[Federal Register Volume 86, Number 80 (Wednesday, April 28, 2021)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 22341-22345]
[FR Doc No: 2021-08781]

========================================================================
Rules and Regulations
                                                Federal Register
________________________________________________________________________

This section of the FEDERAL REGISTER contains regulatory documents
having general applicability and legal effect, most of which are keyed
to and codified in the Code of Federal Regulations, which is published
under 50 titles pursuant to 44 U.S.C. 1510.

The Code of Federal Regulations is sold by the Superintendent of Documents.

========================================================================

Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 80 / Wednesday, April 28, 2021 /
Rules and Regulations

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. FAA-2020-1182; Product Identifier 2018-SW-036-AD; Amendment
39-21518; AD 2021-09-05]
RIN 2120-AA64

Airworthiness Directives; Airbus Helicopters

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: The FAA is superseding Airworthiness Directive (AD) 2016-08-20
for certain Airbus Helicopters (previously Eurocopter France) EC130B4
and EC130T2 helicopters. AD 2016-08-20 required repetitively inspecting
the tail boom to Fenestron junction frame (junction frame) for a crack.
This new AD continues to require inspecting the junction frame with the
horizontal stabilizer removed, and expands the applicability, revises
the compliance time and the inspection procedures for inspecting the
junction frame, adds inspection procedures for certain helicopters,
allows repair of the junction frame, and requires modifying and then
repetitively inspecting the junction frame and reporting certain
information. This AD was prompted by additional cracks and the
availability of a design change that modifies the junction frame. The
actions of this AD are intended to address an unsafe condition on these
products.

DATES: This AD is effective June 2, 2021.
    The Director of the Federal Register approved the incorporation by
reference of certain publications listed in this AD as of June 2, 2021.

ADDRESSES: For service information identified in this final rule,
contact Airbus Helicopters, 2701 N Forum Drive, Grand Prairie, TX
75052; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER> or<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax<PHONE_NUMBER>;
or at https://www.airbus.com/helicopters/services/technical-support.html. You may view this referenced service information at the
FAA, Office of the Regional Counsel, Southwest Region, 10101 Hillwood
Pkwy., Room 6N-321, Fort Worth, TX 76177. It is also available on the
internet at https://www.regulations.gov by searching for and locating
Docket No. FAA-2020-1182.

Examining the AD Docket

    You may examine the AD docket on the internet at https://www.regulations.gov in Docket No. FAA-2020-1182; or in person at Docket
Operations between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except
Federal holidays. The AD docket contains this AD, the European Aviation
Safety Agency (now European Union Aviation Safety Agency) AD, any
service information that is incorporated by reference, any comments
received, and other information. The street address for Docket
Operations is U.S. Department of Transportation, Docket Operations, M-
30, West Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140, 1200 New Jersey Avenue
SE, Washington, DC 20590.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Kristi Bradley, Aerospace Engineer,
General Aviation & Rotorcraft Section, International Validation Branch,
Compliance & Airworthiness Division, FAA, 10101 Hillwood Pkwy., Fort
Worth, TX 76177; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>; email
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Background

    The FAA issued a notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) to amend 14
CFR part 39 to remove AD 2016-08-20, Amendment 39-18497 (81 FR 26103,
May 2, 2016) (2016-08-20), and add a new AD. AD 2016-08-20 applied to
Airbus Helicopters Model EC130B4 and EC130T2 helicopters with a
junction frame that has 690 or more hours time-in-service (TIS)
installed. The NPRM published in the Federal Register on March 5, 2021
(86 FR 12857). The NPRM proposed to require, for all Airbus Helicopters
Model EC130B4 and EC130T2 helicopters with a junction frame:
     For helicopters without MOD 074775, or MOD AH 350A087421
or SB EC130-53-029 installed, at a compliance time based on the hours
TIS accumulated on the junction frame, removing the horizontal
stabilizer, cleaning the junction frame, and visually inspecting the
junction frame area for a crack, paying particular attention to the
area around the 4 spars.
    [cir] Following the initial visual inspection, within 25 hours TIS
or 390 sling cycles, whichever comes first, and thereafter at intervals
not exceeding 25 hours TIS or 390 sling cycles, whichever comes first,
either repeating the initial visual inspection, or, if the surface area
is clean, borescope inspecting the junction frame area for a crack,
paying particular attention to the area around the 4 spars.
    [cir] Also following the initial visual inspection, within 150
hours TIS and thereafter at intervals not to exceed 150 hours TIS,
repeating the initial visual inspection.
     For helicopters without MOD 074775 installed, but with MOD
AH 350A087421 or SB EC130-53-029 installed, before the junction frame
accumulates 350 hours TIS or within 10 hours TIS, whichever occurs
later, visually inspecting for a crack on the junction frame area in
each skin cut-out area.
    [cir] Following the initial visual inspection, within 10 hours TIS
or 250 sling cycles, whichever occurs first, and thereafter at
intervals not exceeding 10 hours TIS or 250 sling cycles, whichever
occurs first, repeating the initial visual inspection.
    [cir] Also following the initial visual inspection, within 660
hours TIS and thereafter at intervals not to exceed 660 hours TIS,
removing the horizontal stabilizer, cleaning the junction frame, and
dye-penetrant inspecting the junction frame area for a crack, paying
particular attention to the area around the 4 spars.
     If there is a crack, replacing or repairing the junction
frame in accordance with an FAA approved repair procedure before
further flight. Repairing the junction frame would not constitute
terminating action for the requirements of this AD.
     For helicopters without MOD 074775 installed, with or
without MOD AH 350A087421 or SB EC130-53-029 installed, without MOD
074609 or SB 53-024 installed, and on which the skin of the junction
frame area has never been repaired, installing MOD 074775 within 24
months as of the effective date

of this AD and reporting certain information to Airbus Helicopters
within 30 days after installing MOD 074775.
     For helicopters without MOD 074775 installed, with MOD
074609 or SB 53-024 installed, or on which the skin of the junction
frame area has been previously repaired at any time, reinforcing the
junction frame by replacing the two lateral splices which join the
skins with four carbon patches (left-hand side, right-hand side, and
lower sides) within 24 months as of the effective date of this AD.
     For helicopters with MOD 074775 installed or with the four
carbon patches reinforcements installed, but without MOD 074581 for
Model EC130T2 helicopters, within 600 hours TIS after the installation
of MOD 074775 or the reinforcement, and thereafter at intervals not
exceeding 600 hours TIS, visually inspect the junction frame area for a
crack. If there is a crack, replacing or repairing the junction frame
in accordance with an FAA approved repair procedure before further
flight. Repairing the junction frame would not constitute terminating
action for the requirements of this AD.
    The NPRM was prompted by a series of EASA ADs that have been issued
since the FAA issued AD 2016-08-20, the most recent being EASA AD 2018-
0104, dated May 4, 2018 (EASA AD 2018-0104), issued by EASA, which is
the Technical Agent for the Member States of the European Union, to
correct an unsafe condition for Airbus Helicopters (formerly
Eurocopter, Eurocopter France) Model EC 130 B4 and EC 130 T2
helicopters, all serial numbers, except those with Airbus modification
(MOD) 074775 installed. EASA's initial AD was prompted by two incidents
of crack propagation through the junction frame that initiated in the
lower right-hand side between the web and the flange where the lower
spar of the tail boom is joined. EASA stated the cracks were of a
significant length and not visible from the outside of the helicopter.
EASA advised that this condition, if not detected, could lead to
structural failure, possibly resulting in Fenestron detachment and
consequent loss of control of the helicopter.
    AD 2016-08-20 was prompted by EASA AD 2015-0033-E, dated February
24, 2015 (EASA AD 2015-0033-E). Following EASA AD 2015-0033-E, EASA
revised its AD to EASA AD 2015-0033R1, dated May 3, 2016 (EASA AD 2015-
0033R1), which was prompted by the determination that it was not
necessary to inspect junction frames that had accumulated less than
1,200 flight hours. Accordingly, EASA AD 2015-0033R1 extended the
inspection threshold from 700 flight hours to 1,200 flight hours.
Thereafter, EASA issued EASA AD 2016-0240, dated December 2, 2016 (EASA
AD 2016-0240) to supersede EASA AD 2015-0033R1. EASA AD 2016-0240 was
prompted by a third incident of cracking in the same area of the
junction frame as the first two incidents. Investigation determined
that detection of the crack was delayed because of insufficient
cleaning of the inspection area inside the junction frame. For that
reason, EASA AD 2016-0240 retained the requirements of EASA AD 2015-
0033R1 and added additional cleaning requirements before inspecting.
After EASA AD 2016-0240 was issued, a fourth incident of cracking in
the same area of the junction frame as the first three incidents was
reported. This fourth incident prompted EASA to issue EASA AD 2017-
0066-E, dated April 21, 2017 (EASA AD 2017-0066-E) to supersede EASA AD
2016-0240. This fourth incident occurred on a junction frame that had
accumulated significantly less flight hours than the first three
incidents. In light of this, EASA AD 2017-0066-E retained the
requirements of EASA AD 2016-0240 and reduced the inspection threshold.
Shortly after, EASA issued EASA AD 2017-0080, dated May 5, 2017 (EASA
AD 2017-0080) to supersede EASA AD 2017-0066-E. EASA AD 2017-0080 was
prompted by the determination that improved procedures to remove the
horizontal stabilizer before cleaning and inspecting were necessary for
certain helicopters. Accordingly, EASA AD 2017-0080 retained the
requirements of EASA AD 2017-0066-E and added the improved procedures.
Since EASA issued EASA AD 2017-0080, Airbus Helicopters developed MOD
074775, which consists of the installation of four carbon patches at
the junction frame. Installation of MOD 074775, either in production or
by retrofit, constitutes terminating action for the repetitive
inspections. Based on the latest information, EASA determined that
continued inspections may not adequately address the long-term risk and
requires modifying the affected helicopters, which also terminates the
repetitive inspections of the pre-modified configuration. Accordingly,
EASA issued EASA AD 2018-0104 to supersede EASA AD 2017-0080 to require
installation of MOD 074775.

Discussion of Final Airworthiness Directive

Comments

    The FAA gave the public the opportunity to participate in
developing this final rule, but the FAA did not receive any comments on
the NPRM or on the determination of the cost to the public.

FAA's Determination

    These helicopters have been approved by EASA and are approved for
operation in the United States. Pursuant to the FAA's bilateral
agreement with the European Union, EASA has notified the FAA of the
unsafe condition described in its AD. The FAA is issuing this AD after
evaluating all of the information provided by EASA and determining the
unsafe condition exists and is likely to exist or develop on other
helicopters of these same type designs and that air safety and the
public interest require adopting the AD requirements as proposed.
Except for a minor editorial change of ``25 hours'' to ``25 hours TIS''
in Figure 1 to paragraph (f)(1) of this AD, this AD is adopted as
proposed in the NPRM.

Differences Between This AD and the EASA AD

    EASA AD 2018-0104 does not apply to helicopters with MOD 074775,
whereas this AD does. EASA AD 2018-0104 requires performing a local
non-destructive inspection if in doubt about if there is a crack,
whereas this AD does not. EASA AD 2018-0104 allows the pilot to
visually inspect the junction frame from outside the tail boom for a
crack, whereas this AD does not. EASA AD 2018-0104 requires contacting
Airbus Helicopters if any crack is detected, whereas this AD requires
replacing or repairing the junction frame in accordance with an FAA
approved repair procedure instead. This AD requires a repetitive
inspection for helicopters with MOD 074775 installed, whereas the EASA
AD does not.

Related Service Information Under 1 CFR Part 51

    The FAA reviewed Airbus Helicopters Emergency Alert Service
Bulletin No. 05A017, Revision 7, dated March 21, 2018, for Model EC130
B4 and T2 helicopters without MOD 074775 installed. This service
information specifies procedures for cleaning inside the junction
frame, inspecting the junction frame from the inside of the tail boom
with the horizontal stabilizer both removed and installed for a crack,
and inspecting the junction frame from the outside of the tail boom for
a crack.
    The FAA also reviewed Airbus Helicopters Service Bulletin No.
EC130-53-036, Revision 4, dated April, 28, 2020, for Model EC130 B4 and
T2 helicopters without MOD 074609 or 074775 installed and on which the
skin

of the junction frame area has not been repaired. This service
information specifies procedures to reinforce the junction frame (MOD
074775) by replacing the two lateral splices which join the skins with
four carbon patches (left-hand side, right-hand side, and lower sides).
    This service information is reasonably available because the
interested parties have access to it through their normal course of
business or by the means identified in the ADDRESSES section.

Other Related Service Information

    The FAA reviewed Airbus Helicopters Service Bulletin No. EC130-53-
029, Revision 1, dated January 27, 2016. This service information
specifies procedures to make a cut-out of the splice and skin at the
junction frame (MOD 350A087421).
    The FAA reviewed Airbus EC 130 B4 Chapter 4, Airworthiness
Limitations Section, Revision 11, dated January 19, 2019, and EC 130 T2
Chapter 4, Airworthiness Limitations Section, Revision 9, dated
September 9, 2019, which specify visually checking the junction frame
for cracks at an interval of 600 flight hours with a margin of 60
flight hours.
    The FAA also reviewed Airbus Helicopters Section 55-11-00, 6-4--
Horizontal Stabilizer--Inspection/Check, of Aircraft Maintenance Manual
EC130, dated November 9, 2017, which specifies procedures for cleaning
inside the junction frame and inspecting the junction frame from the
inside of the tail boom with the horizontal stabilizer removed.

Costs of Compliance

    The FAA estimates that this AD affects 263 helicopters of U.S.
Registry. Labor rates are estimated at $85 per work-hour. Based on
these numbers, the FAA estimates that operators may incur the following
costs in order to comply with this AD.
    Cleaning and inspecting the junction frame area with the horizontal
stabilizer removed takes about 1 work-hour for an estimated cost of $85
per helicopter and $22,355 for the U.S. fleet, per inspection cycle.
    Internally borescope inspecting the junction frame area with the
horizontal stabilizer installed takes about 0.5 work-hour for an
estimated cost of $43 per helicopter and $11,309 for the U.S. fleet,
per inspection cycle.
    If applicable, cleaning and inspecting the junction frame area in
each skin cut-out area takes about 1.25 work-hour for an estimated cost
of $106 per helicopter and $27,878 for the U.S. fleet, per inspection
cycle.
    Modifying the junction frame skin reinforcements takes about 90
work-hours and parts cost about $10,000 for an estimated cost of
$17,650 per helicopter and $4,641,950 for the U.S. fleet. Reporting
certain information takes about 1 work-hour for an estimated cost of
$85 per helicopter and $22,355 for the U.S. fleet. Inspecting the
modified junction frame area takes about 1 work-hour for an estimated
cost of $85 per helicopter and $22,355 for the U.S. fleet, per
inspection cycle.
    If required, repairing or replacing the junction frame takes up to
50 work-hours and parts cost about $60,000 for an estimated cost of
$64,250 per helicopter.
    According to Airbus Helicopters' service information, some of the
costs of this AD may be covered under warranty, thereby reducing the
cost impact on affected individuals. The FAA does not control warranty
coverage by Airbus Helicopters. Accordingly, all costs are included in
the cost estimate.

Paperwork Reduction Act

    A federal agency may not conduct or sponsor, and a person is not
required to respond to, nor shall a person be subject to a penalty for
failure to comply with a collection of information subject to the
requirements of the Paperwork Reduction Act unless that collection of
information displays a currently valid OMB Control Number. The OMB
Control Number for this information collection is 2120-0056. Public
reporting for this collection of information is estimated to be
approximately 1 hour per response, including the time for reviewing
instructions, searching existing data sources, gathering and
maintaining the data needed, and completing and reviewing the
collection of information. All responses to this collection of
information are mandatory. Send comments regarding this burden estimate
or any other aspect of this collection of information, including
suggestions for reducing this burden to: Information Collection
Clearance Officer, Federal Aviation Administration, 10101 Hillwood
Parkway, Fort Worth, TX 76177-1524.

Authority for This Rulemaking

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

Regulatory Findings

    The FAA has determined that this AD will not have federalism
implications under Executive Order 13132. This AD will not have a
substantial direct effect on the States, on the relationship between
the national government and the States, or on the distribution of power
and responsibilities among the various levels of government.
    For the reasons discussed above, I certify that this AD:
    (1) Is not a ``significant regulatory action'' under Executive
Order 12866,
    (2) Will not affect intrastate aviation in Alaska, and
    (3) Will not have a significant economic impact, positive or
negative, on a substantial number of small entities under the criteria
of the Regulatory Flexibility Act.

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39

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

Adoption of the Amendment

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

PART 39--AIRWORTHINESS DIRECTIVES

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

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

Sec.  39.13   [Amended]

0
2. The FAA amends Sec.  39.13 by:
0
a. Removing Airworthiness Directive 2016-08-20, Amendment 39-18497 (81
FR 26103, May 2, 2016); and
0
b. Adding the following new airworthiness directive:

2021-09-05 Airbus Helicopters: Amendment 39-21518; Docket No. FAA-
2020-1182; Product Identifier 2018-SW-036-AD.

(a) Applicability

    This airworthiness directive (AD) applies to Airbus Helicopters
Model EC130B4 and EC130T2 helicopters, certificated in any

category, with a tail boom to Fenestron junction frame (junction
frame).

(b) Unsafe Condition

    This AD defines the unsafe condition as a crack in the junction
frame. This condition could result in failure of the junction frame,
which could result in loss of the Fenestron and subsequent loss of
control of the helicopter.

(c) Affected ADs

    This AD replaces AD 2016-08-20, Amendment 39-18497 (81 FR 26103,
May 2, 2016).

(d) Effective Date

    This AD becomes effective June 2, 2021.

(e) Compliance

    You are responsible for performing each action required by this
AD within the specified compliance time unless it has already been
accomplished prior to that time.

(f) Required Actions

    (1) For helicopters without modification (MOD) 074775, or MOD AH
350A087421 or SB EC130-53-029 installed, at the compliance time
specified by the hours time-in-service (TIS) accumulated on the
junction frame in Figure 1 to this paragraph, do the following:
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR28AP21.009

    (i) Remove the horizontal stabilizer; using a clean, lint-free,
white cloth soaked with liquid Methyl Ethyl Ketone (MEK), clean the
inside of the junction frame (a) as shown in Figure 1 of Airbus
Helicopters Emergency Alert Service Bulletin No. 05A017, Revision 7,
dated March 21, 2018 (EASB 05A017, Rev 7); and visually inspect for
cracking around the circumference of the junction frame, in the web
of the junction frame (a) and in the radius between the web and the
flange of the tail boom side as shown in Figure 1 EASB 05A017, Rev
7. Pay particular attention to the area around the 4 spars (b) as
shown in Figure 1 of EASB 05A017, Rev 7. Examples of cracks are
shown in Figure 3 of EASB 05A017, Rev 7. If there is a crack, before
further flight, replace or repair the junction frame in accordance
with an FAA approved repair procedure. Repairing or replacing the
junction frame does not constitute terminating action for the
requirements of this AD.
    (ii) Thereafter following paragraph (f)(1)(i) of this AD, within
25 hours TIS or 390 sling cycles for helicopters that perform
external load carrying operations, whichever occurs first, and
thereafter at intervals not exceeding 25 hours TIS or 390 sling
cycles, whichever occurs first, either perform the actions of
paragraph (f)(1)(i) of this AD or, if the surface of the junction
frame area is clean, use a borescope through the horizontal
stabilizer opening to borescope inspect for a crack around the
circumference of the junction frame, and in the web of the junction
frame (a) and in the radius between the web and the flange on the
tail boom side as shown in Figure 2 EASB 05A017, Rev 7. Pay
particular attention to the area around the 4 spars (b) of Figure 2
of EASB 05A017, Rev 7. Examples of cracks are shown in Figure 3 of
EASB 05A017, Rev 7. For purposes of this AD, a sling cycle is
defined as one landing with or without stopping the rotor or one
external load-carrying operation; an external load-carrying
operation occurs each time a helicopter picks up an external load
and drops it off. If there is a crack, before further flight,
replace or repair the junction frame in accordance with an FAA
approved repair procedure. Repairing or replacing the junction frame
does not constitute terminating action for the requirements of this
AD.
    (iii) Thereafter following paragraph (f)(1)(i) of this AD,
within 150 hours TIS and thereafter at intervals not to exceed 150
hours TIS, accomplish the actions required by paragraph (f)(1)(i) of
this AD. Accomplishment of this paragraph constitutes compliance for
an instance of paragraph (f)(1)(ii) of this AD.
    (2) For helicopters without MOD 074775 installed, but with MOD
AH 350A087421 or SB EC130-53-029 installed, before the junction
frame accumulates 350 hours TIS or within 10 hours TIS, whichever
occurs later:
    (i) Visually inspect for cracking on the junction frame (a) in
the upper and lower right-hand side and upper and lower left-hand
side areas of the skin cut-out as shown in Detail A, Figure 4 of
EASB 05A017, Rev 7. If there is a crack, before further flight,
replace or repair the junction frame in accordance with an FAA
approved repair procedure. Repairing or replacing the junction frame
does not constitute terminating action for the requirements of this
AD.
    (ii) Thereafter following paragraph (f)(2)(i) of this AD, within
10 hours TIS or 250 sling cycles for helicopters that perform
external load carrying operations, whichever occurs first, and
thereafter at intervals not exceeding 10 hours TIS or 250 sling
cycles, whichever occurs first, accomplish the actions required by
paragraph (f)(2)(i) of this AD.
    (iii) Thereafter following paragraph (f)(2)(i) of this AD,
within 660 hours TIS and thereafter at intervals not to exceed 660
hours TIS, accomplish the actions required by paragraph (f)(1)(i) of
this AD. Accomplishment of this paragraph constitutes compliance for
an instance of paragraph (f)(2)(ii) of this AD.
    (3) For helicopters without MOD 074775 installed, with or
without MOD AH 350A087421 or SB EC130-53-029 installed, without MOD
074609 or SB 53-024 installed, and on which the skin of the junction
frame area has never been repaired, within 24 months as of the
effective date of this AD, install MOD 074775 by following the
Accomplishment Instructions, paragraphs 3.B.2.a. through g., of
Airbus Helicopters Service Bulletin No. EC130-53-036, Revision 4,
dated April, 28, 2020 (ASB EC130-53-036, Rev 4), except where ASB
EC130-53-036, Rev. 4 specifies to certain discard parts, you are
required to remove those parts from service instead and where ASB
EC130-53-036, Rev 4. specifies contacting Airbus Helicopters for
corrective action, the corrective action must be accomplished using
a method approved by the FAA. Where ASB EC130-53-036, Rev 4,
specifies completing the table in Appendix 4.H. under paragraph
3.B.2.g., complete and return the table to Airbus Helicopters within
30 days after installing MOD 074775. Installation of MOD 074775
constitutes terminating action for the inspections required by
paragraphs (f)(1) and (2) of this AD.
    (4) For helicopters without MOD 074775 installed, with MOD
074609 or SB 53-024 installed, or on which the skin of the junction
frame area has been previously repaired at any time, within 24
months as of the effective date of this AD, reinforce the junction
frame by replacing the two lateral splices which join the skins with
four carbon

patches (left-hand side, right-hand side, and lower sides) in
accordance with an FAA approved corrective procedure. Installation
of this reinforcement constitutes terminating action for the
inspections required by paragraphs (f)(1) and (2) of this AD.
    (5) For Model EC130B4 helicopters with MOD 074775 installed or
with the reinforcement that is required by paragraph (f)(4) of this
AD; and for Model EC130T2 helicopters with MOD 074775 installed or
with the reinforcement that is required by paragraph (f)(4) of this
AD, but without MOD 074581 installed:
    (i) Within 600 hours TIS after the installation of MOD 074775 or
the reinforcement that is required by paragraph (f)(4) of this AD,
and thereafter at intervals not exceeding 600 hours TIS, perform the
actions of paragraph (f)(1)(i) of this AD.
    (ii) If there is a crack, before further flight, replace or
repair the junction frame in accordance with an FAA approved repair
procedure. Repairing the junction frame does not constitute
terminating action for the requirements of this AD.

(g) Special Flight Permits

    Special flight permits are prohibited.

(h) Alternative Methods of Compliance (AMOCs)

    (1) The Manager, International Validation Branch, FAA, has the
authority to approve AMOCs for this AD, if requested using the
procedures found in 14 CFR 39.19. In accordance with 14 CFR 39.19,
send your request to your principal inspector or local Flight
Standards District Office, as appropriate. If sending information
directly to the manager of the International Validation Branch, send
it to the attention of the person identified in paragraph (i)(1) of
this AD. Information may be emailed to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>    (2) Before using any approved AMOC, notify your appropriate
principal inspector, or lacking a principal inspector, the manager
of the local flight standards district office/certificate holding
district office.

(i) Related Information

    (1) For more information about this AD, contact Kristi Bradley,
Aerospace Engineer, General Aviation & Rotorcraft Section,
International Validation Branch, Compliance & Airworthiness
Division, FAA, 10101 Hillwood Pkwy., Fort Worth, TX 76177; telephone
(817) 222-5110; email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>    (2) Airbus Helicopters Service Bulletin No. EC130-53-029,
Revision 1, dated January 27, 2016, Airbus EC 130 B4 Chapter 4,
Airworthiness Limitations Section, Revision 11, dated January 19,
2019, Airbus EC 130 T2 Chapter 4, Airworthiness Limitations Section,
Revision 9, dated September 9, 2019, and Section 55-11-00, 6-4--
Horizontal Stabilizer--Inspection/Check, of Aircraft Maintenance
Manual EC130, dated November 9, 2017, which are not incorporated by
reference, contain additional information about the subject of this
AD. This service information is available at the contact information
specified in paragraphs (k)(3) and (4) of this AD.
    (3) The subject of this AD is addressed in European Aviation
Safety Agency (now European Union Aviation Safety Agency) (EASA)
2018-0104, dated May 4, 2018. You may view the EASA AD on the
internet at https://www.regulations.gov in Docket No. FAA-2020-1182.

(j) Subject

    Joint Aircraft Service Component (JASC) Code: 5302, Rotorcraft
Tail Boom.

(k) Material Incorporated by Reference

    (1) The Director of the Federal Register approved the
incorporation by reference of the service information listed in this
paragraph under 5 U.S.C. 552(a) and 1 CFR part 51.
    (2) You must use this service information as applicable to do
the actions required by this AD, unless the AD specifies otherwise.
    (i) Airbus Helicopters Emergency Alert Service Bulletin No.
05A017, Revision 7, dated March 21, 2018.
    (ii) Airbus Helicopters Service Bulletin No. EC130-53-036,
Revision 4, dated April, 28, 2020.
    (3) For service information identified in this AD, contact
Airbus Helicopters, 2701 N. Forum Drive, Grand Prairie, TX 75052;
telephone<PHONE_NUMBER> or<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax<PHONE_NUMBER>; or
at https://www.airbus.com/helicopters/services/technical-support.html.
    (4) You may view this service information at FAA, Office of the
Regional Counsel, Southwest Region, 10101 Hillwood Pkwy., Room 6N-
321, Fort Worth, TX 76177. For information on the availability of
this material at the FAA, call<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    (5) You may view this service information that is incorporated
by reference at the National Archives and Records Administration
(NARA). For information on the availability of this material at
NARA, email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or go to: https://www.archives.gov/federal-register/cfr/ibr-locations.html.

    Issued on April 14, 2021.
Lance T. Gant,
Director, Compliance & Airworthiness Division, Aircraft Certification
Service.
[FR Doc. 2021-08781 Filed 4-27-21; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


[Federal Register Volume 85, Number 99 (Thursday, May 21, 2020)]
[Notices]
[Pages 31019-31020]
[FR Doc No: 2020-10929]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-88884/May 15, 2020]

Order Granting a Conditional Exemption From Exchange Act Section
11(d)(1) for Certain Asset Backed Securities and Other Collateral

    The Securities and Exchange Commission (``Commission'' or ``SEC'')
is issuing an order granting an exemption from compliance with Section
11(d)(1) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (``Exchange Act'')
pertaining to certain lending transactions in asset backed securities.

I. Introduction

    By letter dated May 12, 2020 (the ``Letter''),\1\ the Federal
Reserve Bank of New York (``New York Fed''), has requested that the
Commission grant exemptive relief from Section 11(d)(1) of the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (``Exchange Act'') to permit all
brokers and dealers registered with the Commission and designated by
the New York Fed as ``TALF Agents'' (``TALF Agents'') to participate in
the Federal Reserve's 2020 Term Asset-Backed Securities Loan Facility
(``TALF 2020'') by facilitating extensions of non-recourse credit, on
behalf of a special purpose vehicle (the ``TALF SPV'') established by
the New York Fed, to purchasers of new issues of asset-backed
securities (``ABS'') that are or that may be designated as ``eligible
collateral'' in the distribution of which such TALF Agents may have
participated as member of a selling syndicate or group within the
meaning of Section 11(d)(l).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ Letter from Michael Held, General Counsel and Executive Vice
President, Federal Reserve Bank of New York to Vanessa Countryman,
Secretary, Securities and Exchange Commission, dated May 12, 2020.
Each defined term in this order has the same meaning as defined in
the Letter, unless otherwise noted.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

II. Discussion

    Section 11(d)(1) of the Exchange Act generally prohibits a person
that is both a broker and a dealer from extending or maintaining
credit, or arranging for the extension or maintenance of credit, to or
for a customer on any security (other than an exempted security) that
was part of a distribution of a new issue of securities in which the
broker-dealer participated as a member of a selling syndicate or group
within thirty days prior to such transaction.
    The TALF 2020 is intended to support the provision of credit to
consumers and businesses by enabling the issuance of ABS backed by
private student loans, auto loans and leases, consumer and corporate
credit card receivables, equipment loans and leases, floorplan loans,
insurance premium finance loans, certain small business loans
guaranteed by the Small Business Administration, and leveraged
loans.\2\ TALF Agents will act as agents of borrowers in, among other
things, making applications for TALF loans. TALF Agents will also (i)
assess the eligibility of prospective borrowers and collateral, (ii)
receive that portion of the interest and principal distributions on the
collateral that is for the account of the borrowers, and (iii) disburse
such interest and principal to the borrowers. TALF Agents will also
perform certain recordkeeping functions. In addition, all payments in
respect of interest and principal on the underlying collateral that are
to be paid to a borrower shall be paid by the custodian to such
borrower's TALF Agent, for further distribution to that borrower. The
function of the TALF Agents is necessary to the success of the TALF
2020 because the New York Fed and the TALF SPV lack the resources to
perform these functions themselves.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \2\ Certain legacy commercial mortgage-backed securities are
also eligible ABS. The set of permissible underlying assets of
eligible ABS may be expanded later to other asset classes.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Commission understands, based on the New York Fed statements,
that the success of the TALF 2020 program depends on the effective
participation of TALF Agents in facilitating the availability of the
program to potential participants, and furthermore that the success of
the TALF 2020 program is important to the United States Government's
efforts to restore the availability of credit in the national economy.
The relief is consistent with investor protection because the TALF 2020
loans are non-recourse to the borrower, absent a breach of
representation or other enforcement event under the facility
documentation, and therefore neither the TALF SPV nor the New York Fed
may proceed against the borrower for collection of the loan balance,
irrespective of the market value or performance of the underlying
collateral. Furthermore, natural persons do not qualify as participants
under the TALF 2020 program. The Commission agrees that granting the
requested relief is consistent with its tripartite mission.

III. Conclusion

    In light of the above, and in accordance with Section 36 of the
Exchange Act, the Commission finds that exempting brokers and dealers
that are designated by the New York Fed as TALF Agents and that
participate in TALF 2020 from the requirements of Section 11(d)(1) of
the Exchange Act with respect to ABS that are or that may be designated
as ``eligible collateral'' is necessary and appropriate in the public
interest, and consistent with the mission of the Commission, including
the protection of investors.\3\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ Exchange Act Section 36 [15 U.S.C. 78mm]. Section 36 of the
Exchange Act authorizes the Commission to conditionally or
unconditionally exempt, by rule, regulation, or order any person,
security, or transaction (or any class or classes of persons,
securities, or transactions) from any provision of the Exchange Act
or any rule or regulation thereunder, to the extent such exemption
is necessary or appropriate in the public interest, and is
consistent with the protection of investors.

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

    It is hereby ordered, pursuant to its authority under Section 36 of
the Exchange Act, based on the representations and facts presented in
the Letter, that any broker-dealer that is designated as a TALF Agent
and that participates in TALF 2020 by facilitating extensions of non-
recourse credit, on behalf of the TALF SPV, to a purchaser of new
issues of securities is exempt from the prohibition on arranging
certain credit contained in Section 11(d)(1) with respect to ABS
securities that are or that may be designated as designated as
``eligible collateral.''
    This exemption from Section 11(d)(1) of the Exchange Act applies
solely to such TALF Agent's facilitation of extensions and maintenance
of credit by the New York Fed pursuant to the TALF 2020 with respect to
ABS that are or that may be designated as ``eligible collateral,'' and
not to any other extension or maintenance of credit, or any other
arranging for the extension or maintenance of credit, on new issues of
securities in the distribution of which such TALF Agent participated as
a member of a selling syndicate or group within the meaning of Section
11(d)(1) of the Exchange Act.
    This order should not be considered a view with respect to any
other question that participation in TALF 2020 program may raise,
including, but not limited to the applicability of other federal or
state laws to such participation.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(62).

    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets
pursuant to delegated authority.\4\
J. Matthew DeLesDernier,
Assistant Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2020-10929 Filed 5-20-20; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 84, Number 212 (Friday, November 1, 2019)]
[Notices]
[Pages 58769-58772]
[FR Doc No: 2019-23940]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Investment Company Act Release No. 33678; 812-15060]

OSI ETF Trust and O'Shares Investment Advisers, LLC; Notice of
Application

October 29, 2019.
AGENCY: Securities and Exchange Commission (``Commission'').

ACTION: Notice.

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

    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'').

Applicants:  OSI ETF Trust (``Trust''), a Delaware statutory trust
registered under the Act as an open-end management investment company
with multiple series (each a ``Fund'') and O'Shares Investment
Advisers, 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'').

Summary of Application:  The requested exemption would permit
Applicants to enter into and materially amend subadvisory agreements
with subadvisers without shareholder approval and would grant relief
from the Disclosure Requirements as they relate to fees paid to the
subadvisers.

Filing Dates:  The application was filed on August 20, 2019, and
amended on October 4, 2019.

Hearing or Notification of Hearing:  An order granting the application
will be issued unless the Commission orders a hearing. Interested
persons may request a hearing by writing to the Commission's Secretary
and serving Applicants with a copy of the request, personally or by
mail. Hearing requests should be received by the Commission by 5:30
p.m. on November 25, 2019, 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 writing to the
Commission's Secretary.

ADDRESSES: Secretary, U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission, 100 F
Street NE, Washington, DC 20549-1090. Applicants: Louise Anne Poirier,
O'Shares Investment Advisers, LLC, 1010 Sherbrooke Street W, Suite
2105, Montreal, QC H3A 2R7 Canada and Michael W. Mundt, Stradley Ronon
Stevens & Young, LLP, 1250 Connecticut Avenue NW, Ste. 500, Washington,
DC 20036.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Laura L. Solomon, Senior Counsel, at
(202) 551-6915, or Kaitlin C. Bottock, Branch Chief, at<PHONE_NUMBER>
(Division of Investment Management, Chief Counsel's Office).

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The following is a summary of the
application. The complete application may be obtained via the
Commission's website by searching for the file number or 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 each 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 subadvisers
(``Subadvisers'') for all or a portion of the assets of one or more of
the Funds pursuant to an investment subadvisory agreement with each
Subadviser (each a ``Subadvisory Agreement''); and (ii) materially
amend Subadvisory Agreements with the Subadvisers.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \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 Subadvised 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 Subadvised Fund (as defined below), if
different from the board of trustees (``Trustees'') of the Trust.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    2. Applicants also request an order exempting the Subadvised Funds
(as defined below) from the Disclosure Requirements, which require each
Fund to disclose fees paid to a Subadviser. Applicants seek relief to
permit each Subadvised 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 Subadvisers; and (ii) the aggregate
fees paid to Affiliated and Non-Affiliated Subadvisers (``Aggregate Fee
Disclosure'').\3\ Applicants seek an exemption to permit a Subadvised
Fund to include only the Aggregate Fee Disclosure.\4\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ A ``Wholly-Owned Subadviser'' is any investment adviser that
is (1) an indirect or direct ``wholly-owned subsidiary'' (as such
term is defined in 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 Subadviser'' is any
investment subadviser that is not a Wholly-Owned Subadviser, but is
an ``affiliated person'' (as defined in section 2(a)(3) of the Act)
of a Subadvised Fund or the Adviser for reasons other than serving
as investment subadviser to one or more Funds. A ``Non-Affiliated
Subadviser'' 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 Subadviser
serves as a subadviser 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 ``Subadvised Fund'').\5\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ All registered open-end investment companies that currently
intend to rely on the requested order are named as Applicants. 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 Subadvised Funds

    4. The Adviser serves or will serve as the investment adviser to
each

Subadvised 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 Subadvised 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 Subadvised Fund. For
its services to each Subadvised 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 Subadvised Fund (if required by applicable law), delegate
portfolio management responsibilities of all or a portion of the assets
of a Subadvised Fund to a Subadviser. The Adviser will retain overall
responsibility for the management and investment of the assets of each
Subadvised Fund. This responsibility includes recommending the removal
or replacement of Subadvisers, allocating the portion of that
Subadvised Fund's assets to any given Subadviser and reallocating those
assets as necessary from time to time.\6\ The Subadvisers will be
``investment advisers'' to the Subadvised 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 Subadvisers, 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 Subadvised 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 Subadvised Fund
contains the name of a subadviser, 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 subadviser.
    \7\ The Subadvisers will be registered with the Commission as an
investment adviser under the Advisers Act or not subject to such
registration.
    \8\ A ``Subadviser'' also includes an investment subadviser 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 Subadvised 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 Subadvised
Fund's portfolio or a portion thereof, and place orders with brokers
or dealers that it selects.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    6. The Subadvisory 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
Subadvisory Agreement will comply fully with the requirements of
section 15(a) of the Act. The Adviser may compensate the Subadvisers or
the Subadvised Funds may compensate the Subadvisers directly.
    7. Subadvised Funds will inform shareholders of the hiring of a new
Subadviser pursuant to the following procedures (``Modified Notice and
Access Procedures''): (a) Within 90 days after a new Subadviser is
hired for any Subadvised 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 Subadvised 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 Subadviser (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 Subadvised 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
Subadviser is hired or terminated, or a Subadvisory Agreement is
materially amended, the Subadvised 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 Subadvisers 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 Subadviser who is in the best
position to achieve the Subadvised Fund's investment objective.
Applicants believe that permitting the Adviser to perform the duties
for which the shareholders of the Subadvised Fund are paying the
Adviser--the selection, oversight and evaluation of the Subadviser--
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 Subadvised 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 Subadvisers are hired.
    15. Applicants contend that, in the circumstances described in the
application, a proxy solicitation to approve the appointment of new
Subadvisers 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
Subadvisers does not serve any meaningful purpose. Applicants contend
that the primary reasons for requiring disclosure of individual fees
paid to Subadvisers are to inform shareholders of expenses to be
charged by a particular Subadvised 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 Subadvised Fund's overall advisory fee will be fully
disclosed and, therefore, shareholders will know what the Subadvised
Fund's fees and expenses are and will be able to compare the advisory
fees a Subadvised Fund is charged to those of other investment
companies. In addition, Applicants assert that the requested relief
would benefit shareholders of the Subadvised Fund because it would
improve the Adviser's ability to negotiate the fees paid to
Subadvisers. In particular, Applicants state that if the Adviser is not
required to disclose the Subadvisers' fees to the public, the Adviser
may be able to negotiate rates that are below a Subadviser's ``posted''
amounts. Applicants assert that the relief will also encourage
Subadvisers to negotiate lower subadvisory fees with the Adviser if the
lower fees are not required to be made public.

V. Relief for Affiliated Subadvisers

    17. The Commission has granted the requested relief with respect to
Wholly-Owned and Non-Affiliated Subadvisers through numerous exemptive
orders. The Commission also has extended the requested relief to
Affiliated Subadvisers.\11\ Applicants state that although the
Adviser's judgment in recommending a Subadviser can be affected by
certain conflicts, they do not warrant denying the extension of the
requested relief to Affiliated Subadvisers. Specifically, the Adviser
faces those conflicts in allocating fund assets between itself and a
Subadviser, and across Subadvisers, as it has an interest in
considering the benefit it will receive, directly or indirectly, from
the fee the Subadvised 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 Subadviser, 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 Subadvisers for the same reasons that similar
relief has been granted previously with respect to Wholly-Owned and
Non-Affiliated Subadvisers.

VI. Applicants' Conditions

    Applicants agree that any order granting the requested relief will
be subject to the following conditions:
    1. Before a Subadvised Fund may rely on the order requested in the
Application, the operation of the Subadvised Fund in the manner
described in the Application will be, or has been, approved by a
majority of the Subadvised Fund's outstanding voting securities as
defined in the Act, or, in the case of a Subadvised 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 Subadvised Fund's shares are offered to the
public.
    2. The prospectus for each Subadvised Fund will disclose the
existence, substance and effect of any order granted pursuant to the
Application. In addition, each Subadvised 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 Subadvisers and recommend their hiring, termination, and
replacement.
    3. The Adviser will provide general management services to each
Subadvised Fund, including overall supervisory responsibility for the
general management and investment of the Subadvised Fund's assets, and
subject to review and oversight of the Board, will (i) set the
Subadvised Fund's overall investment strategies, (ii) evaluate, select,
and recommend Subadvisers for all or a portion of the Subadvised Fund's
assets, (iii) allocate and, when appropriate, reallocate the Subadvised
Fund's assets among Subadvisers, (iv) monitor and evaluate the
Subadvisers' performance, and (v) implement procedures reasonably
designed to ensure that Subadvisers comply with the Subadvised Fund's
investment objective, policies and restrictions.

    4. Subadvised Funds will inform shareholders of the hiring of a new
Subadviser within 90 days after the hiring of the new Subadviser
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 Subadviser 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 subadvisory arrangement. Specifically, whenever a
subadviser change is proposed for a Subadvised Fund (``Subadviser
Change'') or the Board considers an existing Subadvisory Agreement as
part of its annual review process (``Subadviser 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 Subadviser, in the
case of a Subadviser Change, or the Subadviser in the case of a
Subadviser Review, held directly or indirectly by the Adviser or a
parent or sister company of the Adviser, and any material impact the
proposed Subadvisory 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 Subadviser Change or
Subadviser Review, or (B) may be materially affected by the proposed
Subadviser Change or Subadviser Review;
    (iii) any material interest in a Subadviser held directly or
indirectly by an officer or Trustee of the Subadvised 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
Subadviser Change or Subadviser Review.
    (b) the Board, including a majority of the Independent Trustees,
will make a separate finding, reflected in the Board minutes, that the
Subadviser Change or continuation after Subadviser Review is in the
best interests of the Subadvised 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 Subadviser, any officer or
Trustee of the Subadvised Fund, or any officer or board member of the
Adviser derives an inappropriate advantage.
    9. Each Subadvised 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 Subadvisory Agreement or any amendment to an existing
Investment Advisory Agreement or Subadvisory Agreement that directly or
indirectly results in an increase in the aggregate advisory fee rate
payable by the Subadvised Fund will be submitted to the Subadvised
Fund's shareholders for approval.

    For the Commission, by the Division of Investment Management,
under delegated authority.
Jill M. Peterson,
Assistant Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2019-23940 Filed 10-31-19; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


[Federal Register: May 31, 2007 (Volume 72, Number 104)]
[Notices]
[Page 30406-30408]
[DOCID:fr31my07-107]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-55806; File No. SR-NASD-2007-028]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; National Association of Securities
Dealers, Inc.; Notice of Filing of Proposed Rule Change and Amendment
No. 1 Thereto Relating to the Order Audit Trail System

May 23, 2007.
    Pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934
(``Act''),\1\ and Rule 19b-4 thereunder,\2\ notice is hereby given that
on April 17, 2007, the National Association of Securities Dealers, Inc.
(``NASD''), filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission
(``Commission'') the proposed rule change as described in Items I, II,
and III below, which Items have been substantially prepared by NASD. On
May 18, 2007, NASD filed Amendment No. 1 to the proposed rule change.
The Commission is publishing this notice to solicit comments on the
proposed rule change, as amended, from interested persons.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

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

    NASD is proposing to amend Rules 6951 and 6954 to require members
that transmit an intermarket sweep order (``ISO'') to another member,
electronic communications network, nonmember, or exchange to record and
report the fact that the order was an ISO. The text of the proposed
rule change is available on NASD's Web site at http://www.nasd.com, at

NASD's principal office, and at the Commission's Public Reference Room.

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

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

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

1. Purpose
    NASD Rules 6950 through 6958 (``OATS Rules'') impose obligations on
member firms to record in electronic form and report to NASD on a daily
basis certain information regarding orders in Nasdaq-listed securities
originated, received, transmitted, modified, canceled, or executed by
NASD members.\3\ NASD integrates this Order Audit Trail System
(``OATS'') information with quote and transaction information to create
a time-sequenced record of orders, quotes, and transactions. This
information is critical to NASD in conducting surveillance and
investigations of members for violations of NASD rules and the federal
securities laws.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ Beginning on February 4, 2008, members also will be required
to record and report order information regarding all OTC equity
securities, as defined in NASD Rule 6951. See Securities Exchange
Act Release No. 54585 (October 10, 2006), 71 FR 61112 (October 17,
2006) (SR-NASD-2005-101); see also NASD Notice to Members 06-70
(December 2006) and Securities Exchange Act Release No. 55440 (March
9, 2007), 72 FR 12852 (March 19, 2007) (SR-NASD-2007-019).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    On June 9, 2005, the Commission adopted Regulation NMS, which
established new substantive rules designed to modernize and strengthen
the regulatory structure of the U.S. equities markets.\4\ Among other
things, Regulation NMS adopted an Order Protection Rule \5\ that
requires trading centers to establish, maintain, and

enforce written policies and procedures reasonably designed to prevent
the execution of trades at prices inferior to protected quotations
displayed by automated trading centers, subject to applicable
exceptions. One of the exceptions from the Order Protection Rule is
when the transaction that constitutes a trade-through \6\ is ``effected
by a trading center that simultaneously routed an intermarket sweep
order to execute against the full displayed size of any protected
quotation in the NMS stock that was traded through.'' \7\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 51808 (June 9,
2005), 70 FR 37496 (June 29, 2005).
    \5\ 17 CFR 242.611.
    \6\ A ``trade-through'' is ``the purchase or sale of an NMS
stock during regular trading hours, either as principal or agent, at
a price that is lower than a protected bid or higher than a
protected offer.'' See 17 CFR 242.600(b)(77).
    \7\ See 17 CFR 242.611(b)(6). The phrase ``intermarket sweep
order'' is defined as ``a limit order for an NMS stock that meets
the following requirements: (i) When routed to a trading center, the
limit order is identified as an intermarket sweep order; and (ii)
Simultaneously with the routing of the limit order identified as an
intermarket sweep order, one or more additional limit orders, as
necessary, are routed to execute against the full displayed size of
any protected bid, in the case of a limit order to sell, or the full
displayed size of any protected offer, in the case of a limit order
to buy, for the NMS stock with a price that is superior to the limit
price of the limit order identified as an intermarket sweep order.
These additional routed orders must also be marked as intermarket
sweep orders.'' The proposed rule change adopts this same definition
of intermarket sweep order for purposes of the OATS Rules. See 17
CFR 242.600(b)(30).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The purpose of the proposed rule change is to require member firms
to record the fact that an order in an OATS-eligible security is an ISO
when the member routes an ISO to another member or non-member. The
member would be required to include this information in the Route
Report it submits to NASD pursuant to the OATS Rules.\8\ This
requirement will ensure that NASD knows that the order was an ISO and
can utilize that information when reviewing audit trails to ensure
compliance with Regulation NMS.\9\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \8\ When a member transmits an order in an OATS-eligible
security to another member, electronic communications network, non-
member, or exchange for handling or execution, the routing member is
required to submit a Route Report to NASD. The categories of
information that a member must include in a Route Report are set
forth in NASD Rule 6954(c) and in the OATS Reporting Technical
Specifications published by NASD.
    \9\ Members are also required to submit New Order Reports when
they receive an order in an OATS-eligible security. NASD Rule
6954(b) and the OATS Reporting Technical Specifications set forth
the information that a member must include in a New Order Report.
NASD Rule 6954(b)(15) already requires members to include ``special
handling requests, specified by [NASD] for purposes of this Rule.''
Pursuant to that provision, the most recent version of the OATS
Reporting Technical Specifications includes a new special handling
code for ISOs in New Order Reports, which would be used when a
member relies on the exception from the Order Protection Rule for a
transaction that ``was the execution of an order identified as an
intermarket sweep order.'' See 17 CFR 242.611(b)(5). Because NASD
Rule 6954(b) already provides NASD with the authority to establish a
new code for ISOs in New Order Reports, the proposed rule filing
does not address that portion of the rule and only seeks to
establish a new code for ISOs in Route Reports under NASD Rule
6954(c).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    NASD will announce the effective date of the proposed rule change
in a Notice to Members to be published no later than 60 days following
Commission approval. The effective date will be February 4, 2008, to
coincide with the changes to the OATS Rules approved by the Commission
on October 10, 2006.\10\ Although firms will not be required to begin
using the ISO routing method code on Route Reports until February 4,
2008, NASD states that the code will be available for use by firms
beginning on June 11, 2007. Firms are encouraged to use the ISO code on
their Route Reports as soon as possible to facilitate NASD's ability to
determine whether the trade was made in reliance on an ISO exception
from the Order Protection Rule.\11\ As noted in the December 11, 2006
version of the OATS Reporting Technical Specifications, firms will be
required to use the ISO Special Handling Code on New Order Reports upon
implementation of the Order Protection Rule.\12\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \10\ See supra note 3.
    \11\ 17 CFR 242.611.
    \12\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

2. Statutory Basis
    NASD believes that the proposed rule change is consistent with the
provisions of Section 15A(b)(6) of the Act,\13\ which requires, among
other things, that NASD rules must be designed to prevent fraudulent
and manipulative acts and practices, to promote just and equitable
principles of trade, and, in general, to protect investors and the
public interest. NASD believes that the proposed rule change will
enhance OATS data and ensure that NASD is able to monitor compliance
with Regulation NMS in a more effective manner.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \13\ 15 U.S.C. 78o-3(b)(6).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

    NASD does not believe that the proposed rule change will result in
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

    Written comments were neither solicited nor received.

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

    Within 35 days of the date of publication of this notice in the
Federal Register or within such longer period (i) as the Commission may
designate up to 90 days of such date if it finds such longer period to
be appropriate and publishes its reasons for so finding, or (ii) as to
which NASD consents, the Commission will:
    (A) by order approve such proposed rule change, or
    (B) institute proceedings to determine whether the proposed rule
change should be disapproved.

IV. Solicitation of Comments

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

Electronic Comments

     Use the Commission's Internet comment form (http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml.
); or     Send an e-mail to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Please include

File Number SR-NASD-2007-028 on the subject line.

Paper Comments

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

All submissions should refer to File Number SR-NASD-2007-028. 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. Copies of such
filing also will be available for inspection and copying at the
principal office of the NASD. 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-NASD-2007-028 and should be
submitted on or before June 21, 2007.

    For the Commission, by the Division of Market Regulation,
pursuant to delegated authority.\14\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \14\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Florence E. Harmon,
Deputy Secretary.
 [FR Doc. E7-10405 Filed 5-30-07; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 8010-01-P


[Federal Register: July 11, 2007 (Volume 72, Number 132)]
[Notices]
[Page 37746-37747]
[DOCID:fr11jy07-57]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Docket No. RP07-509-000]

Columbia Gas Transmission Corporation; Notice of Proposed Changes
in FERC Gas Tariff

July 3, 2007.
    Take notice that on June 29, 2007, Columbia Gas Transmission
Corporation (Columbia) tendered for filing as part of its FERC Gas
Tariff, Second Revised Volume No. 1, the following tariff sheets, with
a proposed effective date of August 1, 2007:

Third Revised Sheet No. 580
Sixth Revised Sheet No. 581
Second Revised Sheet No. 582

    Columbia states that it is proposing to revise the pro forma Form
of Assignment Agreement to be used by replacement shippers when
entering into contracts with Columbia with respect to capacity awarded.
    Any person desiring to intervene or to protest this filing must
file in accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of the Commission's Rules of
Practice and Procedure (18 CFR 385.211 and 385.214). Protests will be
considered by the Commission in determining the appropriate action to
be taken, but will not serve to make protestants parties to the
proceeding. Any person wishing to become a party must file a notice of
intervention or motion to intervene, as appropriate. Such notices,
motions, or protests must be filed in accordance with the provisions of
Section 154.210 of the Commission's regulations (18 CFR 154.210).
Anyone filing an intervention or protest must serve a copy of that
document on the Applicant. Anyone filing an intervention or protest on
or before the intervention or protest date need not serve motions to
intervene or protests on persons other than the Applicant.
    The Commission encourages electronic submission of protests and
interventions in lieu of paper using the ``eFiling'' link at http://www.ferc.gov.
 Persons unable to file electronically should submit an

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

``eLibrary'' link and is available for review in the Commission's
Public Reference Room in Washington, DC. There is an ``eSubscription''
link on the Web site that enables subscribers to

receive e-mail notification when a document is added to a subscribed
docket(s). For assistance with any FERC Online service, please e-mail
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or call<PHONE_NUMBER> (toll free). For

TTY, call<PHONE_NUMBER>.

Kimberly D. Bose,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. E7-13453 Filed 7-10-07; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


MEMORANDUM

SUBJECT: 	4-11-12 Meeting on Processed C&D materials

FROM:	Marc Thomas
      Office of Resource Conservation and Recovery

TO:		Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-RCRA-2008-0329

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

On April 11, 2012, EPA met with various industries who expressed concerns regarding how construction and demolition (C&D) materials are characterized in the Non-hazardous Secondary Materials (NHSM) Rule (March 21, 2011, 76 FR 15456).  In particular, industry participants urged EPA to codify a categorical non-waste determination for processed C&D wood under the framework of the December 21 proposed rule (76 FR 80452) and summarized various best management practices that would constitute sufficient processing.  EPA asked clarifying questions.  Copies of meeting handouts are attached.  In addition, a list of attendees is below.

Meeting Attendees

Kerry Kelly (Waste Management)
Andrew Szurgot (Stratosphere, LLC)
Fadi Mourad (DTE Energy)
Rodney Christian (DTE Energy)
Patrick Coughlin (St. Germian Collins)
Gary Melow (Michigan Biomass
Bob Cleaves (Biomass Power Assoc.)
Jeffrey Pietrich (Washington Council Ernst & Young)
Angela Morrison (CMRA)
Max Lee (CMRA)
Jim Berlow (EPA)


[Federal Register Volume 77, Number 246 (Friday, December 21, 2012)]
[Notices]
[Pages 75627-75628]
[FR Doc No: 2012-30722]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Docket No. IC13-4-000]

Commission Information Collection Activities (FERC-538); Comment
Request; Extension

AGENCY: Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, DOE.

ACTION: Notice of information collection and request for comments.

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

SUMMARY: In compliance with the requirements of the Paperwork Reduction
Act of 1995, 44 U.S.C. 3506(c)(2)(A), the Federal Energy Regulatory
Commission (Commission or FERC) is soliciting public comment on the
currently approved information collection, Gas Pipeline Certificates:
Section 7(a) Mandatory Initial Service.

DATES: Comments on the collection of information are due February 19,
2013.

ADDRESSES: You may submit comments (identified by Docket No. IC13-4-
000) by either of the following methods:
     eFiling at Commission's Web Site: http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/efiling.asp.
     Mail/Hand Delivery/Courier: Federal Energy Regulatory
Commission, Secretary of the Commission, 888 First Street NE.,
Washington, DC 20426.
    Instructions: All submissions must be formatted and filed in
accordance with submission guidelines at: http://www.ferc.gov/help/submission-guide.asp. For user assistance contact FERC Online Support
by email at<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or by phone at:<PHONE_NUMBER>
(toll-free), or<PHONE_NUMBER> for TTY.
    Docket: Users interested in receiving automatic notification of
activity in this docket or in viewing/downloading comments and
issuances in this docket may do so at http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/docs-filing.asp.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ellen Brown may be reached by email at
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>telephone at<PHONE_NUMBER>, and fax at (202)
273-0873.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
    Title: FERC-538: Gas Pipelines Certificates: Section 7(a) Mandatory
Initial Service.
    OMB Control No.:1902-0061.
    Type of Request: Three-year extension of the FERC-538 information
collection requirements with no changes to the current reporting
requirements.
    Abstract: Under sections 7(a), 10(a) and 16 of Natural Gas Act
(NGA),\1\ upon application by a person or municipality authorized to
engage in the local distribution of natural gas, the Commission may
order a natural gas company to extend or improve its transportation
facilities, and sell natural gas to the municipality or person and, for
such purpose, to extend its transportation facilities to communities
immediately adjacent to such facilities or to territories served by the
natural gas pipeline company. The Commission uses the application data
in order to be fully informed concerning the applicant, and the service
the applicant is requesting.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ 15 U.S.C. 717f-w
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Type of Respondents: Persons or municipalities authorized to engage
in the local distribution of natural gas.
    Estimate of Annual Burden: \2\ The Commission estimates the total
Public Reporting Burden for this information collection as:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \2\ The Commission defines burden as the total time, effort, or
financial resources expended by persons to generate, maintain,
retain, or disclose or provide information to or for a Federal
agency. For further explanation of what is included in the
information collection burden, reference 5 Code of Federal
Regulations 1320.3.

                                FERC-538 (IC13-4-000): Gas Pipelines Certificates: Section 7(a) Mandatory Initial Service
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                Number of                       Average burden
                                                                        Number of      responses per   Total number of     hours per     Estimated total
                                                                       respondents       respondent       responses         response      annual burden
                                                                                (A)              (B)    (A) x (B) = (C)            (D)                (C) x (D)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Gas Pipeline Certificates..........................................               1                1                1              240              240
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The total estimated annual cost burden to respondents is $16,562
[240 hours / 2080 hours/year \3\ * $143,540/year \4\ = $16,562].
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ 2080 hours = 52 weeks * 40 hours per week (i.e. 1 year of
full-time employment).
    \4\ Average salary plus benefits per full-time equivalent
employee.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Comments: Comments are invited on: (1) Whether the collection of
information is necessary for the proper performance of the functions of
the Commission, including whether the information will have practical
utility; (2) the accuracy of the agency's estimate of the burden and
cost of the collection of information, including the validity of the
methodology and assumptions used; (3) ways to enhance the quality,
utility and clarity of the information collection; and (4) ways to
minimize the burden of the collection of information on those who are
to respond, including the use of automated collection techniques or
other forms of information technology.

    Dated: December 14, 2012.
Kimberly D. Bose,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2012-30722 Filed 12-20-12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


SAFE PESTICIDES/SAFE PRODUCTS (SP2) SUBCOMMITTEE

MEETING AGENDA

February 7-9, 2007

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency

Office of Research and Development

109 T. W. Alexander Drive

Building C -   Room  C111A, B, C

Research Triangle Park, NC

Wednesday, February 7, 2007  ___________________________________________________

7:30 AM	Registration

Welcome and Overview:                               ________________________________________________

8:00 AM	   Welcome and Opening Remarks	Dr. Anna Harding

		Chair, SP2 Subcommittee

		Dr. Barry Ryan

		Vice-Chair, SP2 Subcommittee

8:15 AM	   DFO Remarks	Heather Drumm

	  		Designated Federal Official, ORD

8:30 AM		ORD Welcome	Dr. Elaine Francis

			Office of Research and Development

SP2 Research Program Long Term Goal 1:           __________________________________________

8:40 AM	 	 LTG 1:  Overview (Subparts A & B)	Dr. William Mundy, NHEERL

			Office of Research and Development

9:10 AM		 LTG 1:  Poster Session I (Atrium)

11:10 AM	 	 LTG 1:  Poster Session I Discussion	SP2 Subcommittee

12:10 PM	  BREAK

12:30 PM		Working Lunch:

		Subcommittee Working Time

1:00 PM		 LTG 1:  Overview (Subpart C)	Dr. Gregory Sayles, NHSRC

				Office of Research and Development

1:30 PM	  LTG 1:  Poster Session II (Atrium)

3:00 PM		 LTG 1:  Poster Session II Discussion	SP2 Subcommittee

3:30 PM	 Subcommittee Working Time

4:00 PM	 OPP Perspective of ORD’s SP2 Research	Jim Jones, Director

		Office of Pesticide Programs

		OPPTS

4:45 PM	 ADJOURN

Thursday, February 8, 2007      _______________________________________________________

8:30 AM	  Review of Yesterday’s Activities	Dr. Anna Harding

	  Overview of Today’s Agenda	Chair, SP2 Subcommittee

SP2 Research Program Long Term Goals_2 & 3:     _____________________________________________

8:45 AM 	    LTG 2:  Overview 	Dr. Timothy Gleason, NHEERL

			Office of Research and Development

9:15 AM 		   LTG 2:  Poster Session (Atrium)

10:45 AM	 	LTG 3:  Overview	Dr. Robert Frederick, NCEA

			Office of Research and Development

11:15 AM	    LTG 3:  Poster Session (Atrium)

12:00 PM	    Lunch

1:00 PM		LTG 2 & 3:  Poster Session Discussion	SP2 Subcommittee

2:00 PM	 Subcommittee Working Time

2:30 PM		OPPT Perspective of ORD’s SP2 Research	Jim Willis, Director

		Chemical Control Division

Office of Pollution Prevention & Toxics

		OPPTS

3:15 PM		Preliminary Subcommittee Discussion of	SP2 Subcommittee

		Charge Questions/Rating of LTG1

4:00 PM		Public Comment

4:15 PM		ADJOURN

Friday, February 9, 2007      _____________________________________________________

8:00 AM	Preliminary Subcommittee Discussion of	SP2 Subcommittee

	Charge Questions / Rating of LTG2 & 3

8:45 AM	Working Time for Subcommittee

11:00 AM	General Report Out	Dr. Anna Harding

		Chair, SP2 Subcommittee

12:00 PM 	ADJOURN

            A Federal Advisory Committee for the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency’s Office of Research and Development