[Federal Register Volume 78, Number 155 (Monday, August 12, 2013)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 48841-48842]
[FR Doc No: 2013-19455]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 71

[Docket No. FAA-2013-0176; Airspace Docket No. 13-AGL-13]

Proposed Amendment of Class E Airspace; Kankakee, IL

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM).

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

SUMMARY: This action proposes to amend Class E airspace at Kankakee,
IL. Additional controlled airspace is necessary to accommodate amended
Standard Instrument Approach Procedures (SIAP) at Greater Kankakee
Airport. The FAA is taking this action to enhance the safety and
management of Instrument Flight Rules (IFR) operations for SIAPs at the
airport. Geographic coordinates would also be updated.

DATES: Comments must be received on or before September 26, 2013.

ADDRESSES: Send comments on this proposal to the U.S. Department of
Transportation, Docket Operations, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., West
Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140, Washington, DC 20590-0001. You
must identify the docket number FAA-2013-0176/Airspace Docket No. 13-
AGL-13, at the beginning of your comments. You may also submit comments
through the Internet at http://www.regulations.gov. You may review the
public docket containing the proposal, any comments received, and any
final disposition in person in the Dockets Office between 9:00 a.m. and
5:00 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays. The Docket
Office (telephone 1-800-647-5527), is on the ground floor of the
building at the above address.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Scott Enander, Central Service Center,
Operations Support Group, Federal Aviation Administration, Southwest
Region, 2601 Meacham Blvd., Fort Worth, TX 76137; telephone: 817-321-
7716.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Comments Invited

    Interested parties are invited to participate in this proposed
rulemaking by submitting such written data, views, or arguments, as
they may desire. Comments that provide the factual basis supporting the
views and suggestions presented are particularly helpful in developing
reasoned regulatory

decisions on the proposal. Comments are specifically invited on the
overall regulatory, aeronautical, economic, environmental, and energy-
related aspects of the proposal. Communications should identify both
docket numbers and be submitted in triplicate to the address listed
above. Commenters wishing the FAA to acknowledge receipt of their
comments on this notice of proposed rulemaking must submit with those
comments a self-addressed, stamped postcard on which the following
statement is made: ``Comments to Docket No. FAA-2013-0176/Airspace
Docket No. 13-AGL-13.'' The postcard will be date/time stamped and
returned to the commenter.

Availability of NPRMs

    An electronic copy of this document may be downloaded through the
Internet at http://www.regulations.gov. Recently published rulemaking
documents can also be accessed through the FAA's Web page at http://www.faa.gov/airports_airtraffic/air_traffic/publications/airspace_amendments/.
    You may review the public docket containing the proposal, any
comments received and any final disposition in person in the Dockets
Office (see ``ADDRESSES'' section for address and phone number) between
9:00 a.m. and 5:00 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal
holidays. An informal docket may also be examined during normal
business hours at the office of the Central Service Center, 2601
Meacham Blvd., Fort Worth, TX 76137.
    Persons interested in being placed on a mailing list for future
NPRMs should contact the FAA's Office of Rulemaking<PHONE_NUMBER>, to
request a copy of Advisory Circular No. 11-2A, Notice of Proposed
Rulemaking Distribution System, which describes the application
procedure.

The Proposal

    This action proposes to amend Title 14, Code of Federal Regulations
(14 CFR), Part 71 by amending Class E airspace extending upward from
700 feet above the surface to accommodate amended standard instrument
approach procedures at Greater Kankakee Airport, Kankakee, IL.
Accordingly, segments would extend from the 7-mile radius of the
airport to 16 miles and 16.6 miles southwest and 7.5 miles northeast of
the airport, to retain the safety and management of IFR aircraft in
Class E airspace to/from the en route environment. Geographic
coordinates of the airport would also be updated to coincide with the
FAA's aeronautical database.
    Class E airspace areas are published in Paragraph 6005 of FAA Order
7400.9W, dated August 8, 2012 and effective September 15, 2012, which
is incorporated by reference in 14 CFR 71.1. The Class E airspace
designation listed in this document would be published subsequently in
the Order.
    The FAA has determined that this proposed 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. Since this is a routine matter that
will only affect air traffic procedures and air navigation, it is
certified that this proposed rule, when promulgated, will not have a
significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities
under the criteria of the Regulatory Flexibility Act.
    The FAA's authority to issue rules regarding aviation safety is
found in Title 49 of the U.S. Code. Subtitle 1, Section 106 describes
the authority of the FAA Administrator. Subtitle VII, Aviation
Programs, describes in more detail the scope of the agency's authority.
This rulemaking is promulgated under the authority described in
Subtitle VII, Part A, Subpart I, Section 40103. Under that section, the
FAA is charged with prescribing regulations to assign the use of
airspace necessary to ensure the safety of aircraft and the efficient
use of airspace. This proposed regulation is within the scope of that
authority as it would amend controlled airspace at Greater Kankakee
Airport, Kankakee, IL.

Environmental Review

    This proposal will be subject to an environmental analysis in
accordance with FAA Order 1050.1E, ``Environmental Impacts: Policies
and Procedures'' prior to any FAA final regulatory action.

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 71

    Airspace, Incorporation by reference, Navigation (Air)

The Proposed Amendment

    In consideration of the foregoing, the Federal Aviation
Administration proposes to amend 14 CFR Part 71 as follows:

PART 71--DESIGNATION OF CLASS A, B, C, D, AND E AIRSPACE AREAS; AIR
TRAFFIC SERVICE ROUTES; AND REPORTING POINTS

0
1. The authority citation for part 71 continues to read as follows:

     Authority: 49 U.S.C. 106(g); 40103, 40113, 40120; E.O. 10854,
24 FR 9565, 3 CFR, 1959-1963 Comp., p. 389.

Sec.  71.1  [Amended]

0
2. The incorporation by reference in 14 CFR 71.1 of FAA Order 7400.9W,
Airspace Designations and Reporting Points, dated August 8, 2012, and
effective September 15, 2012, is amended as follows:

Paragraph 6005 Class E Airspace areas extending upward from 700
feet or more above the surface of the earth.

* * * * *

AGL IL E5 Kankakee, IL [Amended]

Kankakee, Greater Kankakee Airport, IL
    (Lat. 41[deg]04[min]17[sec] N., long. 87[deg]50[min]47[sec] W.)
Kankakee VOR/DME
    (Lat. 41[deg]04[min]28[sec] N., long. 87[deg]51[min]01[sec] W.)

    That airspace extending upward from 700 feet above the surface
within a 7-mile radius of Greater Kankakee Airport, and within 2
miles each side of the 218[deg] bearing from the airport extending
from the 7-mile radius of the airport to 16.6 miles southwest of the
airport, and within 4 miles northwest and 8 miles southeast of the
Kankakee VOR/DME 212[deg] radial extending from the 7-mile radius of
the airport to 16 miles southwest of the airport, and within 2.4
miles each side of the Kankakee VOR/DME 051[deg] radial extending
from the 7-mile radius of the airport to 7.5 miles northeast of the
airport.

    Issued in Fort Worth, TX, on July 26, 2013.
David P. Medina,
Manager, Operations Support Group, ATO Central Service Center.
[FR Doc. 2013-19455 Filed 8-9-13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


[Federal Register: June 25, 2009 (Volume 74, Number 121)]
[Notices]
[Page 30342-30345]
[DOCID:fr25jn09-87]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-60139; File No. SR-NYSEAmex-2009-18]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; Notice of Filing and Immediate
Effectiveness of Proposed Rule Change by NYSE Amex LLC Amending NYSE
Amex Equities Rule 124 To Clarify the Pricing Methodology for the Odd-
Lot Portion of a Part of a Round-Lot Order; Clarify the Systems Capable
of Accepting PRL Orders; and Clarify the Systems Capable of Accepting a
Good `Til Cancelled Order During the Implementation of Exchange System
Enhancements

June 18, 2009.
    Pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) \1\ of the Securities Exchange Act of
1934 (the ``Act'') \2\ and Rule 19b-4 thereunder,\3\ notice is hereby
given that, on June 8, 2009, NYSE Amex LLC (the ``Exchange'' or ``NYSE
Amex'') filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the
``Commission'') the proposed rule change as described in Items I and II
below, which Items have been prepared by the self-regulatory
organization. NYSE Amex filed the proposed rule change pursuant to
Section 19(b)(3)(A) of the Act \4\ and Rule 19b-4(f)(6) thereunder,\5\
which renders it effective upon filing with the Commission. 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\ 15 U.S.C. 78a.
    \3\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4.
    \4\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A).
    \5\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

    The Exchange proposes to: (i) Amend NYSE Amex Equities Rule 124
(Odd-Lot Orders) to clarify the pricing methodology for the odd-lot
portion of a part of a round-lot (``PRL'') order; (ii) clarify the
systems capable of accepting PRL orders; and (iii) clarify the systems
capable of accepting a Good `Til Cancelled Order (``GTC'') during the
implementation of Exchange system enhancements. The text of the
proposed rule change is available at the Exchange, the Commission's
Public Reference Room, and http://www.nyse.com.

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

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

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

1. Purpose
    NYSE Amex LLC (``NYSE Amex'' or ``the Exchange''), formerly the
American Stock Exchange LLC, proposes to: (i) Amend NYSE Amex Equities
Rule 124 (Odd-Lot Orders) to clarify the pricing methodology for the
odd-lot portion of a part of a round-lot (``PRL'') order; (ii) clarify
the systems capable of accepting PRL orders; and (iii) clarify the
systems capable of accepting a Good `Til Cancelled Order (``GTC'')
during the implementation of Exchange system enhancements. The text of
the proposed rule change is attached hereto as Exhibit 5.
    The Exchange notes that parallel changes are proposed to be made to
the rules of the New York Stock Exchange LLC (``NYSE'').\6\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ See SR-NYSE-2009-45 (filed June 8, 2009).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

I. Background

    As described more fully in a related rule filing,\7\ NYSE Euronext
acquired The Amex Membership Corporation (``AMC'') pursuant to an
Agreement and Plan of Merger, dated January 17, 2008 (the ``Merger'').
In connection with the Merger, the Exchange's predecessor, the American
Stock Exchange LLC (``Amex''), a subsidiary of AMC, became a subsidiary
of NYSE Euronext now called NYSE Amex LLC, and continues to operate as
a national securities exchange registered under Section 6 of the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended (the ``Act'').\8\ The
effective date of the Merger was October 1, 2008.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 58673 (September 29,
2008), 73 FR 57707 (October 3, 2008) (SR-NYSE-2008-60 and SR-Amex
2008-62) (approving the Merger).
    \8\ 15 U.S.C. 78f.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In connection with the Merger, on December 1, 2008, the Exchange
relocated all equities trading conducted on the Exchange legacy trading
systems and facilities located at 86 Trinity Place, New York, New York,
to trading systems and facilities located at 11 Wall Street, New York,
New York (the ``Equities Relocation''). The Exchange's equity trading
systems and facilities at 11 Wall Street (the ``NYSE Amex Trading
Systems'') are operated by the NYSE on behalf of the Exchange.\9\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \9\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 58705 (October 1,
2008), 73 FR 58995 (October 8, 2008) (SR-Amex 2008-63) (approving
the Equities Relocation).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    As part of the Equities Relocation, NYSE Amex adopted NYSE Rules 1-
1004, subject to such changes as necessary to apply the Rules to the
Exchange, as the NYSE Amex Equities Rules to govern trading on the NYSE
Amex Trading Systems.\10\ The NYSE Amex Equities Rules, which became
operative on December 1, 2008, are substantially identical to the
current NYSE Rules 1-1004 and the Exchange continues to update the NYSE
Amex Equities Rules as necessary to conform with rule changes to
corresponding NYSE Rules filed by the NYSE.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \10\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 58705 (October 1,
2008), 73 FR 58995 (October 8, 2008) (SR-Amex 2008-63) (approving
the Equities Relocation); Securities Exchange Act Release No. 58833
(October 22, 2008), 73 FR 64642 (October 30, 2008) (SR-NYSE-2008-
106) and Securities Exchange Act Release No. 58839 (October 23,
2008), 73 FR 64645 (October 30, 2008) (SR-NYSEALTR-2008-03)
(implementing the Bonds Relocation); Securities Exchange Act Release
No. 59022 (November 26, 2008), 73 FR 73683 (December 3, 2008) (SR-
NYSEALTR-2008-10) (adopting amendments to NYSE Amex Equities Rules
to track changes to corresponding NYSE Rules); Securities Exchange
Act Release No. 59027 (November 28, 2008), 73 FR 73681 (December 3,
2008) (SR-NYSEALTR-2008-11) (adopting amendments to Rule 62--NYSE
Amex Equities to track changes to corresponding NYSE Rule 62).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

II. Background of NYSE Amex Equities Rule 124

    Currently, odd-lot orders on the Exchange are processed and
executed systemically by an Exchange system designated solely for odd-
lot orders (the ``Odd-lot System'').\11\ The Odd-lot System executes
all odd-lot orders against the Designated Marker Maker (``DMM'') as the
contra party.\12\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \11\ See NYSE Amex Equities Rule 124(a).
    \12\ Id. Odd-lot orders are in effect netted against one another
and executed; however, since the DMM is buying the same amount that
he or she is selling, there is no economic consequence to the DMM in
this type of pairing-off of orders. Any imbalance of buy or sell
odd-lot market orders are executed against the DMM, up to the size
of the round-lot transaction or the bid/offer size which ever is
less.

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

    Pursuant to NYSE Amex Equities Rule 124(c), after odd-lot market
orders and marketable odd-lot limit orders are received by the Odd-lot
System, they are automatically executed at the price of the next round-
lot transaction in the subject security on the Exchange. Specifically,
marketable odd-lot orders and marketable odd-lot limit orders are
executed in time priority of receipt at the price of the next round-lot
transaction, pursuant to the netting provision described in footnote
12. The imbalance of marketable odd-lot orders that do not receive an
execution as a result of the netting provision are executed in time
priority of receipt at the price of the National Best Bid or Offer
(``NBBO''), subject to a volume limitation.\13\ Any imbalances of odd-
lot limit orders that were non-marketable upon receipt that
subsequently become marketable receive an execution at their limit
price.\14\ Marketable odd-lot orders, which would otherwise receive a
partial execution pursuant to the volume limitation, are executed in
full.\15\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \13\ The volume limitation in section (c) of the rule is defined
as the lesser of either the number of shares in the last round-lot
transaction or the number of shares available at the national best
bid (in the case of an odd-lot order to sell), or the national best
offer (in the case of an odd-lot order to buy).
    \14\ Pursuant to NYSE Amex Equities Rule 124(d) odd-lot limit
orders that are non-marketable upon receipt that become marketable
are eligible to be netted and executed at the price of the next
round-lot transaction. If an odd-lot limit order does not receive an
execution pursuant to the netting provision, then the order is
eligible to be executed, at its limit price, subject to the volume
limitation of section (c) of the rule.
    \15\ As with marketable odd-lot orders, non-marketable odd-lot
limit orders which would otherwise receive a partial execution will
be executed in full. A non-marketable odd-lot limit order that
becomes marketable, that remains unexecuted within 30 seconds of
receipt will be executed, in time priority of receipt, except that
the order will be executed at its limit price.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Any marketable odd-lot orders that do not receive an execution
because of the volume limitation are executed, in time priority of
receipt at the price of the next round-lot transaction, following
pricing and execution procedures described above. Marketable odd-lot
orders (including odd-lot limit orders that were non-marketable upon
receipt and subsequently become marketable) that remain unexecuted
within 30 seconds of receipt will be executed, in time priority of
receipt, at the price of the NBBO (or at its limit price if the order
is a non-marketable odd-lot limit order upon receipt that has become
marketable). These orders are also subject to the volume limitation.
    Marketable odd-lot orders and non-marketable odd-lot limit orders
that have become marketable and remain unexecuted prior to the close of
trading shall be executed, in time priority of receipt at the price of
the closing transaction, subject to the netting provision and a volume
restriction which is not to exceed the size of the closing transaction.
PRL Pricing
    The Exchange believes that the most appropriate way to execute odd-
lot orders is to represent them in the round-lot auction market where
they would interact with all other market interest and be priced in
accordance with supply and demand dynamics. The Exchange is committed
to the goal of integrating odd-lots into the round-lot market and
eliminating the separate handling of odd-lot and PRL transactions.
However, until the requisite technology changes can be completed, the
Exchange is proposing these modifications in order to further
streamline the handling performed by its current systems.
    NYSE Amex Equities Rule 124 was amended as interim measures to
accommodate the pricing and execution of odd-lot orders in a manner
based on the prevailing market.\16\ Most recently, significant upgrades
to the Exchange's technology \17\ made it possible for the Exchange
systems that process orders sent to Display Book, the Exchange matching
engine, to price odd-lot orders sent to the post that were consistent
with the provisions of NYSE Amex Equities Rule 124(c) and (d).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \16\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 56551 (September
27, 2007), 73 FR 56415 (October 3, 2007) (SR-NYSE-2007-82); See also
Securities Exchange Act Release No. 49536 (April 7, 2004), 69 FR
19890, 19893 (April 14, 2004) (SR-NYSE-2003-37); Securities Exchange
Act Release No. 49745 (May 20, 2004), 69 FR 29998 (May 26, 2004)
(SR-NYSE-2003-37).
    \17\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 58184 (July 17,
2008), 73 FR 42853 (July 23, 2008) (SR-NYSE-2008-46) (Key changes in
this filing served to enhance the Exchange technology).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    On March 11, 2009, the Exchange filed a proposed rule change with
the Commission to amend NYSE Amex Equities Rule 124.40 to allow the
odd-lot portion of PRLs to be executed in the Odd-lot System pursuant
to the pricing provisions of NYSE Amex Equities Rule 124.\18\ As
modified, the odd-lot portion of the PRL retains the time stamp of its
original entry as a PRL and is sequenced for execution based on the
initial entry time of the PRL. Once all round lot components of the PRL
are fully executed, the odd-lot portion of the order is executed at a
price consistent with other odd-lot orders subject to the provisions of
NYSE Amex Equities Rule 124(c) and (d).

    \18\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 59614 (March 20,
2009), 74 FR 13501 (March 27, 2009) (SR-NYSEALTR-2009-27).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Example: A marketable order to sell 399 shares of security XYZ
is received by Exchange systems at 12:00:00. The 99 share portion of
the order is eligible for execution only after the 300 share portion
of the PRL order is sold. See table below.

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                       Number of     Price of
 Time of  execution      shares     execution       Customer receives
------------------------------------------------------------------------
12:00:01............          100       $30.22  Report of Execution 100
                                                 shares at a price of
                                                 $30.22.
12:01:00............          100        30.21  Report of Execution 100
                                                 shares at a price of
                                                 $30.21.
12:01:47............          100        30.22  Report of Execution 100
                                                 shares at a price of
                                                 $30.22.
12:01:48............           99    \19\30.23  Report of Execution 99
                                                 shares at a price of
                                                 $30.23.
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In the filing to amend the execution of PRL orders, the Exchange
explained that the system enhancements to Display Book would be
progressively implemented on a security by security basis. On March 16,
2009, the Exchange commenced migration of symbols to the enhanced
systems. This migration is ongoing and PRL orders submitted to the
Display Book in those migrated symbols are executed as described above.
The list of securities that are operating on the enhanced systems, are
available on the Exchange's Web site at: http://www.nyse.com/
attachment/SDBK_SecurityRolloutList.xls.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \19\ This example assumes that the odd-lot portion of the PRL
had priority of execution in the Odd-lot System because its original
order entry time was 12:00:00.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Systems that process orders sent to the Exchange to be executed by
a Floor broker, collectively called Exchange Floor broker systems, are
also being upgraded to provide improved functionality. The Exchange
Floor broker systems can be divided into two categories--booth systems
(Broker

Booth Support Systems or ``BBSS'') and hand-held devices. As of yet,
neither system has been provided with the newer PRL pricing
functionality. As a result, PRLs sent to BBSS are processed pursuant to
the prior provisions of NYSE Amex Equities Rule 124, Supplemental
Material .40, which requires the odd-lot portion of a PRL to be
executed only where no round lot portion thereof is cancelled and at
the same price of the last round lot execution that would complete the
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
round lot portion of the PRL.

    Example: An order to sell 399 shares of security XYZ is received
by Exchange Floor broker systems at 12:00:00. The 99 share portion
of the order is eligible for execution only after the 300 share
portion of the PRL order is sold. See table below.

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                       Number of     Price of
 Time of  execution      shares     execution       Customer receives
------------------------------------------------------------------------
12:00:01............          100       $30.22  Report of Execution 100
                                                 shares at a price of
                                                 $30.22.
12:01:00............          100        30.21  Report of Execution 100
                                                 shares at a price of
                                                 $30.22.
12:01:47............          100        30.22  Report of Execution 199
12:01:47............           99        30.22   shares at a price of
                                                 $30.22.
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Until such time as the Exchange Floor broker systems can be
enhanced to execute PRL orders pursuant to NYSE Amex Equities Rule
124(c) and (d), the Exchange proposes to amend the provisions of NYSE
Amex Equities Rule 124.40 to provide that the odd-lot portion of PRL
orders transmitted to a Floor broker via the Floor broker booth system
for execution will be executed at the same price of the last round lot
execution that would complete the round lot portion of the PRL.
    The Exchange anticipates that the enhancements to the Exchange
Floor broker systems will be completed no later than the end of the
fourth quarter of 2009.
Systems Capable of Accepting PRL and GTC Orders
    During the implementation of the Exchange Floor broker system
enhancements, any PRL orders and GTC orders sent to a Floor broker's
hand-held device will be rejected. Furthermore, GTC orders in symbols
that have been migrated to the enhanced systems noted above will not be
accepted in any broker system. PRL and GTC orders (in non-migrated
symbols) must be transmitted to BBSS where the customer seeks to
utilize a Floor broker's business expertise in the execution of such
orders. Once the full migration has been completed, GTC orders will not
be accepted by broker systems or broker hand-held devices and PRL
orders will not be accepted by broker hand-held devices. Therefore, the
Exchange proposes to amend NYSE Amex Equities Rule 13 (Definitions of
Orders) to state that GTC orders will not be accepted by broker hand-
held devices or broker systems. Similarly, the Exchange proposes to
amend NYSE Amex Equities Rule 124.40 to state that PRL orders will not
be accepted by broker hand-held devices.
2. Statutory Basis
    The basis under the Act for this proposed rule change is the
requirement under Section 6(b)(5) \20\ that an Exchange have rules that
are designed to promote just and equitable principles of trade, to
remove impediments to and perfect the mechanism of a free and open
market and a national market system and, in general, to protect
investors and the public interest. The instant proposal is in keeping
with these principles in that it seeks to clarify and temporarily
modify the Exchange's pricing methodology for PRL orders to provide
customers the benefit of the Floor broker's business expertise while
the Exchange completes required system enhancements.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \20\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

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

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

    No written comments were solicited or received with respect to the
proposed rule change.

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

    The Exchange has filed the proposed rule change pursuant to Section
19(b)(3)(A)(iii) of the Act \21\ and Rule 19b-4(f)(6) thereunder.\22\
Because the foregoing proposed rule change: (1) Does not significantly
affect the protection of investors or the public interest; (2) impose
any significant burden on competition; and (3) by its terms does not
become operative for 30 days of this filing, or such shorter time as
the Commission may designate if consistent with the protection of
investors and the public interest, the proposed rule change has become
effective pursuant to Section 19(b)(3)(A) of the Act \23\ and
subparagraph (f)(6) of Rule 19b-4 thereunder.\24\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \21\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A).
    \22\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6).
    \23\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A).
    \24\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    A proposed rule change filed under Rule 19b-4(f)(6) does not
normally become operative prior to 30 days after the date of
filing.\25\ However, Rule 19b-4(f)(6)(iii) permits the Commission to
designate a shorter time if such action is consistent with the
protection of investors and the public interest. The Exchange has
requested that the Commission waive the 30-day operative delay so that
the proposal may become operative immediately upon filing.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \25\ See id. In addition, Rule 19b-4(f)(6)(iii) requires a self-
regulatory organization to provide the Commission with written
notice of its intent to file the proposed rule change, along with a
brief descriptiption and text of the proposed rule change, at least
five business days prior to the date of filing of the proposed rule
change, or such shorter time as designated by the Commission. The
Exchange has satisfied this requirement.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Commission believes that waiving the 30-day operative delay is
consistent with the protection of investors and the public interest
because the proposed rule change seeks to avoid investor confusion by
clarifying the systems capable of executing PRL and GTC orders and the
pricing methodology for such orders. Therefore, the Commission
designates the proposed rule change operative upon filing.\26\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \26\ For purposes only of waiving the 30-day operative delay of
this proposal, the Commission has considered the proposed rule's
impact on efficiency, competition and capital formation. 15 U.S.C.
78c(f).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    At any time within 60 days of the filing of the proposed rule
change, the Commission may summarily abrogate such rule change if it
appears to the Commission that such action is

necessary or appropriate in the public interest, for the protection of
investors, or otherwise in furtherance of the Act.

IV. Solicitation of Comments

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

Electronic Comments

     Use the Commission's Internet comment form (http://
www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml); or
     Send an e-mail to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Please include
File Number SR-NYSEAmex-2009-18 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-NYSEAmex-2009-18.
This file number should be included on the subject line if e-mail is
used. To help the Commission process and review your comments more
efficiently, please use only one method. The Commission will post all
comments on the Commission's Internet Web site (http://www.sec.gov/
rules/sro.shtml). Copies of the submission, all subsequent amendments,
all written statements with respect to the proposed rule change that
are filed with the Commission, and all written communications relating
to the proposed rule change between the Commission and any person,
other than those that may be withheld from the public in accordance
with the provisions of 5 U.S.C. 552, will be available for inspection
and copying in the Commission's Public Reference Room, 100 F Street,
NE., Washington, DC 20549, on official business days between the hours
of 10 a.m. and 3 p.m. Copies of the filing also will be available for
inspection and copying at the principal office of the Exchange. All
comments received will be posted without change; the Commission does
not edit personal identifying information from submissions. You should
submit only information that you wish to make available publicly. All
submissions should refer to File Number SR-NYSEAmex-2009-18 and should
be submitted on or before July 16, 2009.

    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets,
pursuant to delegated authority.\27\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \27\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Florence E. Harmon,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. E9-14957 Filed 6-24-09; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 8010-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 85, Number 249 (Tuesday, December 29, 2020)]
[Notices]
[Pages 85716-85719]
[FR Doc No: 2020-28688]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Investment Company Act Release No. 34144; 812-15167]

ETF Series Solutions and ClearShares, LLC

AGENCY: Securities and Exchange Commission (``Commission'').

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: ETF Series Solutions (``Trust''), a Delaware statutory trust
registered under the Act as an open-end management investment company
with multiple series (each a ``Fund'') and ClearShares LLC (``Initial
Adviser''), a Delaware limited liability company registered as an
investment adviser under the Investment Advisers Act of 1940
(``Advisers Act'') that serves an investment adviser to the Funds
(collectively with the Trust, the ``Applicants'') have applied for an
exemption from the Investment Company Act of 1940. The requested
exemption would permit Applicants to enter into and materially amend
sub-advisory agreements with sub-advisers without shareholder approval
and would grant relief from the Disclosure Requirements as they relate
to fees paid to the sub-advisers.

DATES: The application was filed on September 29, 2020.

ADDRESSES: The Commission<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Applicants:
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Nina Kostyukovsky, Senior Counsel, at
(202) 551-8833, or Parisa Haghshenas, Branch Chief, at<PHONE_NUMBER>
(Division of Investment Management, Chief Counsel's Office).

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Notice of an application under Section 6(c)
of the Investment Company Act of 1940 (``Act'') for an exemption from
Section 15(a) of the Act, as well as from certain disclosure
requirements in Rule 20a-1 under the Act, Item 19(a)(3) of Form N-1A,
Items 22(c)(1)(ii), 22(c)(1)(iii), 22(c)(8) and 22(c)(9) of Schedule
14A under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (``1934 Act''), and
Sections 6-07(2)(a), (b), and (c) of Regulation S-X (``Disclosure
Requirements'').
    Hearing or Notification of Hearing: An order granting the requested
relief will be issued unless the Commission orders a hearing.
Interested persons may request a hearing by emailing the Commission's
Secretary at<EMAIL_ADDRESS>and serving Applicants with a
copy of the request by email. Hearing requests should be received by
the Commission by 5:30 p.m. on January 15, 2021, and should be
accompanied by proof of service on the Applicants, in the form of an
affidavit, or, for lawyers, a certificate of service. Pursuant to Rule
0-5 under the Act, hearing requests should state the nature of the
writer's interest, any facts bearing upon the desirability of a hearing
on the matter, the reason for the request, and the issues contested.
Persons who wish to be notified of a hearing may request notification
by emailing the Commission's Secretary.
    The following is a summary of the application. The complete
application may be obtained via the Commission's website by searching
for the file number or an Applicant using the ``Company'' name box, at
http://www.sec.gov/search/search.htm or by calling<PHONE_NUMBER>.

I. Requested Exemptive Relief

    1. Applicants request an order to permit the Adviser,\1\ subject to
the approval of the board of trustees of the Trust (collectively, the
``Board''),\2\ including a majority of the trustees who are not
``interested persons'' of the Trust or the Adviser, as defined in
Section 2(a)(19) of the Act (the ``Independent Trustees''), without
obtaining shareholder approval, to: (i) Select investment sub-advisers
(``Sub-Advisers'') for all or a portion of the assets of one or more of
the Funds pursuant to an investment sub-advisory agreement with each
Sub-Adviser (each a ``Sub-Advisory Agreement''); and (ii) materially
amend Sub-Advisory Agreements with the Sub-Advisers.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ The term ``Adviser'' means (i) the Initial Adviser, (ii) its
successors, and (iii) any entity controlling, controlled by or under
common control with, the Initial Adviser or its successors that
serves as the primary adviser to a Sub-Advised Fund. For the
purposes of the requested order, ``successor'' is limited to an
entity or entities that result from a reorganization into another
jurisdiction or a change in the type of business organization. Any
other Adviser also will be registered with the Commission as an
investment adviser under the Advisers Act.
    \2\ The term ``Board'' also includes the board of trustees or
directors of a future Sub-Advised Fund (as defined below), if
different from the board of trustees (``Trustees'') of the Trust.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    2. Applicants also request an order exempting the Sub-Advised Funds
(as defined below) from the Disclosure Requirements, which require each
Fund to disclose fees paid to a Sub-Adviser. Applicants seek relief to
permit each Sub-Advised Fund to disclose (as a dollar amount and a
percentage of the Fund's net assets): (i) The aggregate fees paid to
the Adviser and any Wholly-Owned Sub-Advisers; and (ii) the aggregate
fees paid to Affiliated and Non-Affiliated Sub-Advisers (``Aggregate
Fee Disclosure'').\3\

Applicants seek an exemption to permit a Sub-Advised Fund to include
only the Aggregate Fee Disclosure.\4\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ A ``Wholly-Owned Sub-Adviser'' is any investment adviser
that is (1) an indirect or direct ``wholly-owned subsidiary'' (as
such term is defined in Section 2(a)(43) of the Act) of the Adviser,
(2) a ``sister company'' of the Adviser that is an indirect or
direct ``wholly-owned subsidiary'' of the same company that
indirectly or directly wholly owns the Adviser (the Adviser's
``parent company''), or (3) a parent company of the Adviser. An
``Affiliated Sub-Adviser'' is any investment sub-adviser that is not
a Wholly-Owned Sub-Adviser, but is an ``affiliated person'' (as
defined in Section 2(a)(3) of the Act) of a Sub-Advised Fund or the
Adviser for reasons other than serving as investment sub-adviser to
one or more Funds. A ``Non-Affiliated Sub-Adviser'' is any
investment adviser that is not an ``affiliated person'' (as defined
in the Act) of a Fund or the Adviser, except to the extent that an
affiliation arises solely because the Sub-Adviser serves as a sub-
adviser to one or more Funds.
    \4\ Applicants note that all other items required by Sections 6-
07(2)(a), (b) and (c) of Regulation S-X will be disclosed.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    3. Applicants request that the relief apply to Applicants, as well
as to any future Fund and any other existing or future registered open-
end management investment company or series thereof that intends to
rely on the requested order in the future and that: (i) Is advised by
the Adviser; (ii) uses the multi-manager structure described in the
application; and (iii) complies with the terms and conditions of the
application (each, a ``Sub-Advised Fund'').\5\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ All registered open-end investment companies that currently
intend to rely on the requested order are named as Applicants. All
Funds that currently are, or that currently intend to be, Sub-
Advised Funds are identified in this application. Any entity that
relies on the requested order will do so only in accordance with the
terms and conditions contained in the application.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

II. Management of the Sub-Advised Funds

    4. The Adviser serves or will serve as the investment adviser to
each Sub-Advised Fund pursuant to an investment advisory agreement with
the Fund (each an ``Investment Advisory Agreement''). Each Investment
Advisory Agreement has been or will be approved by the Board, including
a majority of the Independent Trustees, and by the shareholders of the
relevant Sub-Advised Fund in the manner required by Sections 15(a) and
15(c) of the Act. The terms of these Investment Advisory Agreements
comply or will comply with Section 15(a) of the Act. Applicants are not
seeking an exemption from the Act with respect to the Investment
Advisory Agreements. Pursuant to the terms of each Investment Advisory
Agreement, the Adviser, subject to the oversight of the Board, will
provide continuous investment management for each Sub-Advised Fund. For
its services to each Sub-Advised Fund, the Adviser receives or will
receive an investment advisory fee from that Fund as specified in the
applicable Investment Advisory Agreement.
    5. Consistent with the terms of each Investment Advisory Agreement,
the Adviser may, subject to the approval of the Board, including a
majority of the Independent Trustees, and the shareholders of the
applicable Sub-Advised Fund (if required by applicable law), delegate
portfolio management responsibilities of all or a portion of the assets
of a Sub-Advised Fund to a Sub-Adviser. The Adviser will retain overall
responsibility for the management and investment of the assets of each
Sub-Advised Fund. This responsibility includes recommending the removal
or replacement of Sub-Advisers, allocating the portion of that Sub-
Advised Fund's assets to any given Sub-Adviser and reallocating those
assets as necessary from time to time.\6\ The Sub-Advisers will be
``investment advisers'' to the Sub-Advised Funds within the meaning of
Section 2(a)(20) of the Act and will provide investment management
services to the Funds subject to, without limitation, the requirements
of Sections 15(c) and 36(b) of the Act.\7\ The Sub-Advisers, subject to
the oversight of the Adviser and the Board, will determine the
securities and other investments to be purchased, sold or entered into
by a Sub-Advised Fund's portfolio or a portion thereof, and will place
orders with brokers or dealers that they select.\8\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ Applicants represent that if the name of any Sub-Advised
Fund contains the name of a sub-adviser, the name of the Adviser
that serves as the primary adviser to the Fund, or a trademark or
trade name that is owned by or publicly used to identify the
Adviser, will precede the name of the sub-adviser.
    \7\ The Sub-Advisers will be registered with the Commission as
an investment adviser under the Advisers Act or not subject to such
registration.
    \8\ A ``Sub-Adviser'' also includes an investment sub-adviser
that will provide the Adviser with a model portfolio reflecting a
specific strategy, style or focus with respect to the investment of
all or a portion of a Sub-Advised Fund's assets. The Adviser may use
the model portfolio to determine the securities and other
instruments to be purchased, sold or entered into by a Sub-Advised
Fund's portfolio or a portion thereof, and place orders with brokers
or dealers that it selects.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    6. The Sub-Advisory Agreements will be approved by the Board,
including a majority of the Independent Trustees, in accordance with
Sections 15(a) and 15(c) of the Act. In addition, the terms of each
Sub-Advisory Agreement will comply fully with the requirements of
Section 15(a) of the Act. The Adviser may compensate the Sub-Advisers
or the Sub-Advised Funds may pay advisory fees to the Sub-Advisers
directly.
    7. Sub-Advised Funds will inform shareholders of the hiring of a
new Sub-Adviser pursuant to the following procedures (``Modified Notice
and Access Procedures''): (a) Within 90 days after a new Sub-Adviser is
hired for any Sub-Advised Fund, that Fund will send its shareholders
either a Multi-Manager Notice or a Multi-Manager Notice and Multi-
Manager Information Statement; \9\ and (b) the Sub-Advised Fund will
make the Multi-Manager Information Statement available on the website
identified in the Multi-Manager Notice no later than when the Multi-
Manager Notice (or Multi-Manager Notice and Multi-Manager Information
Statement) is first sent to shareholders, and will maintain it on that
website for at least 90 days.\10\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \9\ A ``Multi-Manager Notice'' will be modeled on a Notice of
internet Availability as defined in Rule 14a-16 under the 1934 Act,
and specifically will, among other things: (a) Summarize the
relevant information regarding the new Sub-Adviser (except as
modified to permit Aggregate Fee Disclosure); (b) inform
shareholders that the Multi-Manager Information Statement is
available on a website; (c) provide the website address; (d) state
the time period during which the Multi-Manager Information Statement
will remain available on that website; (e) provide instructions for
accessing and printing the Multi-Manager Information Statement; and
(f) instruct the shareholder that a paper or email copy of the
Multi-Manager Information Statement may be obtained, without charge,
by contacting the Sub-Advised Fund. A ``Multi-Manager Information
Statement'' will meet the requirements of Regulation 14C, Schedule
14C and Item 22 of Schedule 14A under the 1934 Act for an
information statement, except as modified by the requested order to
permit Aggregate Fee Disclosure. Multi-Manager Information
Statements will be filed with the Commission via the EDGAR system.
    \10\ In addition, Applicants represent that whenever a new Sub-
Adviser is retained, an existing Sub-Adviser is terminated, or a
Sub-Advisory Agreement is materially amended, the Sub-Advised Fund's
prospectus and statement of additional information will be
supplemented promptly pursuant to Rule 497(e) under the Securities
Act of 1933.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

III. Applicable Law

    8. Section 15(a) of the Act states, in part, that it is unlawful
for any person to act as an investment adviser to a registered
investment company ``except pursuant to a written contract, which
contract, whether with such registered company or with an investment
adviser of such registered company, has been approved by the vote of a
majority of the outstanding voting securities of such registered
company.''
    9. Form N-1A is the registration statement used by open-end
investment companies. Item 19(a)(3) of Form N-1A requires a registered
investment company to disclose in its statement of additional
information the method of computing the ``advisory fee payable'' by the
investment company with respect to each investment adviser, including
the total dollar amounts that the investment company ``paid to the
adviser (aggregated with amounts paid to affiliated advisers, if any),
and any advisers who are not affiliated persons of the adviser, under
the investment advisory contract for the last three fiscal years.''
    10. Rule 20a-1 under the Act requires proxies solicited with
respect to a registered investment company to comply with Schedule 14A
under the 1934 Act. Items 22(c)(1)(ii), 22(c)(1)(iii), 22(c)(8) and
22(c)(9) of Schedule 14A, taken together, require a proxy statement for
a shareholder meeting at which the advisory contract will be

voted upon to include the ``rate of compensation of the investment
adviser,'' the ``aggregate amount of the investment adviser's fee,'' a
description of the ``terms of the contract to be acted upon,'' and, if
a change in the advisory fee is proposed, the existing and proposed
fees and the difference between the two fees.
    11. Regulation S-X sets forth the requirements for financial
statements required to be included as part of a registered investment
company's registration statement and shareholder reports filed with the
Commission. Sections 6-07(2)(a), (b), and (c) of Regulation S-X require
a registered investment company to include in its financial statements
information about investment advisory fees.
    12. Section 6(c) of the Act provides that the Commission may exempt
any person, security, or transaction or any class or classes of
persons, securities, or transactions from any provisions of the Act, or
any rule thereunder, if such exemption is necessary or appropriate in
the public interest and consistent with the protection of investors and
the purposes fairly intended by the policy and provisions of the Act.
Applicants state that the requested relief meets this standard for the
reasons discussed below.

IV. Arguments in Support of the Requested Relief

    13. Applicants assert that, from the perspective of the
shareholder, the role of the Sub-Advisers is substantially equivalent
to the limited role of the individual portfolio managers employed by an
investment adviser to a traditional investment company. Applicants also
assert that the shareholders expect the Adviser, subject to review and
approval of the Board, to select a Sub-Adviser who is in the best
position to achieve the Sub-Advised Fund's investment objective.
Applicants believe that permitting the Adviser to perform the duties
for which the shareholders of the Sub-Advised Fund are paying the
Adviser--the selection, oversight and evaluation of the Sub-Adviser--
without incurring unnecessary delays or expenses of convening special
meetings of shareholders is appropriate and in the interest of the
Fund's shareholders, and will allow such Fund to operate more
efficiently. Applicants state that each Investment Advisory Agreement
will continue to be fully subject to Section 15(a) of the Act and
approved by the relevant Board, including a majority of the Independent
Trustees, in the manner required by Section 15(a) and 15(c) of the Act.
    14. Applicants submit that the requested relief meets the standards
for relief under Section 6(c) of the Act. Applicants state that the
operation of the Sub-Advised Fund in the manner described in the
application must be approved by shareholders of that Fund before it may
rely on the requested relief. Applicants also state that the proposed
conditions to the requested relief are designed to address any
potential conflicts of interest or economic incentives, and provide
that shareholders are informed when new Sub-Advisers are hired.
    15. Applicants contend that, in the circumstances described in the
application, a proxy solicitation to approve the appointment of new
Sub-Advisers provides no more meaningful information to shareholders
than the proposed Multi-Manager Information Statement. Applicants state
that, accordingly, they believe the requested relief is necessary or
appropriate in the public interest, and consistent with the protection
of investors and the purposes fairly intended by the policy and
provisions of the Act.
    16. With respect to the relief permitting Aggregate Fee Disclosure,
Applicants assert that disclosure of the individual fees paid to the
Sub-Advisers does not serve any meaningful purpose. Applicants contend
that the primary reasons for requiring disclosure of individual fees
paid to Sub-Advisers are to inform shareholders of expenses to be
charged by a particular Sub-Advised Fund and to enable shareholders to
compare the fees to those of other comparable investment companies.
Applicants believe that the requested relief satisfies these objectives
because the Sub-Advised Fund's overall advisory fee will be fully
disclosed and, therefore, shareholders will know what the Sub-Advised
Fund's fees and expenses are and will be able to compare the advisory
fees a Sub-Advised Fund is charged to those of other investment
companies. In addition, Applicants assert that the requested relief
would benefit shareholders of the Sub-Advised Fund because it would
improve the Adviser's ability to negotiate the fees paid to Sub-
Advisers. In particular, Applicants state that if the Adviser is not
required to disclose the Sub-Advisers' fees to the public, the Adviser
may be able to negotiate rates that are below a Sub-Adviser's
``posted'' amounts as the rate would not be disclosed to the Sub-
Adviser's other clients. Applicants assert that the relief will also
encourage Sub-Advisers to negotiate lower sub-advisory fees with the
Adviser if the lower fees are not required to be made public.

V. Relief for Affiliated Sub-Advisers

    17. The Commission has granted the requested relief with respect to
Wholly-Owned and Non-Affiliated Sub-Advisers through numerous exemptive
orders. The Commission also has extended the requested relief to
Affiliated Sub-Advisers.\11\ Applicants state that although the
Adviser's judgment in recommending a Sub-Adviser can be affected by
certain conflicts, they do not warrant denying the extension of the
requested relief to Affiliated Sub-Advisers. Specifically, the Adviser
faces those conflicts in allocating fund assets between itself and a
Sub-Adviser, and across Sub-Advisers, as it has an interest in
considering the benefit it will receive, directly or indirectly, from
the fee the Sub-Advised Fund pays for the management of those assets.
Applicants also state that to the extent the Adviser has a conflict of
interest with respect to the selection of an Affiliated Sub-Adviser,
the proposed conditions are protective of shareholder interests by
ensuring the Board's independence and providing the Board with the
appropriate resources and information to monitor and address conflicts.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \11\ Carillon Series Trust, et al., Investment Co. Act Rel. Nos.
33464 (May 2, 2019) (notice) and 33494 (May 29, 2019) (order).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    18. With respect to the relief permitting Aggregate Fee Disclosure,
Applicants assert that it is appropriate to disclose only aggregate
fees paid to Affiliated Sub-Advisers for the same reasons that similar
relief has been granted previously with respect to Wholly-Owned and
Non-Affiliated Sub-Advisers.

VI. Applicants' Conditions

    Applicants agree that any order granting the requested relief will
be subject to the following conditions:
    1. Before a Sub-Advised Fund may rely on the order requested in the
application, the operation of the Sub-Advised Fund in the manner
described in the application will be, or has been, approved by a
majority of the Sub-Advised Fund's outstanding voting securities as
defined in the Act, or, in the case of a Sub-Advised Fund whose public
shareholders purchase shares on the basis of a prospectus containing
the disclosure contemplated by condition 2 below, by the initial
shareholder before such Sub-Advised Fund's shares are offered to the
public.
    2. The prospectus for each Sub-Advised Fund will disclose the

existence, substance and effect of any order granted pursuant to the
application. In addition, each Sub-Advised Fund will hold itself out to
the public as employing the multi-manager structure described in the
application. The prospectus will prominently disclose that the Adviser
has the ultimate responsibility, subject to oversight by the Board, to
oversee the Sub-Advisers and recommend their hiring, termination, and
replacement.
    3. The Adviser will provide general management services to each
Sub-Advised Fund, including overall supervisory responsibility for the
general management and investment of the Sub-Advised Fund's assets, and
subject to review and oversight of the Board, will (i) set the Sub-
Advised Fund's overall investment strategies, (ii) evaluate, select,
and recommend Sub-Advisers for all or a portion of the Sub-Advised
Fund's assets, (iii) allocate and, when appropriate, reallocate the
Sub-Advised Fund's assets among Sub-Advisers, (iv) monitor and evaluate
the Sub-Advisers' performance, and (v) implement procedures reasonably
designed to ensure that Sub-Advisers comply with the Sub-Advised Fund's
investment objective, policies and restrictions.
    4. Sub-Advised Funds will inform shareholders of the hiring of a
new Sub-Adviser within 90 days after the hiring of the new Sub-Adviser
pursuant to the Modified Notice and Access Procedures.
    5. At all times, at least a majority of the Board will be
Independent Trustees, and the selection and nomination of new or
additional Independent Trustees will be placed within the discretion of
the then-existing Independent Trustees.
    6. Independent Legal Counsel, as defined in Rule 0-1(a)(6) under
the Act, will be engaged to represent the Independent Trustees. The
selection of such counsel will be within the discretion of the then-
existing Independent Trustees.
    7. Whenever a Sub-Adviser is hired or terminated, the Adviser will
provide the Board with information showing the expected impact on the
profitability of the Adviser.
    8. The Board must evaluate any material conflicts that may be
present in a sub-advisory arrangement. Specifically, whenever a sub-
adviser change is proposed for a Sub-Advised Fund (``Sub-Adviser
Change'') or the Board considers an existing Sub-Advisory Agreement as
part of its annual review process (``Sub-Adviser Review''):
    (a) The Adviser will provide the Board, to the extent not already
being provided pursuant to Section 15(c) of the Act, with all relevant
information concerning:
    (i) Any material interest in the proposed new Sub-Adviser, in the
case of a Sub-Adviser Change, or the Sub-Adviser in the case of a Sub-
Adviser Review, held directly or indirectly by the Adviser or a parent
or sister company of the Adviser, and any material impact the proposed
Sub-Advisory Agreement may have on that interest;
    (ii) any arrangement or understanding in which the Adviser or any
parent or sister company of the Adviser is a participant that (A) may
have had a material effect on the proposed Sub-Adviser Change or Sub-
Adviser Review, or (B) may be materially affected by the proposed Sub-
Adviser Change or Sub-Adviser Review;
    (iii) any material interest in a Sub-Adviser held directly or
indirectly by an officer or Trustee of the Sub-Advised Fund, or an
officer or board member of the Adviser (other than through a pooled
investment vehicle not controlled by such person); and
    (iv) any other information that may be relevant to the Board in
evaluating any potential material conflicts of interest in the proposed
Sub-Adviser Change or Sub-Adviser Review.
    (b) the Board, including a majority of the Independent Trustees,
will make a separate finding, reflected in the Board minutes, that the
Sub-Adviser Change or continuation after Sub-Adviser Review is in the
best interests of the Sub-Advised Fund and its shareholders and, based
on the information provided to the Board, does not involve a conflict
of interest from which the Adviser, a Sub-Adviser, any officer or
Trustee of the Sub-Advised Fund, or any officer or board member of the
Adviser derives an inappropriate advantage.
    9. Each Sub-Advised Fund will disclose in its registration
statement the Aggregate Fee Disclosure.
    10. In the event that the Commission adopts a rule under the Act
providing substantially similar relief to that in the order requested
in the application, the requested order will expire on the effective
date of that rule.
    11. Any new Sub-Advisory Agreement or any amendment to an existing
Investment Advisory Agreement or Sub-Advisory Agreement that directly
or indirectly results in an increase in the aggregate advisory fee rate
payable by the Sub-Advised Fund will be submitted to the Sub-Advised
Fund's shareholders for approval.

    For the Commission, by the Division of Investment Management,
under delegated authority.
J. Matthew DeLesDernier,
Assistant Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2020-28688 Filed 12-28-20; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 84, Number 194 (Monday, October 7, 2019)]
[Notices]
[Pages 53451-53452]
[FR Doc No: 2019-21775]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Coast Guard

[Docket No. USCG-2019-0753]

Information Collection Request to Office of Management and
Budget; OMB Control Number: 1625-NEW

AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS.

ACTION: Sixty-day notice requesting comments.

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

SUMMARY: In compliance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, the
U.S. Coast Guard intends to submit an Information Collection Request
(ICR) to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB), Office of
Information and Regulatory Affairs (OIRA), requesting approval for the
following collection of information; 1625-NEW, Merchant Mariner
Credentialing--Job Task Analysis. Our ICR describes the information we
seek to collect from the public. Before submitting this ICR to OIRA,
the Coast Guard is inviting comments as described below.

DATES: Comments must reach the Coast Guard on or before December 6,
2019.

ADDRESSES: You may submit comments identified by Coast Guard docket
number [USCG-2019-0753] to the Coast Guard using the Federal
eRulemaking Portal at https://www.regulations.gov. See the ``Public
participation and request for comments'' portion of the SUPPLEMENTARY
INFORMATION section for further instructions on submitting comments.
    A copy of the ICR is available through the docket on the internet
at https://

www.regulations.gov. Additionally, copies are available from:
Commandant (CG-612), Attn: Paperwork Reduction Act Manager, U.S. Coast
Guard, 2703 Martin Luther King Jr. Ave. SE, Stop 7710, Washington, DC
20593-7710.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr. Anthony Smith, Office of
Information Management, telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>, or fax<PHONE_NUMBER>,
for questions on these documents.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Public Participation and Request for Comments

    This notice relies on the authority of the Paperwork Reduction Act
of 1995; 44 U.S.C. chapter 35, as amended. An ICR is an application to
OIRA seeking the approval, extension, or renewal of a Coast Guard
collection of information (Collection). The ICR contains information
describing the Collection's purpose, the Collection's likely burden on
the affected public, an explanation of the necessity of the Collection,
and other important information describing the Collection. There is one
ICR for each Collection.
    The Coast Guard invites comments on whether this ICR should be
granted based on the Collection being necessary for the proper
performance of Departmental functions. In particular, the Coast Guard
would appreciate comments addressing: (1) The practical utility of the
Collection; (2) the accuracy of the estimated burden of the Collection;
(3) ways to enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of information
subject to the Collection; and (4) ways to minimize the burden of the
Collection on respondents, including the use of automated collection
techniques or other forms of information technology. Consistent with
the requirements of Executive Order 13771, Reducing Regulation and
Controlling Regulatory Costs, and Executive Order 13777, Enforcing the
Regulatory Reform Agenda, the Coast Guard is also requesting comments
on the extent to which this request for information could be modified
to reduce the burden on respondents.
    In response to your comments, we may revise the this ICR or decide
not to seek approval for the Collection. We will consider all comments
and material received during the comment period.
    We encourage you to respond to this request by submitting comments
and related materials. Comments must contain the OMB Control Number of
the ICR and the docket number of this request, [USCG-2019-0753], and
must be received by December 6, 2019.

Submitting Comments

    We encourage you to submit comments through the Federal eRulemaking
Portal at https://www.regulations.gov. If your material cannot be
submitted using https://www.regulations.gov, contact the person in the
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section of this document for alternate
instructions. Documents mentioned in this notice, and all public
comments, are in our online docket at https://www.regulations.gov and
can be viewed by following that website's instructions. Additionally,
if you go to the online docket and sign up for email alerts, you will
be notified when comments are posted.
    We accept anonymous comments. All comments received will be posted
without change to https://www.regulations.gov and will include any
personal information you have provided. For more about privacy and the
docket, you may review a Privacy Act notice regarding the Federal
Docket Management System in the March 24, 2005, issue of the Federal
Register (70 FR 15086).

Information Collection Request

    Title: Merchant Mariner Credentialing--Job Task Analysis.
    OMB Control Number: 1625-NEW.
    Summary: The Coast Guard's Merchant Mariner Credentialing Program
establishes the requirements for the issuance of a Merchant Mariner
Credential (MMC) with the officer or rating endorsements necessary for
employment on U.S. flagged vessels. To improve the credentialing
process, inform future decisions, and ensure the Coast Guard maintains
standards reflecting changes in technology, the Coast Guard is
conducting a Job Task Analysis (JTA) for each officer and rating
endorsement issued on an MMC. Information shall be collected through
focus group discussions and the administration of surveys.
Participation is voluntary.
    Need: The Coast Guard issues credentials to merchant mariners in
accordance with 46 CFR Subchapter B. Screening and assessing applicants
for competency ensure they do not present a safety or security risk,
they are medically qualified to serve, and that they have the training
and experience to serve in the position for which they are applying.
The JTA shall inform the training and assessment processes.
    Forms: None.
    Respondents: Merchant mariners and shoreside personnel.
    Frequency: On occasion.
    Hour Burden Estimate: The estimated burden is 3,060 hours annually.
    Authority: The Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995; 44 U.S.C. chapter
35, as amended.

    Dated: October 1, 2019.
James D. Roppel,
U.S. Coast Guard, Chief, Office of Information Management.
[FR Doc. 2019-21775 Filed 10-4-19; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 9110-04-P


[Federal Register Volume 86, Number 92 (Friday, May 14, 2021)]
[Notices]
[Pages 26514-26515]
[FR Doc No: 2021-10247]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

[FRL-10024-02-Region 1]

2021 Annual Joint Meeting of the Ozone Transport Commission and
the Mid-Atlantic Northeast Visibility Union

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Notice; meeting.

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

SUMMARY: The United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is
announcing the 2021 Annual Joint Meeting of the Ozone Transport
Commission (OTC) and the Mid-Atlantic Northeast Visibility Union (MANE-
VU). The meeting agenda will include topics regarding reducing ground-
level ozone precursors and matters relative to Regional Haze and
visibility improvement in Federal Class I areas in a multi-pollutant
context.

DATES: The meeting will be held on June 15, 2021 starting at 2:30 p.m.
and ending at 4:00 p.m.

ADDRESSES: Virtual meeting. Further information on the details for the
virtual public meeting will be available at http://otcair.org.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
    For documents and press inquiries contact: Ozone Transport
Commission,

89 South St., Suite 602, Boston, MA 02111;<PHONE_NUMBER>; email:
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>website: http://www.otcair.org.
    For registration: To register for the virtual meeting, please use
the online registration form available at http://otcair.org, or contact
the OTC at<PHONE_NUMBER> or by email at<EMAIL_ADDRESS>    Supplementary Information: The Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990
contain Section 184 provisions for the Control of Interstate Ozone Air
Pollution. Section 184(a) establishes an Ozone Transport Region (OTR)
comprised of the States of Connecticut, Delaware, Maine, Maryland,
Massachusetts, New Hampshire, New Jersey, New York, Pennsylvania, Rhode
Island, Vermont, parts of Virginia and the District of Columbia. The
purpose of the OTC is to address ground-level ozone formation,
transport, and control within the OTR.
    The Mid-Atlantic/Northeast Visibility Union (MANE-VU) was formed at
in 2001, in response to EPA's issuance of the Regional Haze rule. MANE-
VU's members include: Connecticut, Delaware, the District of Columbia,
Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, New Hampshire, New Jersey, New York,
Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, Vermont, the Penobscot Indian Nation, the
St. Regis Mohawk Tribe along with EPA and Federal Land Managers.
    Type of Meeting: Open.
    Agenda: Copies of the final agenda will be available from the OTC
office<PHONE_NUMBER>; by email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or via the OTC
website at http://www.otcair.org.

    Dated: May 10, 2021.
Deborah Szaro,
Acting Regional Administrator, EPA Region 1.
[FR Doc. 2021-10247 Filed 5-13-21; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


Springsteen B., EERGC Inc., personal communication, September, 2003 Phone Call between Bruce Springsteen of EERGC and Jason Price of Industrial Economics.

Jason Price called Bruce Springsteen at EERGC to ask a number of questions. These questions are presented below, followed by Springsteen's answers.

  Question ( JP): Do estimated engineering costs need to include costs to new systems the EPA anticipates will come on line in the future?   Answer ( BS): New systems that come on line will more than likely face no additional costs because of the HWC MACT standards because, as new facilities, they are built with more recent technology that would make them compliant with the MACT standards. Systems using activated carbon to control emissions of dioxin/ furans and mercury will generate almost 11,000 tons of carbon on an annual basis.

  Question ( JP): Will mobile incinerators need to do anything to comply with the standards?   Answer ( BS): No. Stack gas emissions from mobile incinerators are low enough for compliance. Also, very few mobile incinerators are currently in use.

  Question ( JP): How is the statistical design level estimated?   Answer ( BS): First, all sources are rank ordered and then the average of the top 12 percent ( in terms of lowest emissions) is calculated. Then a variability factor, based on the variance in the performance of the top 12 percent of sources, is estimated. The SDL is based on this variability factor and the average.

  Question ( JP): Are shut down costs included in EERGC's engineering cost estimates?   Answer ( BS): Yes. EERGC assumes shutdown costs are zero because retrofitting can be done during routine maintenance.


[Federal Register: March 31, 2008 (Volume 73, Number 62)]
[Notices]
[Page 16960-16961]
[DOCID:fr31mr08-140]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

National Highway Traffic Safety Administration

[Docket No. NHTSA-2008-0051]

Notice of Receipt of Petition for Decision That Nonconforming
2000 Chevrolet Tahoe Multipurpose Passenger Vehicles Are Eligible for
Importation

AGENCY: National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, DOT.

ACTION: Notice of receipt of petition for decision that nonconforming
2000 Chevrolet Tahoe multipurpose passenger vehicles are eligible for
importation.

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

SUMMARY: This document announces receipt by the National Highway
Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) of a petition for a decision that
2000 Chevrolet Tahoe multipurpose passenger vehicles that were not
originally manufactured to comply with all applicable Federal motor
vehicle safety standards (FMVSS) are eligible for importation into the
United States because (1) they are substantially similar to vehicles
that were originally manufactured for sale in the United States and
that were certified by their manufacturer as complying with the safety
standards, and (2) they are capable of being readily altered to conform
to the standards.

DATES: The closing date for comments on the petition is April 30, 2008.

ADDRESSES: Comments should refer to the docket and notice numbers above
and be submitted by any of the following methods:
     Federal eRulemaking Portal: Go to http://
www.regulations.gov. Follow the online instructions for submitting
comments.
     Mail: Docket Management Facility: 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>.
    Instructions: Comments must be written in the English language, and
be no greater than 15 pages in length, although there is no limit to
the length of necessary attachments to the comments. If comments are
submitted in hard copy form, please ensure that two copies are
provided. If you wish to receive confirmation that your comments were
received, please enclose a stamped, self-addressed postcard with the
comments. Note that all comments received will be posted without change
to http://www.regulations.gov, including any personal information
provided. Please see the Privacy Act heading below.
    Privacy Act: Anyone is able to search the electronic form of all
comments received into any of our dockets by the name of the individual
submitting the comment (or signing the comment, if submitted on behalf
of an association, business, labor union, etc.). You may review DOT's
complete Privacy Act Statement in the Federal Register published on
April 11, 2000 (65 FR 19477-78).
    How to Read Comments Submitted to the Docket: You may read the
comments received by Docket Management at the address and times given
above. You may also view the documents from the Internet at http://
www.regulations.gov. Follow the online instructions for accessing the
dockets. The docket ID number and title of this notice are shown at the
heading of this document notice. Please note that even after the
comment closing date, we will continue to file relevant information in
the Docket as it becomes available. Further, some people may submit
late comments. Accordingly, we recommend that you periodically search
the Docket for new material.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Coleman Sachs, Office of Vehicle
Safety Compliance, NHTSA<PHONE_NUMBER>).

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Background

    Under 49 U.S.C. 30141(a)(1)(A), a motor vehicle that was not
originally manufactured to conform to all applicable FMVSS shall be
refused admission into the United States unless NHTSA has decided that
the motor vehicle is substantially similar to a motor vehicle
originally manufactured for sale in the United States, certified under
49 U.S.C. 30115, and of the same model year as the model of the motor
vehicle to be compared, and is capable of being readily altered to
conform to all applicable FMVSS.
    Petitions for eligibility decisions may be submitted by either
manufacturers or importers who have registered with NHTSA pursuant to
49 CFR Part 592. As specified in 49 CFR 593.7, NHTSA publishes notice
in the Federal Register of each petition that it receives, and affords
interested persons an opportunity to comment on the petition. At the
close of the comment period, NHTSA decides, on the basis of the
petition and any comments that it has received, whether the vehicle is
eligible for importation. The agency then publishes this decision in
the Federal Register.
    Barry Taylor Enterprises of Richmond, California (BTE)(Registered
Importer 01-280) has petitioned NHTSA to decide whether nonconforming
2000 Chevrolet Tahoe multipurpose passenger vehicles are eligible for
importation into the United States. The vehicles which BTE believes are
substantially similar are 2000 Chevrolet Tahoe multipurpose passenger
vehicles that were manufactured for sale in the United States and
certified by their manufacturer as conforming to all applicable FMVSS.
    The petitioner claims that it carefully compared non-U.S. certified
2000 Chevrolet Tahoe multipurpose passenger vehicles to their U.S.-
certified counterparts, and found the vehicles to be substantially
similar with respect to compliance with most FMVSS.
    BTE submitted information with its petition intended to demonstrate
that non-U.S. certified 2000 Chevrolet Tahoe multipurpose passenger
vehicles, as originally manufactured, conform to many FMVSS in the same
manner as their U.S. certified counterparts, or are capable of being
readily altered to conform to those standards.
    Specifically, the petitioner claims that non-U.S. certified 2000
Chevrolet Tahoe multipurpose passenger vehicles are identical to their
U.S.-certified counterparts with respect to compliance with Standard
Nos. 102 Transmission Shift Lever Sequence, Starter Interlock, and
Transmission Braking Effect, 103 Windshield Defrosting and Defogging
Systems, 104 Windshield Wiping and Washing Systems, 106 Brake Hoses,
111 Rearview Mirrors, 113 Hood Latch System, 114 Theft Protection, 116
Motor Vehicle Brake Fluids, 118 Power-Operated Window, Partition, and
Roof Panel Systems, 119 New Pneumatic Tires for Vehicles Other than
Passenger Cars, 120 Tire Selection and Rims for Motor Vehicles Other
than Passenger Cars, 124 Accelerator Control Systems, 135 Passenger Car
Brake Systems, 201 Occupant Protection in Interior Impact, 202 Head
Restraints, 204 Steering Control Rearward Displacement, 205 Glazing
Materials, 206 Door Locks and Door Retention Components, 207 Seating
Systems, 208 Occupant Crash

Protection, 210 Seat Belt Assembly Anchorages, 212 Windshield Mounting,
214 Side Impact Protection, 216 Roof Crush Resistance, 219 Windshield
Zone Intrusion, 225 Child Restraint Anchorage Systems, 301 Fuel System
Integrity, and 302 Flammability of Interior Materials.
    The petitioner additionally states that the vehicle identification
plates affixed to the vehicles meet the requirements of 49 CFR part
565.
    The petitioner also contends that the vehicles are capable of being
readily altered to meet the following standards, in the manner
indicated:
    Standard No. 101 Controls and Displays: Inscription of the word
``brake'' on the dash in place of the international ECE warning symbol.
    Standard No. 108 Lamps, Reflective Devices and Associated
Equipment: Installation of a U.S.-conforming model front side-mounted
reflex reflectors and installation of U.S.-conforming model front turn
signal lamps or modification of the existing lamps to meet the
requirements of this standard.
    Standard No. 209 Seat Belt Assemblies: Inspection of all vehicles
and installation, on vehicles that are not already so equipped, of
U.S.-conforming model components to meet the requirements of this
standard.
    All comments received before the close of business on the closing
date indicated above will be considered, and will be available for
examination in the docket at the above addresses both before and after
that date. To the extent possible, comments filed after the closing
date will also be considered. Notice of final action on the petition
will be published in the Federal Register pursuant to the authority
indicated below.

    Authority: 49 U.S.C. 30141(a)(1)(A) and (b)(1); 49 CFR 593.8;
delegations of authority at 49 CFR 1.50 and 501.8.

    Issued on: March 24, 2008.
Claude H. Harris,
Director, Office of Vehicle Safety Compliance.
 [FR Doc. E8-6492 Filed 3-28-08; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4910-59-P


[Federal Register Volume 82, Number 157 (Wednesday, August 16, 2017)]
[Notices]
[Pages 38903-38904]
[FR Doc No: 2017-17265]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Docket No. ER17-2258-000]

Rock Falls Wind Farm LLC; Supplemental Notice That Initial
Market-Based Rate Filing Includes Request for Blanket Section 204
Authorization

    This is a supplemental notice in the above-referenced proceeding of
Rock Falls Wind Farm LLC's application for market-based rate authority,
with an accompanying rate tariff, noting that such application includes
a request for blanket authorization, under 18 CFR part 34, of future
issuances of securities and assumptions of liability.
    Any person desiring to intervene or to protest should file with the
Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street NE., Washington,
DC 20426, in accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of the Commission's
Rules of Practice and Procedure (18 CFR 385.211 and 385.214). Anyone
filing a motion to intervene or protest must serve a copy of that
document on the Applicant.
    Notice is hereby given that the deadline for filing protests with
regard to the applicant's request for blanket authorization, under 18
CFR part 34, of future issuances of securities and assumptions of
liability, is August 29, 2017.
    The Commission encourages electronic submission of protests and
interventions in lieu of paper, using the FERC Online links at http://www.ferc.gov. To facilitate electronic service, persons with Internet
access who will eFile a document and/or be listed as a contact for an
intervenor must create and validate an eRegistration account using the
eRegistration link. Select the eFiling link to log on and submit the
intervention or protests.
    Persons unable to file electronically should submit an original and
5 copies of the intervention or protest to the Federal Energy
Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street NE., Washington, DC 20426.
    The filings in the above-referenced proceeding are accessible in
the Commission's eLibrary system by clicking on the appropriate link in
the above list. They are also available for electronic 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
email notification when a document is added to a subscribed docket(s).
For assistance with any FERC

Online service, please email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or call (866)
208-3676 (toll free). For TTY, call<PHONE_NUMBER>.

    Dated: August 9, 2017.
Nathaniel J. Davis, Sr.,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2017-17265 Filed 8-15-17; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 87, Number 209 (Monday, October 31, 2022)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 65521-65523]
[FR Doc No: 2022-22165]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 71

[Docket No. FAA-2022-0243; Airspace Docket No. 22-AGL-5]
RIN 2120-AA66

Amendment of VOR Federal Airways V-26 and V-63; Establishment of
Area Navigation (RNAV) Route T-464; and Revocation of the Wausau, WI,
Low Altitude Reporting Point; in the Vicinity of Wausau, WI

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: This action amends VHF Omnidirectional Range (VOR) Federal
airways V-26 and V-63; establishes Area Navigation (RNAV) route T-464;
and revokes the Wausau, WI, Low Altitude Reporting Point in the
vicinity of Wausau, WI. This action is necessary due to the planned
decommissioning of the VOR portion of the Wausau, WI, VOR/Distance
Measuring Equipment (VOR/DME) navigational aid (NAVAID). The Wausau VOR
is being decommissioned as part of the FAA's

VOR Minimum Operational Network (VOR MON) program.

DATES: Effective date 0901 UTC, December 29, 2022. The Director of the
Federal Register approves this incorporation by reference action under
1 CFR part 51, subject to the annual revision of FAA Order JO 7400.11
and publication of conforming amendments.

ADDRESSES: FAA Order JO 7400.11G, Airspace Designations and Reporting
Points, and subsequent amendments can be viewed online at www.faa.gov/air_traffic/publications/. For further information, you can contact the
Rules and Regulations Group, Federal Aviation Administration, 800
Independence Avenue SW, Washington, DC 20591; telephone: (202) 267-
8783.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Colby Abbott, Rules and Regulations
Group, Office of Policy, Federal Aviation Administration, 800
Independence Avenue SW, Washington, DC 20591; telephone: (202) 267-
8783.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Authority for This Rulemaking

    The FAA's authority to issue rules regarding aviation safety is
found in Title 49 of the United States Code. 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. This rulemaking is promulgated under the authority described
in Subtitle VII, Part A, Subpart I, Section 40103. Under that section,
the FAA is charged with prescribing regulations to assign the use of
the airspace necessary to ensure the safety of aircraft and the
efficient use of airspace. This regulation is within the scope of that
authority as it modifies the Air Traffic Service (ATS) route structure
as necessary to preserve the safe and efficient flow of air traffic
within the National Airspace System.

History

    The FAA published a notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) for Docket
No. FAA-2022-0243 in the Federal Register (87 FR 17040; March 25,
2022), amending VOR Federal airways V-26 and V-63; establishing RNAV
route T-464; and revoking the Wausau, WI, Low Altitude Reporting Point
due to the planned decommissioning of the VOR portion of the Wausau,
WI, VOR/DME NAVAID. Interested parties were invited to participate in
this rulemaking effort by submitting written comments on the proposal.
No comments were received.
    Subsequent to the NPRM, the FAA published a rule for Docket No.
FAA-2021-0972 in the Federal Register (87 FR 38913; June 30, 2022),
amending VOR Federal airway V-26 by removing the airway segment between
the Green Bay, WI, VOR/Tactical Air Navigation (VORTAC) and the White
Cloud, MI, VOR/DME NAVAIDs. That airway amendment was effective
September 8, 2022, and is included in this rule.
    VOR Federal airways are published in paragraph 6010(a), RNAV routes
are published in paragraph 6011, and Domestic Low Altitude Reporting
Points are published in paragraph 7001 of FAA Order JO 7400.11G, dated
August 19, 2022, and effective September 15, 2022, which is
incorporated by reference in 14 CFR 71.1. The ATS route and Domestic
Low Altitude Reporting Point actions listed in this document will be
published subsequently in FAA Order JO 7400.11.

Availability and Summary of Documents for Incorporation by Reference

    This document amends FAA Order JO 7400.11G, Airspace Designations
and Reporting Points, dated August 19, 2022, and effective September
15, 2022. FAA Order JO 7400.11G is publicly available as listed in the
ADDRESSES section of this document. FAA Order JO 7400.11G lists Class
A, B, C, D, and E airspace areas, air traffic service routes, and
reporting points.

The Rule

    This action amends 14 CFR part 71 by amending VOR Federal airways
V-26 and V-63; establishing RNAV route T-464; and revoking the Wausau,
WI, Low Altitude Reporting Point. The ATS route and Reporting Point
actions are described below.
    V-26: V-26 extends between the Blue Mesa, CO, VOR/DME and the
Pierre, SD, VORTAC; and between the Redwood Falls, MN, VOR/DME and the
Green Bay, WI, VORTAC. The airway segment between the Eau Claire, WI,
VOR/DME and the Green Bay, WI, VORTAC is removed. As amended, the
airway is changed to extend between the Blue Mesa, CO, VOR/DME and the
Pierre, SD, VORTAC; and between the Redwood Falls, MN, VOR/DME and the
Eau Claire, WI, VOR/DME.
    V-63: V-63 extends between the Razorback, AR, VORTAC and the
Davenport, IA, VORTAC; between the Janesville, WI, VOR/DME and the
Oshkosh, WI, VORTAC; and between the Wausau, WI, VOR/DME and the
Houghton, MI, VOR/DME. The airspace at and above 10,000 feet MSL from 5
NM north to 46 NM north of Quincy, IL, when the Howard West MOA is
active, is excluded. The airway segment between the Wausau, WI, VOR/DME
and the Rhinelander, WI, VOR/DME is removed. As amended, the airway is
changed to extend between the Razorback, AR, VORTAC and the Davenport,
IA, VORTAC; between the Janesville, WI, VOR/DME and the Oshkosh, WI,
VORTAC; and between the Rhinelander, WI, VOR/DME and the Houghton, MI,
VOR/DME, and the excluded airspace remains unchanged.
    T-464: T-464 is a new RNAV route that extends between the CUSAY,
WI, waypoint (WP) located northwest of Eau Claire, WI, and the CHURP,
WI, Fix located near Clintonville, WI. The new route provides
navigational options in areas of limited or no radar coverage to pilots
whose aircraft are RNAV equipped as well as supports the FAA's efforts
to transition the NAS from ground-based to satellite-based navigation.
The full route description of T-464 is listed in the amendments to part
71 as set forth below.
    Wausau, WI: The Wausau, WI, Domestic Low Altitude Reporting Point
is revoked.
    FAA Order JO 7400.11, Airspace Designations and Reporting Points,
is published yearly and effective on September 15.

Regulatory Notices and Analyses

    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
Department of Transportation (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.
Since this is a routine matter that will only affect air traffic
procedures and air navigation, it is certified that this rule, when
promulgated, will not have a significant economic impact on a
substantial number of small entities under the criteria of the
Regulatory Flexibility Act.

Environmental Review

    The FAA has determined that this action of amending VOR Federal
airways V-26 and V-63; establishing RNAV route T-464; and revoking the
Wausau, WI, Low Altitude Reporting Point, due to the planned
decommissioning of the VOR portion of the Wausau, WI, VOR/DME NAVAID,
qualifies for categorical exclusion under the National Environmental
Policy Act (42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq.) and its

implementing regulations at 40 CFR part 1500, and in accordance with
FAA Order 1050.1F, Environmental Impacts: Policies and Procedures,
paragraph 5-6.5a, which categorically excludes from further
environmental impact review rulemaking actions that designate or modify
classes of airspace areas, airways, routes, and reporting points (see
14 CFR part 71, Designation of Class A, B, C, D, and E Airspace Areas;
Air Traffic Service Routes; and Reporting Points) and paragraph 5-6.5k,
which categorically excludes from further environmental impact review
the publication of existing air traffic control procedures that do not
essentially change existing tracks, create new tracks, change altitude,
or change concentration of aircraft on these tracks. As such, this
action is not expected to result in any potentially significant
environmental impacts. In accordance with FAA Order 1050.1F, paragraph
5-2 regarding Extraordinary Circumstances, the FAA has reviewed this
action for factors and circumstances in which a normally categorically
excluded action may have a significant environmental impact requiring
further analysis. The FAA has determined that no extraordinary
circumstances exist that warrant preparation of an environmental
assessment or environmental impact study.

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 71

    Airspace, Incorporation by reference, Navigation (air).

The Amendment

    In consideration of the foregoing, the Federal Aviation
Administration amends 14 CFR part 71 as follows:

PART 71--DESIGNATION OF CLASS A, B, C, D, AND E AIRSPACE AREAS; AIR
TRAFFIC SERVICE ROUTES; AND REPORTING POINTS

0
1. The authority citation for 14 CFR part 71 continues to read as
follows:

    Authority:  49 U.S.C. 106(f), 106(g); 40103, 40113, 40120; E.O.
10854, 24 FR 9565, 3 CFR, 1959-1963 Comp., p. 389.

Sec.  71.1   [Amended]

0
2. The incorporation by reference in 14 CFR 71.1 of FAA Order JO
7400.11G, Airspace Designations and Reporting Points, dated August 19,
2022, and effective September 15, 2022, is amended as follows:

Paragraph 6010(a) Domestic VOR Federal Airways.

* * * * *

V-26 [Amended]

    From Blue Mesa, CO; Montrose, CO; 13 miles 112 MSL, 131 MSL,
Grand Junction, CO; Meeker, CO; Cherokee, WY; Muddy Mountain, WY; 14
miles, 37 miles 75 MSL, 84 miles 90 MSL, Rapid City, SD; Philip, SD;
to Pierre, SD. From Redwood Falls, MN; Farmington, MN; to Eau
Claire, WI.
* * * * *

V-63 [Amended]

    From Razorback, AR; Springfield, MO; Hallsville, MO; Quincy, IL;
Burlington, IA; Moline, IL; to Davenport, IA. From Janesville, WI;
Badger, WI; to Oshkosh, WI. From Rhinelander, WI; to Houghton, MI.
Excluding that airspace at and above 10,000 feet MSL from 5 NM north
to 46 NM north of Quincy, IL, when the Howard West MOA is active.
* * * * *

Paragraph 6011 United States Area Navigation Routes.

* * * * *

T-464 CUSAY, WI to CHURP, WI [New]
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
CUSAY, WI                                       WP                             (Lat. 46[deg]01'07.84'' N, long. 091[deg]26'47.14'' W)
TONOC, WI                                       WP                             (Lat. 45[deg]03'47.56'' N, long. 091[deg]38'11.87'' W)
EDGRR, WI                                       WP                             (Lat. 44[deg]51'31.83'' N, long. 089[deg]56'43.06'' W)
HEVAV, WI                                       WP                             (Lat. 44[deg]50'48.43'' N, long. 089[deg]35'12.51'' W)
CHURP, WI                                       FIX                            (Lat. 44[deg]42'54.82'' N, long. 088[deg]56'48.69'' W)

* * * * *

Paragraph 7001 Domestic Low Altitude Report Points.

* * * * *
    Wausau, WI [Removed]
* * * * *

    Issued in Washington, DC, on October 5, 2022.
Scott M. Rosenbloom,
Manager, Airspace Rules and Regulations.
[FR Doc. 2022-22165 Filed 10-28-22; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P