal Docket
Management System (FDMS) Docket ID FMCSA-2014-0352 using any of the
following methods:
     Federal eRulemaking Portal: www.regulations.gov. See the
Public Participation and Request for Comments section below for further
information.
     Mail: Docket Operations, U.S. Department of
Transportation, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE, West Building, Ground Floor,
Room W12-140, Washington, DC 20590-0001.
     Hand Delivery or Courier: West Building, Ground Floor,
Room W12-140, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., ET,
Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays.
     Fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    Each submission must include the Agency name and the docket number
for this notice (FMCSA-2014-0352). Note that DOT posts all comments
received without change to www.regulations.gov, including any personal
information included in a comment. Please see the Privacy Act heading
below.
    Docket: For access to the docket to read background documents or
comments, go to www.regulations.gov at any time or visit Room W12-140
on the ground level of the West Building, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE,
Washington, DC, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., ET, Monday through Friday,
except Federal holidays. To be sure someone is there to help you,
please call<PHONE_NUMBER> or<PHONE_NUMBER> before visiting Dockets
Operations.
    Privacy Act: In accordance with 49 U.S.C. 31315(b)(6), DOT solicits
comments from the public to better inform its exemption 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.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ms. Pearlie Robinson, FMCSA Driver and
Carrier Operations Division; Office of Carrier, Driver and Vehicle
Safety Standards; Telephone:<PHONE_NUMBER>. Email: [email protected]. If you
have questions on viewing or submitting material to the docket, contact
Docket Services, telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Public Participation and Request for Comments

    FMCSA encourages you to participate by submitting comments and
related materials.

Submitting Comments

    If you submit a comment, please include the docket number for this
notice (FMCSA-2014-0352), indicate the specific section of this
document to which the comment applies, and provide a reason for
suggestions or recommendations. You may submit your comments and
material online or by fax, mail, or hand delivery, but please use only
one of these means. FMCSA recommends that you include your name and a
mailing address, an email address, or a phone number in the body of
your document so the Agency can contact you if it has questions
regarding your submission.
    To submit your comment online, go to www.regulations.gov and put
the docket number, ``FMCSA-2014-0352'' in the ``Keyword'' box, and
click ``Search.'' When the new screen appears, click on the ``Comment
Now!'' button and type your comment into the text box in the following
screen. Choose whether you are submitting your comment as an individual
or on behalf of a third party and then submit. If you submit your
comments by mail or hand delivery, submit them in an unbound format, no
larger than 8\1/2\ by 11 inches, suitable for copying and electronic
filing. If you submit comments by mail and would like to know that they
reached the facility, please enclose a stamped, self-addressed postcard
or envelope. FMCSA will consider all comments and material received
during the comment period.

II. Legal Basis

    FMCSA has authority under 49 U.S.C. 31136(e) and 31315(b)(2) and 49
CFR 381.300(b) to renew an exemption from the Federal Motor Carrier
Safety Regulations for a 5-year period if it finds ``such exemption
would likely achieve a level of safety that is equivalent to, or
greater than, the level that would be achieved absent such exemption.''
RVIA has requested a five-year extension of the current exemption in
Docket No. FMCSA-2014-0352.

III. Background

Current Regulation(s) Requirements

    The CDL regulations require drivers to hold a CDL when operating
vehicles in Groups A and B (49 CFR 383.91(a)(1) and 383.91(a)(2)).
Group A vehicles are any combination of vehicles with a gross
combination weight rating (GCWR) of 26,001 pounds or more, provided the
gross vehicle weight rating (GVWR) of the towed unit is over 10,000
pounds. Group B vehicles are any single vehicle with a GVWR of 26,001
pounds or more, or any such vehicle towing a vehicle not over 10,000
pounds. The GVWR is the value specified by the manufacturer as the
loaded weight of the vehicle.

Application for Renewal of Exemption

    FMCSA published notice of RVIA's initial application for exemption
from 49 CFR 383.91(a)(1)-(2) to this docket on October 1, 2014 (79 FR
59343). That notice described the nature of the RV deliveries by
commercial motor vehicle (CMV) drivers. FMCSA published a notice
granting RVIA's exemption request on April 6, 2015, which was effective
through April 6, 2017 (80 FR 18493). FMCSA found that RVIA would
achieve a level of safety that was equivalent to, or greater than, the
level of safety that would be obtained by complying with the CDL
requirements. FMCSA published a notice granting RVIA's request to renew
its exemption to this docket on April 12, 2017 (82 FR 17734). The
exemption expires on April 6, 2022.
    RVIA has now requested a second renewal of the exemption from the
CDL requirement in 49 CFR 383.91(a)(1)-(2). The exemption allows
drivers of RVs with GCWRs and GVWRs of 26,001 pounds or more to operate
without a CDL as long as the RV has an actual vehicle weight of less
than 26,001 pounds. A combination of RV trailer and tow vehicle must
have a gross

combined weight of less than 26,001 pounds and the actual weight of the
towed unit must not exceed 10,000 pounds.

IV. Equivalent Level of Safety Analysis

    FMCSA determined in 2015 and again in 2017 that the level of safety
associated with the transportation of RVs from manufacturers to dealers
would likely be equivalent to, or greater than, the level of safety
obtained by complying with the CDL requirements. FMCSA noted in its
April 12, 2017 notice that RVIA asserted that drivers who deliver RVs
have substantially more experience than a typical driver operating an
RV for recreational purposes. RVIA also stated that RV driveaway-
towaway companies have a lower crash rate than the national benchmark
average. RVIA contended that RV manufacturers and driveaway-towaway
companies have economic incentives to train, monitor, and evaluate
their RV drivers because of their exposure to liability for any traffic
accidents. RVIA also asserted that newly manufactured vehicles have a
low risk of mechanical failures and that travel distances between the
manufacturer and dealer are shorter than the typical distance which RVs
travel when in recreational use. (82 FR 17734). When FMCSA affirmed the
renewal in 2018, FMCSA concluded that private owners and drivers have
operated large RVs for years without CDLs without generating any
concern among law enforcement professionals that they pose a risk to
highway safety.
    In its March 15, 2022 application for renewal, RVIA asserts that RV
manufacturers and driveaway-towaway companies do not seek an exemption
from other safety regulations such as safe driving (49 CFR part 392),
driver qualifications (49 CFR part 391), and hours of service (49 CFR
part 395). RVIA also states that the exempt RVs would always be empty
and their actual weight would not exceed 26,000 pounds.
    FMCSA is unaware of any evidence of a degradation in safety
attributable to the current exemption for employee-drivers of
driveaway-towaway companies, RV manufacturers, and RV dealers
transporting RVs between the manufacturing site and dealer location and
for movements prior to first retail sale. There is no indication of an
adverse impact on safety while operating under the terms and conditions
specified in the April 6, 2015, notice of final determination (80 FR
18493).
    FMCSA concludes that provisionally extending the exemption granted
on April 6, 2015 for another five years, under the same terms and
conditions, will likely achieve a level of safety that is equivalent
to, or greater than, the level of safety achieved without the
exemption.

V. Exemption Decision

A. Grant of Exemption

    FMCSA provisionally renews the exemption for a period of five years
subject to the terms and conditions of this decision and the absence of
public comments that would cause the Agency to terminate the exemption
under Sec. V.F. below. The exemption from the requirements of 49 CFR
383.91(a)(1)-(2) is otherwise effective April 6, 2022 through April 6,
2027, 11:59 p.m. local time, unless renewed or rescinded.

B. Applicability of Exemption

    The exemption is restricted to employees of driveaway-towaway
companies, RV manufacturers, and RV dealers transporting RVs between
the manufacturing site and dealer location and for movements prior to
first retail sale. Drivers covered by the exemption will not be
required to hold a CDL when transporting RVs with a gross vehicle
weight not exceeding 26,000 pounds, or a combination of RV trailer/tow
vehicle with the gross weight of the towed unit not exceeding 10,000
pounds and the gross combined weight not exceeding 26,000 pounds.

C. Terms and Conditions

    When operating under this exemption, motor carriers and drivers are
subject to the following terms and conditions:
    (1) The drivers and motor carriers must comply with all other
applicable Federal Motor Carrier Safety Regulations (49 CFR part 350-
399);
    (2) The drivers must be able to provide this exemption document to
enforcement officials; and
    (3) The drivers must be in possession of a valid State driver's
license.

D. Preemption

    In accordance with 49 U.S.C. 31315(d), as implemented by 49 CFR
381.600, during the period this exemption is in effect, no State shall
enforce any law or regulation that conflicts with or is inconsistent
with this exemption with respect to a firm or person operating under
the exemption. States may, but are not required to, adopt the same
exemption with respect to operations in intrastate commerce.

E. Notification to FMCSA

    Motor carriers using exempt drivers must notify FMCSA within 5
business days of any accident (as defined in 49 CFR 390.5) involving
any of its CMVs operating under the terms of this exemption. The
notification must include the following information:
    (a) Name of the exemption: ``RVIA'';
    (b) Name of the operating motor carrier;
    (c) Date of the accident;
    (d) City or town, and State, in which the accident occurred, or
closest to the accident scene;
    (e) Driver's name and license number;
    (f) Vehicle number and State license number;
    (g) Number of individuals suffering physical injury;
    (h) Number of fatalities;
    (i) The police-reported cause of the accident;
    (j) Whether the driver was cited for violation of any traffic laws,
motor carrier safety regulations; and
    (k) The driver's total driving time and total on-duty time period
prior to the accident.
    Reports filed under this provision shall be emailed to
[email protected]

F. Termination

    FMCSA does not believe the drivers covered by this exemption will
experience any deterioration of their safety record. The exemption will
be rescinded if: (1) Motor carriers and drivers operating under the
exemption fail to comply with the terms and conditions of the
exemption; (2) the exemption has resulted in a lower level of safety
than was maintained before it was granted; or (3) continuation of the
exemption would not be consistent with the goals and objects of 49
U.S.C. 31136(e) and 31315.

VI. Request for Comments

    FMCSA requests comments from parties with data concerning the
safety record of drivers employed by driveaway-towaway companies, RV
manufacturers, and RV dealers transporting RVs between the
manufacturing site and dealer location and for movements prior to first
retail sale. The Agency will evaluate any adverse evidence submitted
and, if safety is being compromised or if continuation of the exemption
would not be consistent with the goals and objectives of 49 U.S.C.
31136(e) and 31315, FMCSA will take immediate steps to rescind the
exemption of the company or companies and drivers in question.

Robin Hutcheson,
Deputy Administrator.
[FR Doc. 2022-10762 Filed 5-18-22; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-EX-P


[Federal Register Volume 82, Number 118 (Wednesday, June 21, 2017)]
[Notices]
[Pages 28375-28376]
[FR Doc No: 2017-12881]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

National Highway Traffic Safety Administration

Petition for Exemption From the Federal Motor Vehicle Theft
Prevention Standard; Nissan North America, Inc.

AGENCY: National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA),
Department of Transportation (DOT).

ACTION: Grant of petition for exemption.

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

SUMMARY: This document grants in full the Nissan North America, Inc.'s,
(Nissan) petition for exemption of the (confidential) vehicle line in
accordance with the Exemption from the Theft Prevention Standard. This
petition is granted because the agency has determined that the
antitheft device to be placed on the line as standard equipment is
likely to be as effective in reducing and deterring motor vehicle theft
as compliance with the parts-marking requirements of the Federal Motor
Vehicle Theft Prevention Standard (Theft Prevention Standard). Nissan
also requested confidential treatment for specific information in its
petition. While official notification granting or denying its request
for confidential treatment will be addressed by separate letter, no
confidential information provided for purposes of this document has
been disclosed.

DATES: The exemption granted by this notice is effective beginning with
the 2018 model year (MY).

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ms. Carlita Ballard, Office of
International Policy, Fuel Economy and Consumer Programs, National
Highway Traffic Safety Administration, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., West
Building, Room W43-439, Washington, DC 20590. Ms. Ballard's telephone
phone number is<PHONE_NUMBER>. Her fax number is<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: In a petition dated March 31, 2017, Nissan
requested an exemption from the parts-marking requirements of the Theft
Prevention Standard for the (confidential) vehicle line beginning with
MY 2018. The petition requested an exemption from parts-marking
pursuant to 49 CFR part 543, Exemption from Vehicle Theft Prevention
Standard, based on the installation of an antitheft device as standard
equipment for the entire vehicle line.
    Under 49 CFR part 543.5(a), a manufacturer may petition NHTSA to
grant an exemption for one vehicle line per model year. In its
petition, Nissan provided a detailed description and diagram of the
identity, design, and location of the components of the antitheft
device for the (confidential) vehicle line. Nissan stated that the MY
2018 (confidential) vehicle line will be installed with a passive,
electronic engine immobilizer antitheft device as standard equipment.
Key components of the antitheft device will include an engine
immobilizer, engine control module (ECM), security indicator light,
immobilizer antenna, Key FOB, and a specially-designed key with a
microchip. Nissan will not provide any visible or audible indication of
unauthorized vehicle entry on the (confidential) vehicle line.
    Nissan's submission is considered a complete petition as required
by 49 CFR 543.7, in that it meets the general requirements contained in
Sec.  543.5 and the specific content requirements of Sec.  543.6.
    In addressing the specific content requirements of 543.6, Nissan
provided information on the reliability and durability of its proposed
device. Nissan stated that its antitheft device is tested for specific
parameters to ensure its reliability and durability. Nissan provided a
detailed list of the tests conducted and believes that the device is
reliable and durable since the device complied with its specified
requirements for each test. Nissan further stated that its immobilizer
device satisfies the European Directive ECE R116, including tamper
resistance. Nissan also stated that all control units for the device
are located inside the vehicle, providing further protection from
unauthorized accessibility of the device from outside the vehicle.
    Nissan stated that activation of its immobilizer device occurs
automatically when the ignition switch is turned to the ``OFF''
position which then causes the security indicator light to flash
notifying the operator that the immobilizer device is activated. Nissan
stated that the immobilizer device prevents normal operation of the
vehicle without using a specially-designed microchip key with a pre-
registered ``Key-ID''. Nissan also stated that, when the brake and
clutch is on and the key FOB is near the engine start switch, the Key-
ID is scanned via the immobilizer antenna. The microchip in the key
transmits the Key-ID to the BCM, beginning an encrypted communication
process. If the Key-ID and encrypted code are correct, the ECM will
allow the engine to keep running and the driver to operate the vehicle.
If the Key-ID and encrypted code are not correct, the ECM will cause
the engine to shut down.
    Nissan stated that the proposed device is functionally equivalent
to the antitheft device installed on the MY

2011 Nissan Cube vehicle line which was granted a parts-marking
exemption by the agency on April 14, 2010 (75 FR 19458). The agency
notes that the theft rates for the Nissan Cube using an average of 3
MYs data (2012-2014), are 0.3322, 0.6471 and 2.0373 respectively.
    Nissan provided data on the effectiveness of the antitheft device
installed on its (confidential) vehicle line in support of the belief
that its antitheft device will be highly effective in reducing and
deterring theft. Nissan referenced the National Insurance Crime
Bureau's data which it stated showed a 70% reduction in theft when
comparing MY 1997 Ford Mustangs (with a standard immobilizer) to MY
1995 Ford Mustangs (without an immobilizer). Nissan also referenced the
Highway Loss Data Institute's data which reported that BMW vehicles
experienced theft loss reductions resulting in a 73% decrease in
relative claim frequency and a 78% lower average loss payment per claim
for vehicles equipped with an immobilizer. Additionally, Nissan stated
that theft rates for its Pathfinder vehicle experienced reductions from
model year (MY) 2000 to 2001 with implementation of the engine
immobilizer device as standard equipment and further significant
reductions subsequent to MY 2001. Specifically, Nissan noted that the
agency's theft rate data for MY's 2001 through 2006 reported theft
rates of 1.9146, 1.8011, 1.1482, 0.8102, 1.7298 and 1.3474 respectively
for the Nissan Pathfinder.
    Nissan compared its device to other similar devices previously
granted exemptions by the agency. Specifically, it referenced the
agency's grant of full exemptions to General Motors Corporation for its
Buick Riviera and Oldsmobile Aurora vehicle lines (58 FR 44872, August
25, 1993) and its Cadillac Seville vehicle line (62 FR 20058, April 24,
1997) from the parts-marking requirements of the theft prevention
standard. Nissan stated that it believes that since its device is
functionally equivalent to other comparable manufacturer's devices that
have already been granted parts-marking exemptions by the agency, along
with the evidence of reduced theft rates for vehicle lines equipped
with similar devices and advanced technology of transponder electronic
security, the Nissan immobilizer device will have the potential to
achieve the level of effectiveness equivalent to those vehicles already
exempted by the agency. The agency agrees that the device is
substantially similar to devices installed on other vehicle lines for
which the agency has already granted exemptions
    Based on the supporting evidence submitted by Nissan, the agency
believes that the antitheft device for the (confidential) vehicle line
is likely to be as effective in reducing and deterring motor vehicle
theft as compliance with the parts-marking requirements of the Theft
Prevention Standard (49 CFR part 541). The agency concludes that the
device will provide four of the five types of performance listed in
Sec.  543.6(a)(3): Promoting activation; preventing defeat or
circumvention of the device by unauthorized persons; preventing
operation of the vehicle by unauthorized entrants; and ensuring the
reliability and durability of the device.
    Pursuant to 49 U.S.C. 33106 and 49 CFR 543.7(b), the agency grants
a petition for exemption from the parts-marking requirements of Part
541 either in whole or in part, if it determines that, based upon
substantial evidence, the standard equipment antitheft device is likely
to be as effective in reducing and deterring motor vehicle theft as
compliance with the parts-marking requirements of Part 541. The agency
finds that Nissan has provided adequate reasons for its belief that the
antitheft device for the (confidential) vehicle line is likely to be as
effective in reducing and deterring motor vehicle theft as compliance
with the parts-marking requirements of the Theft Prevention Standard
(49 CFR part 541). This conclusion is based on the information Nissan
provided about its device.
    For the foregoing reasons, the agency hereby grants in full
Nissan's petition for exemption for the Nissan (confidential) vehicle
line from the parts-marking requirements of 49 CFR part 541. The agency
notes that 49 CFR part 541, Appendix A-1, identifies those lines that
are exempted from the Theft Prevention Standard for a given model year.
49 CFR part 543.7(f) contains publication requirements incident to the
disposition of all Part 543 petitions. Advanced listing, including the
release of future product nameplates, the beginning model year for
which the petition is granted and a general description of the
antitheft device is necessary in order to notify law enforcement
agencies of new vehicle lines exempted from the parts-marking
requirements of the Theft Prevention Standard. As a condition to the
formal granting of Nissan's petition for exemption from the parts-
marking requirements of 49 CFR part 541 for the MY 2018 (confidential)
vehicle line, the agency fully expects Nissan to notify the agency of
the nameplate for the vehicle line prior to its introduction into the
United States commerce for sale.
    If Nissan decides not to use the exemption for this line, it must
formally notify the agency. If such a decision is made, the line must
be fully marked according to the requirements under 49 CFR parts 541.5
and 541.6 (marking of major component parts and replacement parts).
    NHTSA notes that if Nissan wishes in the future to modify the
device on which this exemption is based, the company may have to submit
a petition to modify the exemption. Part 543.7(d) states that a Part
543 exemption applies only to vehicles that belong to a line exempted
under this part and equipped with the antitheft device on which the
line's exemption is based. Further, Part 543.9(c)(2) provides for the
submission of petitions ``to modify an exemption to permit the use of
an antitheft device similar to but differing from the one specified in
that exemption.''
    The agency wishes to minimize the administrative burden that Part
543.9(c)(2) could place on exempted vehicle manufacturers and itself.
The agency did not intend in drafting Part 543 to require the
submission of a modification petition for every change to the
components or design of an antitheft device. The significance of many
such changes could be de minimis. Therefore, NHTSA suggests that if the
manufacturer contemplates making any changes, the effects of which
might be characterized as de minimis, it should consult the agency
before preparing and submitting a petition to modify.

    Issued in Washington, DC, under authority delegated in 49 CFR
part 1.95.
Raymond R. Posten,
Associate Administrator for Rulemaking.
[FR Doc. 2017-12881 Filed 6-20-17; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 4910-59-P


[Federal Register Volume 81, Number 211 (Tuesday, November 1, 2016)]
[Notices]
[Page 75899]
[FR Doc No: 2016-26354]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

Agency Information Collection Activities: Requests for Comments;
Clearance of Renewed Approval of Information Collection: Certification
of Aircraft and Airmen for the Operation of Light-Sport Aircraft

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Notice and request for comments.

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

SUMMARY: In accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, FAA
invites public comments about our intention to request the Office of
Management and Budget (OMB) approval to renew a previously approved
information collection. Information is maintained by owners and
operators of light-sport aircraft and is collected to be used by FAA
safety inspectors in determining whether required maintenance actions
have been accomplished on light-sport aircraft. The information is also
used when investigating accidents.

DATES: Written comments should be submitted by January 3, 2017.

ADDRESSES: Send comments to the FAA at the following address: Ronda
Thompson, Federal Aviation Administration, ASP-110, 800 Independence
Ave. SW., Washington, DC 20591.

PUBLIC COMMENTS INVITED: You are asked to comment on any aspect of this
information collection, including (a) Whether the proposed collection
of information is necessary for FAA's performance; (b) the accuracy of
the estimated burden; (c) ways for FAA to enhance the quality, utility
and clarity of the information collection; and (d) ways that the burden
could be minimized without reducing the quality of the collected
information. The agency will summarize and/or include your comments in
the request for OMB's clearance of this information collection.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ronda Thompson by email at:
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
    OMB Control Number: 2120-0730.
    Title: Certification of Aircraft and Airmen for the Operation of
Light-Sport Aircraft.
    Form Numbers: There are no FAA forms associated.
    Type of Review: Renewal of an information collection.
    Background: 14 CFR 91.417, requires the owners and operators of
light-sport aircraft to maintain a record of the current status of
applicable safety directives and transfer that information at the time
of sale of the aircraft. The information is used by FAA safety
inspectors in determining whether required maintenance actions have
been accomplished on aircraft. The information is also used when
investigating accidents.
    Respondents: Approximately 1000 operators/owners.
    Frequency: On occasion.
    Estimated Average Burden per Response: 2 hours.
    Estimated Total Annual Burden: 2,133 hours.

    Issued in Washington, DC on October 26, 2016.
Ronda Thompson,
FAA Information Collection Clearance Officer, Performance, Policy, and
Records Management Branch, ASP-110.
[FR Doc. 2016-26354 Filed 10-31-16; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


[Federal Register Volume 82, Number 183 (Friday, September 22, 2017)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 44367-44368]
[FR Doc No: 2017-20195]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES

Food and Drug Administration

21 CFR Part 573

[Docket No. FDA-2017-F-4399]

Zinpro Corp.; Filing of Food Additive Petition (Animal Use)

AGENCY: Food and Drug Administration, HHS.

ACTION: Notification; petition for rulemaking.

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

SUMMARY: The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) is announcing that
Zinpro Corp. has filed a petition proposing that the food additive
regulations be amended to provide for the safe use of chromium DL-
methionine as a nutritional source of chromium in cattle feed.

DATES: Submit either electronic or written comments on the petitioner's
environmental assessment by October 23, 2017.

ADDRESSES: You may submit comments as follows. Please note that late,
untimely filed comments will not be considered. Electronic comments
must be submitted on or before October 23, 2017. The https://www.regulations.gov electronic filing system will accept comments until
midnight Eastern Time at the end of October 23, 2017. Comments received
by mail/hand delivery/courier (for written/paper submissions) will be
considered timely if they are postmarked or the delivery service
acceptance receipt is on or before that date.

Electronic Submissions

    Submit electronic comments in the following way:
     Federal eRulemaking Portal: https://www.regulations.gov.
Follow the instructions for submitting comments. Comments submitted
electronically, including attachments, to https://www.regulations.gov
will be posted to the docket unchanged. Because your comment will be
made public, you are solely responsible for ensuring that your comment
does not include any confidential information that you or a third party
may not wish to be posted, such as medical information, your or anyone
else's Social Security number, or confidential business information,
such as a manufacturing process. Please note that if you include your
name, contact information, or other information that identifies you in
the body of your comment, that information will be posted on https://www.regulations.gov.
     If you want to submit a comment with confidential
information that you do not wish to be made available to the public,
submit the comment as a written/paper submission and in the manner
detailed (see ``Written/Paper Submissions'' and ``Instructions'').

Written/Paper Submissions

    Submit written/paper submissions as follows:
     Mail/Hand delivery/Courier (for written/paper
submissions): Dockets Management Staff (HFA-305), Food and Drug
Administration, 5630 Fishers Lane, Rm. 1061, Rockville, MD 20852.
     For written/paper comments submitted to the Dockets
Management Staff, FDA will post your comment, as well as any
attachments, except for information submitted, marked and identified,
as confidential, if submitted as detailed in ``Instructions.''
    Instructions: All submissions received must include the Docket No.
FDA-2017-F-4399 for ``Food Additives Permitted in Feed and Drinking
Water of Animals; Chromium DL-Methionine.'' Received comments, those
filed in a timely manner (see ADDRESSES), will be placed in the docket
and, except for those submitted as ``Confidential Submissions,''
publicly viewable at https://www.regulations.gov or at the Dockets
Management Staff between 9 a.m. and 4 p.m., Monday through Friday.
     Confidential Submissions--To submit a comment with
confidential information that you do not wish to be made publicly
available, submit your comment only as a written/paper submission. You
should submit two copies total. One copy will include the information
you claim to be confidential with a heading or cover note that states
``THIS DOCUMENT CONTAINS CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION.'' The Agency will
review this copy, including the claimed confidential information, in
its consideration of comments. The second copy, which will have the
claimed confidential information redacted/blacked out, will be
available for public viewing and posted on https://www.regulations.gov.
Submit both copies to the Dockets Management Staff. If you do not wish
your name and contact information to be made publicly available, you
can provide this information on the cover sheet and not in the body of
your comments and you must identify this information as
``confidential.'' Any information marked as ``confidential'' will not
be disclosed except in accordance with 21 CFR 10.20 and other
applicable disclosure law. For more information about FDA's posting of
comments to public dockets, see 80 FR 56469, September 18, 2015, or
access the information at: https://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/FR-2015-09-18/pdf/2015-23389.pdf.
    Docket: For access to the docket to read background documents or
the electronic and written/paper comments received, go to https://www.regulations.gov and insert the docket number, found in brackets in
the heading of this document, into the ``Search'' box and follow the
prompts and/or go to the Dockets Management Staff, 5630 Fishers Lane,
Rm. 1061, Rockville, MD 20852.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Carissa Doody, Center for Veterinary
Medicine, Food and Drug Administration, 7519 Standish Pl., Rockville,
MD 20855,<PHONE_NUMBER><EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Under the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic
Act (section 409(b)(5) (21 U.S.C. 348(b)(5)), notice is given that a
food additive petition (FAP 2300) has been filed by the Zinpro Corp.,
10400 Viking Dr., Suite 240, Eden Prairie, MN 55344. The petition
proposes to amend Title 21 of the Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) in
part 573 Food Additives Permitted in Feed and Drinking Water of Animals
(21 CFR part 573) to provide for the safe use of chromium DL-methionine
as a nutritional source of chromium in cattle feed.
    The potential environmental impact of this action is being
reviewed. To encourage public participation consistent with regulations
issued under the National Environmental Policy Act (40 CFR 1501.4(b)),
the Agency is placing the environmental assessment (EA) submitted with
the petition that is the subject of this notice on public display at
the Dockets Management Staff for public review and comment (see DATES
and ADDRESSES). FDA will also place on public display any amendments
to, or comments on, the petitioner's EA without further announcement in
the Federal Register.
    If, based on its review, the Agency finds that an environmental
impact statement is not required and this petition results in a
regulation, the notice of availability of the Agency's finding of no
significant impact and the evidence supporting that finding will be
published with the regulation in the Federal Register in accordance
with 21 CFR 25.51(b).

    Dated: September 15, 2017.
Anna K. Abram,
Deputy Commissioner for Policy, Planning, Legislation, and Analysis.
[FR Doc. 2017-20195 Filed 9-21-17; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 4164-01-P


[Federal Register: November 10, 2005 (Volume 70, Number 217)]
[Notices]
[Page 68424]
[DOCID:fr10no05-81]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Docket No. RP05-473-001]

KO Transmission Company; Notice of Compliance Filing

November 4, 2005.
    Take notice that on November 1, 2005, KO Transmission Company (KOT)
tendered for filing as part of its FERC Gas Tariff, Original Volume No.
1, the following tariff sheets, to become effective December 1, 2005:

Third Revised Sheet No. 50
Third Revised Sheet No. 51
Third Revised Sheet No. 52
Third Revised Sheet No. 54
Original Sheet No. 60A
Original Sheet No. 60B
Third Revised Sheet No. 139
Third Revised Sheet No. 140
Seventh Revised Sheet No. 147

    KOT states that these proposed changes is made to comply with the
Commission's letter order dated August 19, 2005 under Docket No. RP05-
473-000.
    Any person desiring to protest this filing must file in accordance
with Rule 211 of the Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedure (18
CFR 385.211). Protests to this filing will be considered by the
Commission in determining the appropriate action to be taken, but will
not serve to make protestants parties to the proceeding. Such protests
must be filed in accordance with the provisions of section 154.210 of
the Commission's regulations (18 CFR 154.210). Anyone filing a protest
must serve a copy of that document on all the parties to the
proceeding.
    The Commission encourages electronic submission of protests in lieu
of paper using the ``eFiling'' link at http://www.ferc.gov. Persons

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

``eLibrary'' link and is available for review in the Commission's
Public Reference Room in Washington, DC. There is an ``eSubscription''
link on the Web site that enables subscribers to receive e-mail
notification when a document is added to a subscribed docket(s). For
assistance with any FERC Online service, please e-mail
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or call<PHONE_NUMBER> (toll free). For

TTY, call<PHONE_NUMBER>.

Magalie R. Salas,
Secretary.
 [FR Doc. E5-6223 Filed 11-9-05; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 78, Number 82 (Monday, April 29, 2013)]
[Notices]
[Pages 25116-25118]
[FR Doc No: 2013-10019]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-69435; File No. SR-CME-2013-04]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; Chicago Mercantile Exchange Inc.;
Notice of Filing of Proposed Rule Change Related to the Liquidity
Factor of CME's CDS Margin Methodology

April 23, 2013.
    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 April 9, 2013, Chicago Mercantile Exchange Inc. (``CME'') filed with
the Securities and Exchange Commission (``Commission'') the proposed
rule change as described in Items I, II, and III below, which Items
have been prepared primarily by CME. The Commission is publishing this
notice to solicit comments on the proposed rule change from interested
persons.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

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

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

    CME proposes to make an adjustment to one particular component of
its current credit default swap (``CDS'') margin model. The text of the
proposed rule change is below. Italicized text indicates additions;
bracketed text indicates deletions.
* * * * *

CME CDS Liquidity Margin Factor Calculation Methodology

    The Liquidity Factor will be calculated as the sum of two
components:
    (1) A concentration charge for market exposure as a function of
absolute Spread DV01 (a portfolio sensitivity to 1% par spread
shock); and
    (2) A concentration charge for portfolio basis exposure as a
function of Residual Spread DV01 (which is the difference between
the Gross Spread DV01 and the Net Spread DV01 of the portfolio).
    CME will also establish a floor component to the Liquidity
Factor using the current Gross Notional Function with the following
modifications: (1) the concentration scalar will be removed; and (2)
the maximum DST would be replaced by series-tenor specific DST
values based on the series and tenor of the relevant HY and IG
positions, as applicable.
* * * * *

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

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

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

    CME's currently approved CDS margin methodology utilizes a ``multi-
factor'' portfolio model to determine margin requirements for CDS
instruments. The model incorporates risk-based factors that are
designed to represent the different risks inherent to CDS products. The
factors are aggregated to determine the total amount of margin required
to protect a portfolio against exposures resulting from daily changes
in CDS spreads. For both total and minimum margin calculations, CME
evaluates each CDS contract held within a portfolio. These positions
are distinguished by the single name of the underlying entity, the CDS
tenor, the notional amount of the position, and the fixed spread or
coupon rate. For consistency, margins for CDS indices in a portfolio
are handled based on the required margin for each of the underlying
components of the index.
    CME proposes to make an adjustment to one particular component of
its current CDS margin model, the liquidity risk factor. This CDS
margin model component is designed to capture the risk that
concentrated positions may be difficult or costly to unwind following
the default of a CDS clearing member.
The Liquidity Risk Factor in CME's Current CDS Margin Model
    The current liquidity/concentration factor (``Liquidity Factor'')
of CME's margin methodology for a portfolio of CDS indices is the
product of (1) The gross notional amount for each family (i.e., CDX IG
or CDX HY) of CDS positions in a portfolio (2) the current bid/ask of
the 5 year tenor of the ``on the run'' (OTR) contract (3) the Duration/
Series/Tenor (``DST'') factor and (4) a concentration factor based upon
the gross notional for each of the CDX IG and CDX HY contracts (``Gross
Notional Function''). The associated margin for a CDS portfolio
attributed to the Liquidity Factor is the sum of the Liquidity Factor
calculations for each family of CDS positions in the portfolio.
    The calculation of the Liquidity Factor is based on the premise
that the 5-year OTR index is the most liquid CDS index product. As
such, the methodology is designed to evaluate the liquidity exposure of
each position in a CDS portfolio relative to the 5-year OTR index.
    For each index family (i.e., CDX IG and CDX HY), a DST matrix is
calculated based on the historical bid-ask averages of each cleared
position relative to the OTR 5-year historical bid-ask averages. Then,
the maximum DST values are used as the DST factors. Such maximum DST
factors are then applied to the product of 5-year OTR bid-ask spread
(adjusted for duration for CDX IG only) and the Gross Notional of all
positions within each index family. The resulting products are further
scaled by concentration factors in order to account for oversized (as
measured by Gross Notional) portfolios. The concentration factors are
based on exponential functions of the Gross Notional of each index
family in a given portfolio.
Proposed Changes to the Liquidity Risk Factor
    As liquidation costs are dependent on the risk in a portfolio, CME
is proposing to use an index portfolio's market risk rather than its
gross notional as the basis for determining the margins associated with
the Liquidity Factor. The proposed changes would calculate the
Liquidity Factor as the sum of two components:
    (1) A concentration charge for market exposure as a function of
absolute Spread DV01 (a portfolio sensitivity to 1% par spread shock);
and
    (2) A concentration charge for portfolio basis exposure as a
function of Residual Spread DV01 (which is the difference between the
Gross Spread DV01 and the Net Spread DV01 of the portfolio).
    CME expects that these proposed changes would not generally impact
smaller portfolios whose liquidation costs are driven by the market
bid/ask spread rather than by the cost of hedging, and are therefore
adequately captured by the existing Liquidity Factor methodology. To
account for the risks associated with such smaller portfolios, CME also
proposes to establish a floor component to the Liquidity Factor using
the current Gross Notional Function described above with the following
modifications: (1) The concentration scalar would be removed as
concentration risk would already be accounted for by the concentration
charge component outlined above; and (2) the maximum DST would be
replaced by series-tenor specific DST values based on the series and
tenor of the relevant HY and IG positions, as applicable. CME expects
that large (by notional amount) portfolios will be impacted by the
proposed changes more than smaller portfolios.
    The proposed liquidity risk factor model adjustments do not require
any changes to rule text in the CME rulebook and do not necessitate any
changes to CME's CDS Manual of Operations. The change will be announced
to CDS market participants in an advisory notice that will be issued
prior to implementation.
    CME believes the proposed rule change is consistent with the
requirements of the Exchange Act and the rules and regulations
thereunder, including Section 17A of the Exchange Act.\3\ The
enhancements to CME's current CDS margin methodology will facilitate
the prompt and accurate settlement of derivative agreements, contracts
and transactions for which CME is responsible and will contribute

to the safeguarding of securities and funds in CME's custody or control
or for which CME is responsible. CME believes the proposed rule change
accomplishes those objectives because the changes are designed to
incorporate how the liquidity risk factor is affected by not only
portfolio concentration based on gross notional, but also the
composition of the portfolio based on an underlying strategy. CME
believes the proposed rule change would therefore better align CME's
margin methodology with the liquidity profile of the actual instruments
in the portfolio and would therefore contribute to the safeguarding of
securities and funds in CME's custody or control or for which CME is
responsible.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ 15 U.S.C. 78q-1.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

    CME does not believe that the proposed rule change will have any
impact, or impose any burden, on competition.

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

    CME has not solicited comments regarding this proposed rule change.
CME has not received any unsolicited written comments from interested
parties.

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

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

IV. Solicitation of Comments

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

Electronic Comments

     Use the Commission's Internet comment form (http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml); or
     Send an email to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Please include
File Number SR-CME-2013-04 on the subject line.

Paper Comments

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

All submissions should refer to File Number SR-CME-2013-04. This file
number should be included on the subject line if email is used. To help
the Commission process and review your comments more efficiently,
please use only one method. The Commission will post all comments on
the Commission's Internet Web site (http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml). Copies of the submission, all subsequent amendments, all
written statements with respect to the proposed rule change that are
filed with the Commission, and all written communications relating to
the proposed rule change between the Commission and any person, other
than those that may be withheld from the public in accordance with the
provisions of 5 U.S.C. 552, will be available for Web site viewing and
printing in the Commission's Public Reference Room, 100 F Street NE.,
Washington, DC 20549, on official business days between the hours of
10:00 a.m. and 3:00 p.m. Copies of such filing also will be available
for inspection and copying at the principal office of CME and on CME's
Web site at http://www.cmegroup.com/market-regulation/files/sec_19b-4_13-04.pdf.
    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-CME-2013-04
and should be submitted on or before May 20, 2013.

    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets,
pursuant to delegated authority.\4\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Elizabeth M. Murphy,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2013-10019 Filed 4-26-13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 86, Number 1 (Monday, January 4, 2021)]
[Notices]
[Pages 162-163]
[FR Doc No: 2020-29022]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-90805; File No. SR-DTC-2020-020]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; The Depository Trust Company;
Notice of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of a Proposed Rule Change
To Add a Fee for the New ClaimConnect\TM\ Service

December 28, 2020.
    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 December 18, 2020, The Depository Trust Company (``DTC'') filed with
the Securities and Exchange Commission (``Commission'') the proposed
rule change as described in Items I, II and III below, which Items have
been prepared by the clearing agency. DTC filed the proposed rule
change pursuant to Section 19(b)(3)(A) of the Act \3\ and Rule 19b-
4(f)(2) 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).
    \4\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(2).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

I. Clearing Agency's Statement of the Terms of Substance of the
Proposed Rule Change

    The proposed rule change \5\ consists of amendments to the Guide to
the DTC Fee Schedule (``Fee Guide'') \6\ to add a fee for the new
ClaimConnect service at DTC,\7\ as described in greater detail below.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ Capitalized terms not defined herein are defined in the
Rules, By-Laws and Organization Certificate of DTC (``Rules'')
available at http://www.dtcc.com/~/media/Files/Downloads/legal/
rules/dtc_rules.pdf, or in the ClaimConnect\TM\ Service Guide
available at https://www.dtcc.com/-/media/Files/Downloads/legal/service-guides/ClaimConnect.pdf.
    \6\ Available at http://www.dtcc.com/-/media/Files/Downloads/legal/fee-guides/dtcfeeguide.pdf.
    \7\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 90481 (November 23,
2020), 85 FR 76640 (November 30, 2020) (SR-DTC-2020-012) (``Approval
Order'').
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

II. Clearing Agency's Statement of the Purpose of, and Statutory Basis
for, the Proposed Rule Change

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

(A) Clearing Agency's Statement of the Purpose of, and Statutory Basis
for, the Proposed Rule Change

1. Purpose
    The purpose of the proposed rule change is to amend the Fee Guide
to add a fee for the new ClaimConnect service at DTC.
    ClaimConnect, an optional DTC service, enables Participants to
bilaterally match and settle cash claim transactions at DTC.\8\ More
specifically, ClaimConnect is a validation and matching engine that
continually monitors claims throughout their lifecycle in order to
settle and close claims through DTC's settlement process. Claims can be
matched manually (i.e., Affirmed) by ClaimConnect users or
automatically (i.e., Auto-matched) by the ClaimConnect service when it
matches two like claims based on the alignment of certain data
elements. Once matched, claims are settled through systematic
Securities Payment Orders (``SPOs'') generated and submitted by
ClaimConnect at set times intraday on a settlement date.\9\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \8\ With respect to ClaimConnect, a cash claim or cash claim
transaction is a cash entitlement (i.e., a request for cash) from
one Participant to another Participant. Typically, cash claims arise
as a result of trading exceptions from a Corporate Action event,
where a cash entitlement needs to be delivered from one holder to
another. Trading exceptions include, but are not limited to, trades
outside of the market's agreed upon settlement cycle, lack of due
bill fail tracking, stock loan or repo transaction discrepancy, or
tax treaty differences.
    \9\ See ClaimConnect Service Guide, supra note 5.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    With this proposed rule change, DTC is establishing a ClaimConnect
matching fee of a $1.75 per side, per-matched claim, whether or not the
claim is Affirmed or Auto-matched. In other words, both parties to a
matched claim will be charged $1.75, such that DTC would collect $3.50
for each matched claim.\10\ No charge will be assessed for claims that
do not match (e.g., Uncompared, DK-uncompared, or Canceled claims).\11\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \10\ Separate from ClaimConnect, an existing SPO fee of $.10 per
side, per SPO will continue to be charged. Fee ID 186, Fee Guide,
supra note 6.
    \11\ See ClaimConnect Service Guide, supra note 5, regarding
claim states.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    This per-side matching fee for claims processing will be new for
Participants that use Asset Services products. In choosing this fee and
fee structure, DTC considered various factors. First, DTC followed its
pricing policy of setting fees at cost plus a low-margin markup. The
``low-margin markup'' is applied to recover development costs and
operating expenses, and to accumulate capital sufficient to meet
regulatory and economic requirements. In consideration of that policy,
the aggregate amount of $3.50 per-matched claim will help facilitate a
four-year return on investment for DTC's creation of ClaimConnect and
help cover continued operating expenses for the service. Second, the
per-side structure was chosen to allocate the cost evenly between a
claim's two counterparties. Third, in order to align charges for the
ClaimConnect service with Participants' actual usage of the service,
the fee was structured as a per-usage fee (i.e., per-matched claim)
instead of a flat monthly or annual fixed-rate fee. Fourth, in setting
the fee, DTC was mindful that, although there are no competing
services, Participants could choose not to use ClaimConnect and
continue to settle claims as they did prior to ClaimConnect (e.g.,
using internal/proprietary systems, third-party software, or some
combination thereof). Fifth, DTC evaluated its existing Stock, Loan,
Repo & Fail Adjustments fee that DTC charges Participants for such
entitlement/allocation adjustment activity (``Adjustment Service
Fee''), similar to a cash claim.\12\ There, DTC charges a $1.50 per
adjustment, not per side. In other words, whichever party submits an
adjustment is charged $1.50. However, because there is no validation
and matching process for adjustments, unlike with ClaimConnect claims,
counterparties often need to submit multiple adjustments between each
other before reaching final agreement; thus, the total adjustment cost
routinely exceeds $3.50.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \12\ Fee ID 709, Fee Guide, supra note 6.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Changes to the Fee Guide
    To effectuate the ClaimConnect fee, the Corporate Action subsection
of the Custody and Securities Processing section of the Fee Guide will
be updated to include a ClaimConnect Matching Fee of $1.75, per each
claim side after matching.
Implementation Timeframe
    The ClaimConnect fee will be added to the 2021 Fee Guide and
charged beginning January 1, 2021.
2. Statutory Basis
    Section 17A(b)(3)(D) of the Act requires that DTC's Rules provide
for the equitable allocation of reasonable dues, fees, and other
charges among its Participants.\13\ DTC believes that the ClaimConnect
fee is consistent with this provision of the Act.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \13\ 15 U.S.C. 78q-1(b)(3)(D).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    As described above, the ClaimConnect service is an optional service
that was

developed based on discussions with Participants to enable them to
bilaterally match and settle cash claim transactions at DTC.\14\
Pursuant to this proposed rule change, DTC is establishing an aggregate
fee of $3.50 per-matched claim. DTC believes the fee is equitably
allocated because, as described above, the fee will be divided evenly
between the two counterparties to a claim, such that each side of the
claim will be charge $1.75 per-matched claim, which reflects the
counterparties' shared usage of the service in settling a claim.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \14\ See Approval Order, supra note 7.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    DTC believes the fee is reasonable because, as described above, (i)
it is consistent with DTC's cost plus low-margin markup pricing policy;
(ii) it is expected to produce a four-year return on DTC's investment
in developing ClaimConnect, compared to a higher fee that would produce
a quicker return, while helping cover continued operating expenses for
the service; (iii) it is structured so that both parties to a claim pay
the same amount; (iv) it is structured to align charges for the service
with actual usage of the service; and (v) it was set in consideration
of a similar, existing fee (i.e., the Adjustment Service Fee) but
knowing that parties to a claim will not need to submit additional
claims and pay additional ClaimConnect fees to reach agreement on a
claim, given the service's validation and matching process.

(B) Clearing Agency's Statement on Burden on Competition

    DTC does not believe that the ClaimConnect fee will have any impact
on competition.
    As described above, DTC believes that the proposed fee is
equitable, reasonable, and on par with fees for other DTC services
(e.g., the Adjustment Service Fee) already used by Participants. As
such, there is no expectation that this particular fee would cause any
competitive advantages or disadvantages among Participants. Moreover,
although there is no service in direct competition with ClaimConnect,
Participants are able to settle their cash claims without using
ClaimConnect, as they did prior to DTC establishing the service. As
such, it will be up to Participants to decide whether settling claims
via the ClaimConnect service is worth the cost. If a Participant
concludes that the manner in which it was settling claims prior to
ClaimConnect (e.g., using internal/proprietary systems, a third-party
software, or some combination thereof) is preferable (whether due to
cost, functionality, or some other factor), then the Participant can
simply choose not to use ClaimConnect and continue to settle claims
away from DTC. Given this optionality, DTC believes that the proposed
fee should not place any Participants at a relative disadvantage
compared to other Participants.

(C) Clearing Agency's Statement on Comments on the Proposed Rule Change
Received From Members, Participants, or Others

    Written comments relating to this proposed rule change have not
been solicited or received. DTC will notify the Commission of any
written comments received by DTC.

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

    The foregoing rule change has become effective pursuant to Section
19(b)(3)(A) \15\ of the Act and paragraph (f) \16\ of Rule 19b-4
thereunder. At any time within 60 days of the filing of the proposed
rule change, the Commission summarily may temporarily suspend 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.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \15\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A).
    \16\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

IV. Solicitation of Comments

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

Electronic Comments

     Use the Commission's internet comment form (http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml); or
     Send an email to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Please include
File Number SR-DTC-2020-020 on the subject line.

Paper Comments

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

All submissions should refer to File Number SR-DTC-2020-020. This file
number should be included on the subject line if email is used. To help
the Commission process and review your comments more efficiently,
please use only one method. The Commission will post all comments on
the Commission's internet website (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 website 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 DTC and on DTCC's website
(http://dtcc.com/legal/sec-rule-filings.aspx). All comments received
will be posted without change. Persons submitting comments are
cautioned that we do not redact or edit personal identifying
information from comment submissions. You should submit only
information that you wish to make available publicly. All submissions
should refer to File Number SR-DTC-2020-020 and should be submitted on
or before January 25, 2021.

    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets,
pursuant to delegated authority.\17\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

J. Matthew DeLesDernier,
Assistant Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2020-29022 Filed 12-31-20; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011-01-P