[Federal Register Volume 76, Number 148 (Tuesday, August 2, 2011)]
[Notices]
[Pages 46340-46346]
[FR Doc No: 2011-19420]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-64969; File No. SR-FINRA-2009-028]

 Self-Regulatory Organizations; Financial Industry Regulatory
Authority, Inc.; Notice of Filing of Amendment No. 1 to Proposed Rule
Change To Adopt FINRA Rule 2231 (Customer Account Statements) in the
Consolidated FINRA Rulebook

July 26, 2011.
    Pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934
(``Act'' or ``SEA'') \1\ and Rule 19b-4 thereunder,\2\ notice is hereby
given that on April 22, 2009, Financial Industry Regulatory Authority,
Inc. (``FINRA'') (f/k/a National Association of Securities Dealers,
Inc. (``NASD'')) filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission
(``SEC'' or ``Commission'') the proposed rule change. The proposed rule
change was published for comment in the Federal Register on May 21,
2009.\3\ On July 12, 2011, FINRA filed Amendment No. 1 to the proposed
rule change, which addresses the comments and proposes responsive
amendments. Amendment No. 1 is described in Items I, II, and III below,
which Items have been prepared by FINRA. The Commission is publishing
this notice to solicit comments on Amendment No. 1 to the proposed rule
change from interested persons.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1).
    \2\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4.
    \3\ Amendment No. 1 to SR-FINRA-2009-028 responds to comments
received on the original proposed rule change and proposes
amendments to the original rule change pursuant to the comments. See
Securities Exchange Act Release No. 59921 (May 14, 2009), 74 FR
23912 (May 21, 2009) (``Notice'').
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

    FINRA is proposing this Amendment No. 1 to SR-FINRA-2009-028, a
proposed rule change to adopt NASD Rule 2340 (Customer Account
Statements) as FINRA Rule 2231 in the consolidated FINRA rulebook with
moderate changes. The proposed rule change would delete Incorporated
NYSE Rule 409 (Statements of Accounts of Customers), except for
paragraph (f),\4\ and certain of its related interpretations. FINRA
filed SR-FINRA-2009-028 with the Commission on April 22, 2009. On May
21, 2009, the Commission published the proposed rule change for comment
in the Federal Register \5\ and received 12 comment letters.\6\ Based
on the comments received, FINRA is filing this Amendment No. 1 to
respond to the comments received and to propose amendments, where
appropriate. FINRA requests that the Commission publish Amendment No. 1
in the Federal Register to allow interested parties the ability to
comment on changes made to the proposal in light of comments.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ The SEC approved the deletion of Incorporated NYSE Rule
409(f) in connection with the adoption of FINRA Rule 2232 (Customer
Confirmations). See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 63150
(October 21, 2010); 75 FR 66173 (October 27, 2010) (Order Granting
Accelerated Approval of Proposed Rule Change, as Modified by
Amendment No. 1, To Adopt FINRA Rule 2232 (Customer Confirmations)
in the Consolidated FINRA Rulebook and To Delete NASD Rule 2230,
NASD IM-2110-6 and Incorporated NYSE Rule 409(f)). The rule change
became effective on June 17, 2011. See Regulatory Notice 10-62
(December 2010).
    \5\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 59921 (May 19,
2009), 75 FR 23912 (May 21, 2009) (``Proposing Release''). The
comment period closed on June 11, 2009.
    \6\ Letter from Gene Woodham, Chief Operating Officer, Sterne
Agee Group, Inc., dated June 9, 2009 (``Sterne Agee Letter'');
letter from Tamara K. Salmon, Senior Associate Counsel, Investment
Company Institute, dated June 10, 2009 (``ICI Letter''); letter from
Jesse Hill, Director of Regulatory Services, Edward Jones, dated
June 10, 2009 (``Edward Jones Letter''); letter from Dale E. Brown,
President & CEO, Financial Services Institute, Inc., dated June 11,
2009 (``FSI Letter''); letter from Sean C. Davy, Managing Director,
Corporate Credit Markets Division, Securities Industry and Financial
Markets Association (SIFMA), New York, New York, dated June 11, 2009
(``SIFMA Letter''); letter from David J. Pearlman, Chair, Regulatory
Affairs Committee, College Savings Foundation, dated June 11, 2009
(``College Savings Foundation Letter''); letter from John S. Markle,
Deputy General Counsel, Regulatory Operations, TD AMERITRADE Holding
Corporation, dated June 11, 2009 (``TD Ameritrade Letter''); letter
from Bari Havlik, Chief Compliance Officer, Senior Vice President,
Charles Schwab & Co., Inc., dated June 11, 2009 (``Schwab Letter);
letter from John Muschalek, Managing Director, Clearing Services
Division, First Southwest Company, dated June 11, 2009 (``First
Southwest Company Letter''); letter from Jonathan Feigelson, SVP,
General Counsel, TIAA-CREF, New York, New York, dated June 11, 2009
(``TIAA-CREF June Letter''); letter from Sutherland Asbill & Brennan
LLP on behalf of the Committee of Annuity Insurers, dated June 11,
2009 (``Sutherland Asbill & Brennan Letter''); and letter from
Jonathan Feigelson, SVP, General Counsel, TIAA-CREF, New York, New
York, dated June 13, 2009 (``TIAA-CREF July Letter'').
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The text of the proposed rule change is available on FINRA's Web
site at http://www.finra.org, at the principal office of FINRA 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, FINRA 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. FINRA 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
    As part of the process of developing a new consolidated rulebook
(``Consolidated FINRA Rulebook''),\7\ FINRA is proposing to adopt NASD
Rule 2340 (Customer Account Statements) as FINRA Rule 2231 in the
Consolidated FINRA Rulebook with moderate changes. The proposed rule
change would delete: (1) Incorporated NYSE Rule 409 (Statements of
Accounts of Customers), except for paragraph (f); \8\ and (2)
Incorporated NYSE Rule Interpretations 409(a) and 409(b), except for
paragraphs 409(a)/01 and 409(a)/03, as such rule and its related
interpretations are, in main part, duplicative of NASD Rule 2340.
However, as further described herein, the proposed rule change would
incorporate certain provisions of Incorporated NYSE Rule 409 and its
interpretations into new FINRA Rule 2231.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ The current FINRA rulebook consists of (1) FINRA Rules; (2)
NASD Rules; and (3) rules incorporated from NYSE (``Incorporated
NYSE Rules'') (together, the NASD Rules and Incorporated NYSE Rules
are referred to as the ``Transitional Rulebook''). While the NASD
Rules generally apply to all FINRA members, the Incorporated NYSE
Rules apply only to those members of FINRA that are also members of
the NYSE (``Dual Members''). The FINRA Rules apply to all FINRA
members, unless such rules have a more limited application by their
terms. For more information about the rulebook consolidation
process, see Information Notice, March 12, 2008 (Rulebook
Consolidation Process).
    \8\ See supra note 4.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Rule Filing History
    On April 22, 2009, FINRA filed with the Commission SR-FINRA-2009-
028, a proposed rule change to adopt FINRA Rule 2231 (Customer Account
Statements) in the Consolidated FINRA Rulebook. The proposed rule
change would require each general securities member to send account
statements at least once each calendar month to each customer whose
account had account activity during the period since the last statement
was sent to the customer, subject to certain new exceptions proposed in
this Amendment No. 1; and at least once every calendar quarter to each
customer whose account had a security position or money balance during
the period since the last statement was sent to the customer. The
proposed rule change would also continue the exception (subject to
specified conditions) for customer accounts carried solely for the
purpose of execution on a delivery versus payment/receive versus
payment (DVP/RVP) basis.
    On May 21, 2009, the SEC published the proposed rule change for
comment in the Federal Register \9\ and received 12 comment
letters.\10\ Based on the comments received, FINRA is filing this
Amendment No. 1 to respond to the comments received and to propose
amendments, where appropriate.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \9\ See supra note 5.
    \10\ See supra note 6.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    FINRA requests that the Commission publish Amendment No. 1 in the
Federal Register to allow interested parties the ability to comment on
changes made to the proposal in light of comments.
Proposed Changes in Amendment No. 1
    In light of the comments, FINRA is proposing to exclude certain
account activities from the proposed monthly account statement delivery
requirement by adding new paragraph (c) to proposed FINRA Rule 2231.
Proposed paragraph (c) of FINRA Rule 2231 would expressly exclude
certain account activities from the monthly account statement delivery
requirement. These activities would continue to require delivery of
quarterly account statements, subject to new proposed Supplementary
Material .01 (Compliance with SEA Rule 10b-10) that provides a general
reminder that members remain subject to any conditions or requirements
specified in any release, interpretation, ``no-action'' position or
exemption issued by the SEC or its staff in the context of SEA Rule
10b-10 (Confirmation of Transactions) that a member may rely on for
relief from certain delivery obligations of trade confirmations as
specified in such rule (e.g., the manner and frequency of delivering
periodic account statements in lieu of immediate trade confirmations)
and FINRA Rule 2231 is not intended to alter any such conditions or
requirements. FINRA also is proposing to amend proposed Supplementary
Material .02 (Transmission of Customer Account Statements to Other
Persons or Entities) \11\ to: (1) Clarify that members are not required
to obtain prior written consent to send duplicate account statements or
other communications for accounts of associated persons of another
member to such other member in complying with NASD Rule 3050 and
Incorporated NYSE Rule 407; \12\ (2) clarify (consistent with any SEC
release, interpretation, ``no-action'' position or exemption issued by
the SEC or its staff in the context of SEA Rule 10b-10 that have
established the policy that customers should continue to receive
periodic account statements when not receiving immediate trade
confirmations under SEA Rule 10b-10) that members must continue to
deliver customer account statements to customers as provided in the
proposed rule even when directed by the customer in writing to send
duplicates to a third party; \13\ and (3) delete the term
``confirmation,'' from the proposed rule text as delivery requirements
for confirmations are governed by SEA Rule 10b-10 and FINRA Rule
2232.\14\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \11\ FINRA is proposing to add new Supplementary Material .01
(Compliance with SEA Rule 10b-10) as part of this Amendment No. 1
and has therefore renumbered the other proposed Supplementary
Material items.
    \12\ FINRA is proposing to adopt FINRA Rule 3210 (Personal
Securities Transactions for or by Associated Persons), which
combines and streamlines certain provisions of NASD Rule 3050 and
Incorporated NYSE Rule 407. See Regulatory Notice 09-22 (April
2009).
    \13\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 34962 (November 10,
1994); 59 FR 59612 (November 17, 1994) (Confirmation of
Transactions).
    \14\ See supra note 4.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Comments to the Proposed Rule Change
    The commenters express general support for the proposed rule
change, but have concerns with certain aspects of the proposed rule.
Most commenters believe the proposal is too broad. Specifically, most
of the comments focus on the following two issues: (1) The proposal to
change the delivery requirement for customer account statements from
quarterly to monthly; and (2) the proposal's potential conflict with
SEA Rule 10b-10 and related guidance. Commenters also raised concerns
regarding the general utility of customer account statements, potential
environmental impact, availability of alternatives, need for written
customer consent to transmit customer account statements to third
parties, clarification of provisions requiring display of the identity
of clearing firms and other issues. In addition, several commenters
requested sufficient time to comply with the proposal if it is
approved. FINRA discusses its responses to these comments below.
a. General
    Three commenters questioned the value of customer account
statements generally and stated that the significance of customer
account statements has diminished in recent

years.\15\ Several commenters argue that customer account statements
are outdated the day after they are generated and customers now
routinely use other up-to-date mediums to review current account
activities such as on-line account access, automated phone systems and
call centers.\16\ In addition, several commenters expressed concern
that customer account statements are less effective at helping
customers' spot errors, identify theft or other potential problems than
these more timely alternatives.\17\ One commenter urged FINRA to
encourage firms to include disclosure on customer account statements
apprising customers of available alternatives for obtaining the most
current information.\18\ FINRA, however, disagrees with the notion that
customer account statements have little or limited utility. FINRA
believes that customer account statements continue to serve a
significant regulatory purpose and that customers benefit from the
receipt of periodic customer account statements.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \15\ See SIFMA Letter, TIAA-CREF June Letter and Schwab Letter.
    \16\ See TD Ameritrade Letter, TIAA-CREF June Letter and First
Southwest Company Letter.
    \17\ See FSI Letter, TIAA-CREF June Letter and First Southwest
Company Letter.
    \18\ See TIAA-CREF June Letter.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Several commenters also raised concerns regarding the environmental
impact of the proposal.\19\ One commenter estimates the proposal will
generate 60 million additional pages each year. The commenter estimates
that this would be the equivalent of 7,200 trees or 300 tons of paper
annually--almost a half of it destined for landfills.\20\ While FINRA
is mindful of the potential impact of its rulemaking on the environment
and related burdens on its members, FINRA believes customer account
statements serve a significant purpose in protecting customers and
enhancing the overall integrity of the securities market. Moreover,
consistent with current guidance, FINRA is proposing to adopt
Supplementary Material .03 (Use of Electronic Media to Satisfy Delivery
Obligations) which allows a firm to provide electronic delivery of
customer statements upon affirmative consent of the customer.\21\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \19\ See TIAA-CREF June Letter and First Southwest Company
Letter.
    \20\ See TIAA-CREF June Letter.
    \21\ SEC guidance to date on the use of electronic media
continues to require the affirmative consent of the investor/
customer, and FINRA believes such consent should be required for
electronic delivery of customer account statements. See Notice to
Members 98-3 (January 1998). See also Securities Exchange Act
Release No. 42728 (April 28, 2000); 65 FR 25843 (May 4, 2000).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

b. Proposed Monthly Account Statement Delivery Requirement
1. Monthly Delivery Is Not Industry Standard
    As set forth in the Proposing Release, paragraph (a) of the
proposed rule would impose a new requirement that each general
securities member firm send a customer account statement not less than
once every calendar month to each customer whose account had account
activity during the period since the last statement, and continue to
require that such firms send customer account statements not less than
once every calendar quarter to each customer whose account had a
security position or money balance during the period since the last
statement. All 12 commenters objected to the scope of the proposed
monthly delivery requirement.\22\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \22\ See supra note 6.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Several commenters state that current industry practice continues
to be providing customers with account statements on a quarterly-basis,
not monthly.\23\ They contend that FINRA offers little support for the
statement that requiring monthly account statements for customer
accounts with account activity ``better reflects current industry
practice.'' \24\ Another commenter notes that quarterly reporting is
the retirement plan industry legal standard and monthly reporting would
be at odds with other rules governing the retirement plan industry,
including laws enacted by Congress.\25\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \23\ See TIAA-CREF July Letter, SIFMA Letter, TD Ameritrade
Letter, FSI Letter and Schwab Letter and Sutherland Asbill & Brennan
Letter.
    \24\ Id.
    \25\ See TIAA-CREF June Letter.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Another commenter notes that although a majority of its customers
already receive monthly account statements, some customers have
expressed a desire to receive them quarterly and mandatory monthly
delivery would be costly.\26\ Several commenters project that the cost
to comply with the new requirement, e.g., to produce, print, stuff and
mail additional statements, plus train personnel, would be in the
millions.\27\ One commenter argues that ``[s]caling up the member's
compliance systems, training programs, personnel, policies and
procedures, and acquiring the resources necessary for such an
undertaking, would impose immense administrative costs and burdens on
these firms, and ultimately result in the imposition of increased costs
on customers.'' \28\ Commenters state that the practical benefits
received by investors from monthly statements versus quarterly
statements are substantially disproportionate to the inherent cost
under a cost benefit analysis.\29\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \26\ See Schwab Letter.
    \27\ TD Ameritrade estimates the new requirement will increase
costs by $4-$7 million annually and by tens of millions or more
across the industry. TIAA-CREF estimates that the move to monthly
statements will cost an additional $16 million in printing and
postage expenses per year, which would be passed on to customers.
Edward Jones estimates the cost of monthly account statements in
2009 would have been $1.5 million.
    \28\ See Sutherland Asbill & Brennan LLP Letter.
    \29\ See Sterne Agee Letter, ICI Letter, Edward Jones Letter,
FSI Letter, SIFMA Letter, TD Ameritrade Letter, Schwab Letter, First
Southwest Company Letter, TIAA-CREF June Letter, Sutherland Asbill &
Brennan Letter and TIAA-CREF July Letter.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    One commenter further contends that the proposed move to monthly
account statement delivery requirements contradicts the 2008 Rand Study
and recent efforts by the SEC to streamline disclosures to investors to
make them more user-friendly and readable.\30\ Another commenter
suggests that customers should be permitted to affirmatively elect
quarterly delivery of customer account statements with the right to
revert to monthly delivery anytime they choose.\31\ Another commenter
recommends that firms be able to condition the customer's right to
receive monthly statements upon consent to electronic delivery.\32\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \30\ See FSI Letter.
    \31\ See Schwab Letter.
    \32\ See TIAA-CREF June Letter.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In light of the comments, FINRA is proposing to exclude certain
account activities from the proposed monthly account statement delivery
requirement. FINRA believes the proposed exclusions (outlined in detail
below) strike the correct balance between investor protection and the
concerns raised by the commenters.
2. Monthly Delivery Is Inconsistent With SEA Section 15A
    One commenter asserts that the monthly statement requirement is
inconsistent with the statutory requirements of Sections 6 and 15A of
the SEA and therefore the proposal should not be approved by the
SEC.\33\ The commenter contends that FINRA's statement on burden on
competition in the rule filing is cursory and falls short of satisfying
the instructions in Form 19b-4 to provide detailed and specific
statements.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \33\ See TIAA-CREF July Letter. FINRA notes that is not a
``national securities exchange'' and therefore is not subject to the
requirements of Section 6 of the SEA.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    FINRA has complied with all rulemaking obligations imposed by the
SEA. As required under Section 19(b)(1)

of the SEA, FINRA submitted to the SEC a concise general statement of
the basis and purpose of the proposed rule. As stated in its rule
filing, FINRA believes that the proposed rule change will provide
customers with critical information regarding their accounts and will
allow them to review their statements in a timely manner, while also
clarifying and streamlining the customer account rules for adoption as
FINRA rules in the Consolidated FINRA Rulebook. In addition, as also
stated in the rule filing, the proposed rule change does not create ``a
burden on competition not necessary or appropriate in furtherance of
the purposes of [the SEA].'' \34\ Further, FINRA tailors its proposed
rule changes as narrowly as possible to achieve the intended and
necessary regulatory benefit. In this regard, FINRA notes that, as
further detailed below, in response to commenters' concerns, it is
proposing to exclude certain account activities from the proposed
monthly account statement delivery requirement.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \34\ See 15 U.S.C. 78o-3(b)(9).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

3. Monthly Delivery Creates Potential Conflict With SEA Rule 10b-10
    All commenters contend that the adoption of a monthly delivery
requirement for customer account statements would cause the proposed
rule change to conflict with SEA Rule 10b-10 (Confirmation of
Transactions) and its related interpretations and guidance.\35\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \35\ See supra note 6.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Several commenters note that SEA Rule 10b-10 generally requires
that at, or before, the completion of a securities transaction for a
customer, a broker-dealer must deliver to the customer written
notification (a ``confirmation'') that contains certain prescribed
information about the transaction.\36\ Commenters assert that the more
immediate nature of transaction confirmations makes them a very
effective tool for customers for identifying discrepancies in a
customer's account related to erroneous transactions, identity theft,
or other potential problems.\37\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \36\ See Schwab Letter and SIFMA Letter.
    \37\ See Sutherland Asbill & Brennan Letter.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    All commenters also emphasize that the Commission, through SEA Rule
10b-10(b), rule interpretations, no-action guidance and exemptive
relief, has considered the disclosures appropriate for certain types of
transactions, balanced risks to investor protection against cost
savings for broker-dealers, and determined that it is unnecessary for
broker-dealers to send confirmations of certain transactions if certain
information regarding the transactions is disclosed in a quarterly
statement.\38\ The commenters state that these transactions include,
but are not limited to, transactions effected pursuant to a ``periodic
plan'' or ``investment company plan,'' the automatic reinvestment of
dividends in the shares of money market funds, other open-end
investment companies and unit investment trusts and transactions in
certain sorts of ``wrap fee'' or ``payroll deduction''
arrangements.\39\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \38\ See supra note 6.
    \39\ See SIFMA Letter.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In light of the comments, as further detailed below, FINRA is
proposing to add new paragraph (c) to exclude certain account
activities from the proposed monthly account statement delivery
requirement.\40\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \40\ In proposing the exceptions in new paragraph (c), FINRA
reminds firms that they remain subject to any conditions or
requirements specified in any release, interpretation, ``no-action''
position or exemption issued by the SEC or its staff in the context
of SEA Rule 10b-10 that a firm may rely on for relief from certain
delivery obligations of trade confirmations as specified in such
rule (e.g., the manner and frequency of delivering periodic account
statements in lieu of immediate trade confirmations) and proposed
FINRA Rule 2231 is not intended to alter any such conditions or
requirements. See proposed FINRA Rule 2231.01.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

4. Monthly Delivery Creates Potential Conflict With ERISA and Rules
Relating to Retirement Plans and MSRB Rules Relating to 529 College
Savings Plans
    Two commenters are concerned that the proposed monthly delivery
requirement for customer account statements will conflict with current
quarterly reporting standards in the retirement plan industry.\41\ The
commenters note that multiple service providers, including broker-
dealers, banks and trust companies, offer services to retirement plan
participants. These parties are subject to SEA Rule 10b-10, Section 105
of the Employee Retirement Income Securities Act of 1974, as amended
(``ERISA''), and applicable banking regulations. The commenters state
that these various regulations recognize quarterly statements and
changing the requirement for broker-dealers would add confusion and
place broker-dealers at a competitive disadvantage with few, if any,
benefits.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \41\ See TIAA-CREF June Letter and ICI Letter.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Similarly, another commenter is concerned that the proposed monthly
delivery requirement is at odds with Rule G-15 of the Municipal
Securities Rulemaking Board (``MSRB''), which permits that confirmation
of transaction in college savings plan transactions may be done on a
quarterly basis provided that they are part of a regular investment
program meeting the definition of ``periodic municipal fund security
plan'' under the applicable MSRB Rules.\42\ The commenter states the
proposed rule would create an anomaly because a broker-dealer would be
required to provide a monthly statement under FINRA Rules, but would be
permitted under MSRB Rules to provide a quarterly statement. Moreover,
they argue that such periodic activity does not seem to be the sort
that would lend itself to account security issues and/or identity theft
concerns. FINRA notes that nothing in this rule proposal is intended to
alter the balance of jurisdiction between FINRA and the MSRB and the
continued application of MSRB Rules to municipal fund securities.
Further, FINRA believes that proposed paragraph (c) that establishes
exceptions from the proposed monthly delivery requirement would
generally make the proposed rule consistent with the frequency of
delivery requirements in MSRB Rule G-15.\43\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \42\ See College Savings Foundation Letter.
    \43\ See MSRB Rule G-15(a) (Confirmation, Clearance, Settlement
and Other Uniform Practice Requirements with Respect to Transactions
with Customers), which provides in relevant part that ``such broker,
dealer or municipal securities dealer gives or sends to such
customer within five business days after the end of each quarterly
period, in the case of a customer participating in a periodic
municipal fund security plan, or each monthly period, in the case of
a customer participating in a non-periodic municipal fund security
program, a written statement disclosing * * *.''
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

5. Carve-Outs From Monthly Delivery Recommended by Commenters
    Several commenters recommend that FINRA should permit quarterly
account reporting where the only activity in the customer's account
consists of (A) certain types of routine activity that does not involve
the active participation of the customer (``Passive Activity''); (B)
activity that the Commission has determined need only be reported on
quarterly account statements rather than in Rule 10b-10 transaction
confirmations (``10b-10 Exempt Activity''); and (C) occasional
transactions in retirement accounts for which an immediate confirmation
is sent to the customer when the predominant activities in such account
are either Passive Activity or 10b-10 Exempt Activity.\44\ In addition,
one commenter notes that similar activity with respect to ERISA plans
should be exempted as well from the monthly delivery requirements.\45\
The commenters note that the activities described above are generally
routine

and recurring activities in a customer's account that are better suited
to quarterly reporting. In addition, they state that these routine and
regular activities in a customer's account are of the type that
typically do not raise fraud and/or identity theft concerns.\46\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \44\ See SIFMA Letter, FSI Letter, Sutherland Asbill & Brennan
Letter and TIAA-CREF June Letter.
    \45\ See TIAA-CREF June Letter.
    \46\ See supra note 44.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

6. FINRA Response to Monthly Delivery Comments
    In response to the comments raised, FINRA is proposing to add new
paragraph (c) to proposed FINRA Rule 2231. Proposed paragraph (c) would
expressly exclude certain account activities from the monthly account
statement delivery requirement. These activities would continue to
require delivery of quarterly account statements, subject to new
proposed Supplementary Material .01 (Compliance with SEA Rule 10b-10)
that provides a general reminder that members remain subject to any
conditions or requirements specified in any release, interpretation,
``no-action'' position or exemption issued by the SEC or its staff in
the context of SEA Rule 10b-10 (Confirmation of Transactions) that a
member may rely on for relief from certain delivery obligations of
trade confirmations as specified in such rule (e.g., the manner and
frequency of delivering periodic account statements in lieu of
immediate trade confirmations) and FINRA Rule 2231 is not intended to
alter any such conditions or requirements.
    Specifically, subject to proposed Supplementary Material .01, a
member could send quarterly account statements to customers instead of
monthly account statements pursuant to paragraph (a) of the proposed
rule if:
    (1) The member relies on an appropriate rule, regulation, release,
interpretation, ``no-action'' position or exemption issued by the SEC
or its staff that (A) specifically applies to the fact situation of the
activity; (B) provides relief from the immediate transaction
confirmation delivery requirements of SEA Rule 10b-10; and (C) permits
quarterly delivery of customer account statements; or
    (2) The activity to the account consists only of the kind listed
below:
    (A) the receipt of funds in the account that are not directly from
a purchase or sale transaction, including the receipt of interest and
dividends;
    (B) the automatic reinvestment of funds in the account pursuant to
and in accordance with a customer's standing instructions (e.g., a
dividend reinvestment plan);
    (C) the transfer of uninvested customer credit balances into or out
of money market mutual funds or bank deposits pursuant to a ``sweep
program'' pursuant to consent of the customer and implemented
consistent with applicable regulatory guidance, except where the
customer's balance in the bank deposit ``sweep program'' during the
period exceeds the amount insured by the FDIC coverage;
    (D) all fees and charges to the account that have been fully
disclosed to the customer and comply with all disclosure and applicable
regulatory requirements (e.g., account fees, short position charges,
interest on debit balances or charges for dividends on securities held
short in the account).
    (3) A member may rely on an exclusion under this paragraph (c) only
if customers are provided access to current information on their
accounts via the Internet and by telephone.
    FINRA believes the proposed exclusions for these types of account
activities are appropriate as they strike the correct balance between
investor protection and the concerns raised by the commenters.
c. Proposed Supplementary Material .02 (Transmission of Customer
Account Statements to Other Persons or Entities)
    Proposed Supplementary Material .02 would require written
instructions from the customer to address and/or send customer
statements or other communications relating to the customer's account
to other persons or entities. One commenter contends that this
requirement would conflict with Incorporated NYSE Rule 407 and NASD
Rule 3050.\47\ As further detailed therein, these rules generally
address the obligation of a member carrying an account in which an
associated person of another member has an interest to send duplicate
confirmations and accounts statements to such other member. The
commenter seeks clarification that members are not required to obtain
the written consent of the customer before sending duplicate
statements, confirmations or other communications pursuant to NYSE Rule
407 or NASD Rule 3050. FINRA agrees that compliance with such rules
should not be deemed a violation of this provision and is proposing to
revise the proposed rule text to make this clear.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \47\ See SIFMA Letter. See also supra note 12.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Two commenters assert that the proposed rule should allow a
customer's oral consent to be sufficient to send a duplicate account
statement, confirmation, or other communication, provided that the
customer also receives such account statement, confirmation or other
communication and the member relying on such oral consent lists on the
customer's (quarterly or monthly) account statement the names of any
other persons to whom duplicate communications are being sent.\48\ One
of these commenters notes that firms are permitted to accept oral
instructions for a variety of customer transactions and contends that
customers should be afforded the same level of convenience in this
regard so long as the firm has adequate controls in place.\49\ FINRA
does not believe that oral instructions are sufficient in this context.
Due to several concerns (e.g., identify theft, privacy concerns, etc.),
FINRA believes firms must be able to document and record customer
consent to send customer account statements to third-parties. FINRA has
permitted firms to act on oral instructions from customers in other
contexts (e.g., trading instructions) largely to allow customer and
firms to act expeditiously to execute securities transactions that are
time-sensitive in nature. However, the delivery of customer account
statements presents no such concerns and therefore should require
written customer consent.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \48\ See SIFMA Letter and Schwab Letter.
    \49\ See Schwab Letter.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Accordingly, in response to comments, FINRA is proposing to amend
proposed Supplementary Material .02 to: (1) Clarify that members are
not required to obtain prior written consent to send duplicate account
statements or other communications for accounts of associated persons
of another member to such other member in complying with NASD Rule 3050
and Incorporated NYSE Rule 407; (2) clarify (consistent with any SEC
release, interpretation, ``no-action'' position or exemption issued by
the SEC or its staff in the context of SEA Rule 10b-10 that have
established the policy that customers should continue to receive
periodic account statements when not receiving immediate trade
confirmations under SEA Rule 10b-10) that members must continue to
deliver customer account statements to customers as provided in the
proposed Rule even when directed by the customer in writing to send
duplicates to a third party;\50\ and (3) delete the term
``confirmation,'' from the proposed rule text as delivery requirements
for confirmations are governed by SEA Rule 10b-10 and FINRA Rule
2232.\51\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \50\ See supra note 13.
    \51\ See supra note 4.

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

d. Proposed Supplementary Material .03 (Use of Electronic Media To
Satisfy Delivery Obligations)
    One commenter urges FINRA to adopt electronic delivery of customer
account statements as the default delivery mechanism.\52\ The commenter
argues that electronic delivery provides more timely information to
customers and a cost savings to firms. However, another commenter is
concerned that requiring individual customers to affirmatively opt for
electronic delivery will act to negate these benefits, but notes that
further use of electronic delivery methods raises larger issues that
FINRA should consider on a more global basis, rather than solely in the
context of periodic customer account statements.\53\ FINRA believes
that proposed Supplementary Material .03 is consistent with current SEC
guidance on the use of electronic media which, among other things,
requires affirmative consent of the customer for electronic delivery of
certain documents.\54\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \52\ See TIAA-CREF June Letter.
    \53\ See Sutherland Asbill & Brennan Letter.
    \54\ See supra note 21.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

e. Proposed Supplementary Material .04 (Information To Be Disclosed on
Statement)
    One commenter seeks clarification of the requirements in paragraphs
(a) and (b) and contends that the requirements are in conflict.\55\
Proposed paragraph (a) requires disclosure of the identity of the
introducing firm and the clearing firm, if different, and their
respective contact information on the front of the statement, but
allows the identity and contact information of the clearing firm to be
appear on the back of the statement so long as it is bold and
prominent. Proposed paragraph (b) requires that the front of the
statement must clearly disclose that the clearing firm is a member of
SIPC. FINRA believes the two provisions are not inconsistent. Proposed
paragraph (a) gives firms the option to provide the identity and
contact information of the clearing firm on the back of the statement
if the firm chooses; it does not require such placement. Proposed
paragraph (b) simply requires SIPC disclosure, which can be
accomplished either by a general statement or by identifying the
clearing firm by name. FINRA believes these provisions allow firms some
flexibility in providing this information, while also ensuring that the
SIPC status of the clearing firm is disclosed on the front of the
statement.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \55\ See SIFMA Letter.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

f. Proposed Supplementary Material .07 (Use of Summary Statements)
    One commenter objects to proposed Supplementary Material .07 (as
renumbered in this Amendment No. 1) on the Use of Summary
Statements.\56\ The supplementary material would require, among other
things, that the ``beginning and end of each separate statement (e.g.,
summary, brokerage, mutual fund, banking, insurance, etc.) be clearly
distinguishable by color, pagination or other distinct form of
demarcation.'' The commenter asks FINRA to ``clarify that the use of
prominent disclosure within summary statements that aggregate accounts
held or serviced by multiple parties is adequate to satisfy, or may be
used in lieu of, [the above set forth requirement].'' FINRA believes
the term ``other distinct form of demarcation,'' provides firms the
flexibility to format summary statements. Firms are not required to
place separate statements on separate pages, but are required to format
the statements in such a manner as to make them distinguishable on
their face. The use of prominent disclosure with footnotes or other
distinct forms of demarcation can be sufficient so long as accounts
held or serviced by multiple parties are clearly distinguishable. FINRA
believes these guidelines are beneficial because they establish
standards to provide clarity and reduce confusion to customers when
receiving summary statements.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \56\ See TIAA-CREF June Letter.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

g. Miscellaneous Comments
    One commenter seeks clarification on what constitutes a ``general
securities business'' for purposes of triggering the customer account
statement delivery requirement.\57\ They argue that a firm that has
multiple business lines which include varied brokerage and securities
products and services may carry customer accounts or receive or hold
customer funds or securities in connection with one business line or
product or service but not another. They seek clarification that the
rule will apply only to those portions of a firm's business which
triggers the classification--not all lines or services. Another
commenter requests clarification that a ``general securities member''
does not include members that are relying on an SEC Exemptive Order
relating to FINRA Rule 2330 (formerly NASD Rule 2821), which
established sales practice standards regarding recommended purchases
and exchanges of deferred variable annuities.\58\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \57\ Id.
    \58\ See Sutherland Asbill & Brennan Letter. See also Securities
Exchange Act Release No. 56376 (September 7, 2007) (``Exemptive
Order''). The Exemptive Order issued in conjunction with the
approval of FINRA Rule 2330 provides that a broker-dealer will not
be ``deemed'' to hold customer funds for purposes of SEA Rule 15c3-1
and SEA Rule 15c3-3 if, among other things, the transaction to which
the check relates is subject to the registered principal requirement
of the Rule and the broker-dealer promptly transmits the check after
the principal's review has been completed.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In defining the term ``general securities member,'' current NASD
Rule 2340 and proposed FINRA Rule 2231 provide that a member that does
not carry customer accounts and does not hold customer funds or
securities is exempt from the provisions of this rule. FINRA notes that
the proposed rule change does not amend the current definition of
``general securities member'' as set forth in NASD Rule 2340 and
nothing in this proposal is intended to alter the obligations between
clearing firms and introducing firms. If the commenter or others have
concerns about the application of the rule in particular situations
based on the structure of the firm, FINRA believes that such questions
can be best resolved through its interpretative letter process.
    One commenter seeks confirmation that the proposal is not intended
to require members to send account statements to other broker-
dealers.\59\ The commenter notes that NASD Rule 0120(g) defines the
term ``customer'' to exclude a broker or dealer. The commenter seeks
clarification because NASD Rule 0120(g) has not been adopted into the
Consolidated FINRA Rulebook at this time. NASD Rule 2340 and NYSE 409
have not required firms to send account statements to other broker-
dealers, and FINRA does not intend to broaden the scope of the
rules.\60\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \59\ See SIFMA Letter.
    \60\ See SR-FINRA-2008-021 (Proposed Rule Change Relating to the
Adoption of NASD Rules 4000 through 10000 Series and the 12000
through 14000 Series as FINRA Rules in the New Consolidated FINRA
Rulebook) (discussing ``Rules of General Applicability,'' including
NASD Rule 0120); Securities Exchange Act Release No. 58176 (July 16,
2008); 73 FR 42844 (July 23, 2008).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Another commenter expressed support of proposed Supplementary
Material .05 (as renumbered in this Amendment No. 1) (Assets Externally
Held and Included on Statements Solely as a Service to Customers),
which adopts Incorporated NYSE Rule Interpretation 409(a)/04, as
appropriately recognizing the responsibilities of member firms.\61\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \61\ See Sutherland Asbill & Brennan Letter.

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

h. Implementation Timeframe
    Assuming the SEC approves the proposal, several commenters
requested additional time to comply with the proposed requirements,
particularly if the monthly delivery obligations remain as originally
proposed.\62\ FINRA appreciates these factors and notes that in
response to commenters' concerns, it is proposing to exclude certain
activities from the monthly account statement requirement. Such change
should significantly reduce the potential costs and burdens on firms.
Nonetheless, FINRA intends to give firms sufficient time to comply with
new FINRA Rule 2231.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \62\ See Sutherland Asbill & Brennan Letter, TIAA-CREF June
Letter and SIFMA Letter.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    As noted above, FINRA will announce the implementation date of the
proposed rule change in a Regulatory Notice to be published no later
than 90 days following Commission approval. The implementation date
will be no later than 365 days following Commission approval.
2. Statutory Basis
    FINRA believes that the proposed rule change is consistent with the
provisions of Section 15A(b)(6) of the Act,\63\ which requires, among
other things, that FINRA 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. FINRA believes that the proposed rule change will
provide customers with critical information regarding their accounts
and will allow them to review their statements in a timely manner,
while also clarifying and streamlining the customer account rules for
adoption as FINRA Rules in the Consolidated FINRA Rulebook.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \63\ 15 U.S.C. 78o-3(b)(6).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

B. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement on Burden on Competition
    FINRA 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 on the proposed rule change were solicited by the
Commission in response to the publication of SR-FINRA-2009-028.\64\ The
SEC received 12 comment letters. The comments are summarized above.
FINRA is submitting its response to comments on the original filing
contemporaneously with this Amendment No. 1.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \64\ See Proposing Release.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

    Within 45 days of the date of publication of this notice in the
Federal Register or within such longer period up to 90 days (i) as the
Commission may designate if it finds such longer period to be
appropriate and publishes its reasons for so finding or (ii) as to
which the self-regulatory organization consents, the Commission will:
    (A) By order approve or disapprove 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 Amendment No. 1, 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-FINRA-2009-028 on the subject line.

Paper Comments

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

All submissions should refer to File Number SR-FINRA-2009-028. 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 Web site
viewing and printing in the Commission's Public Reference Room, 100 F
Street, NE., Washington, DC 20549, on official business days between
the hours of 10 a.m. and 3 p.m. Copies of such filing also will be
available for inspection and copying at the principal office of FINRA.
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-FINRA-2009-028
and should be submitted on or before August 23, 2011.

    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets,
pursuant to delegated authority.\65\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \65\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Elizabeth M. Murphy,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2011-19420 Filed 8-1-11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 85, Number 32 (Tuesday, February 18, 2020)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Page 8793]
[FR Doc No: 2020-01729]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Parts 60, 61, and 63

[EPA-R09-OAR-2019-0632; FRL-10004-32-Region 9]

Delegation of New Source Performance Standards and National
Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants for the States of
Arizona and Nevada

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Proposed rule.

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

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is proposing to
approve updates to the Code of Federal Regulations delegation tables to
reflect the current delegation status of New Source Performance
Standards and National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants
in Arizona and Nevada.

DATES: Comments must be received by March 19, 2020.

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID No. EPA-R09-
OAR-2019-0632 at http://www.regulations.gov, or via email to
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>For comments submitted at Regulations.gov, follow
the online instructions for submitting comments. Once submitted,
comments cannot be edited or removed from Regulations.gov. For either
manner of submission, the EPA may publish any comment received to its
public docket. Do not submit electronically any information you
consider to be Confidential Business Information (CBI) or other
information whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Multimedia
submissions (audio, video, etc.) must be accompanied by a written
comment. The written comment is considered the official comment and
should include discussion of all points you wish to make. The EPA will
generally not consider comments or comment contents located outside of
the primary submission (i.e., on the web, cloud, or other file sharing
system). For additional submission methods, please contact the person
identified in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section. For the full
EPA public comment policy, information about CBI or multimedia
submissions, and general guidance on making effective comments, please
visit http://www2.epa.gov/dockets/commenting-epa-dockets.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Jeffrey Buss, EPA Region IX, (415)
947-4152<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: In the ``Rules and Regulations'' section of
this Federal Register, the EPA is approving updates to the Code of
Federal Regulations delegation tables to reflect the current delegation
status of New Source Performance Standards and National Emission
Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants in Arizona and Nevada. We are
approving these updates in a direct final action without prior proposal
because we believe this action is not controversial. A detailed
rationale for the approval is set forth in the direct final rule. If we
receive adverse comments, however, we will publish a timely withdrawal
of the direct final rule and address the comments in a subsequent final
rule based on this proposed rule. Please note that if the EPA receives
adverse comment on an amendment, paragraph, or section of this rule and
if that provision may be severed from the remainder of the rule, the
EPA may adopt as final those provisions of the rule that are not the
subject of an adverse comment.
    We do not plan to open a second comment period, so anyone
interested in commenting should do so at this time. If we do not
receive adverse comments, no further activity is planned. For further
information, see please see the direct final action.

    Dated: December 23, 2019.
Elizabeth J. Adams,
Director, Air and Radiation Division, Region IX.
[FR Doc. 2020-01729 Filed 2-14-20; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


[Federal Register Volume 80, Number 65 (Monday, April 6, 2015)]
[Notices]
[Page 18396]
[FR Doc No: 2015-07763]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Project No. 803-105]

Pacific Gas and Electric Company; Notice of Application Accepted
for Filing, Soliciting Comments, Motions To Intervene, and Protests

    Take notice that the following hydroelectric application has been
filed with the Commission and is available for public inspection:
    a. Type of Application: Application for Temporary Variance of
Minimum Flow Requirement
    b. Project No.: 803-105
    c. Date Filed: March 25, 2015
    d. Applicant: Pacific Gas and Electric Company (licensee)
    e. Name of Project: DeSabla Centerville
    f. Location: Butte Creek and West Branch Feather River in Butte
County, California
    g. Filed Pursuant to: Federal Power Act, 16 U.S.C. 791(a)-825(r).
    h. Applicant Contact: Mr. Rich Doble, Senior License Coordinator,
Pacific Gas and Electric Company, Mail Code: N11C, P.O. Box 770000, San
Francisco, CA 94177. Phone<PHONE_NUMBER>
    i. FERC Contact: Mr. John Aedo,<PHONE_NUMBER>, or
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>    j. Deadline for filing comments, motions to intervene, protests,
and recommendations is 15 days from the issuance date of this notice by
the Commission (April 14, 2015). The Commission strongly encourages
electronic filing. Please file motions to intervene, protests,
comments, or recommendations using the Commission's eFiling system at
http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/efiling.asp. Commenters can submit
brief comments up to 6,000 characters, without prior registration,
using the eComment system at http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/ecomment.asp. You must include your name and contact information at the
end of your comments. For assistance, please contact FERC Online
Support at<EMAIL_ADDRESS>(866) 208-3676 (toll free), or
(202) 502-8659 (TTY). In lieu of electronic filing, please send a paper
copy to: Secretary, Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First
Street NE., Washington, DC 20426. Please include the project number (P-
803-105) on any comments, motions to intervene, protests, or
recommendations filed.
    k. Description of Request: The licensee requests Commission
approval for a temporary variance of the minimum flow requirements of
Article 39 of the project license. The licensee proposes to reduce
flows from Philbrook Reservoir to 0.8 cubic feet per second (cfs) (with
an additional 0.2 cfs flow buffer) to ensure the availability of cold
water storage for spring-run Chinook salmon during the fish holding
period in the summer. The licensee explains that current drought
conditions have resulted in depressed storage levels in Philbrook
Reservoir and that spring-run Chinook salmon have already entered Butte
Creek. The licensee requests the above variance until June 1, 2015, or
until conditions improve, as determined by the licensee and resource
agencies at monthly meetings.
    l. Locations of the Application: A copy of the application is
available for inspection and reproduction at the Commission's Public
Reference Room, located at 888 First Street, NE., Room 2A, Washington,
DC 20426, or by calling<PHONE_NUMBER>. This filing may also be viewed
on the Commission's Web site at http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/elibrary.asp. Enter the docket number excluding the last three digits
in the docket number field to access the document. You may also
register online at http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/esubscription.asp to
be notified via email of new filings and issuances related to this or
other pending projects. For assistance, call 1-866-208-3676 or email
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>for TTY, call<PHONE_NUMBER>. A copy is
also available for inspection and reproduction at the address in item
(h) above.
    m. Individuals desiring to be included on the Commission's mailing
list should so indicate by writing to the Secretary of the Commission.
    n. Comments, Protests, or Motions to Intervene: Anyone may submit
comments, a protest, or a motion to intervene in accordance with the
requirements of Rules of Practice and Procedure, 18 CFR 385.210, .211,
.214. In determining the appropriate action to take, the Commission
will consider all protests or other comments filed, but only those who
file a motion to intervene in accordance with the Commission's Rules
may become a party to the proceeding. Any comments, protests, or
motions to intervene must be received on or before the specified
comment date for the particular application.
    o. Filing and Service of Responsive Documents: Any filing must (1)
bear in all capital letters the title ``COMMENTS'', ``PROTEST'', or
``MOTION TO INTERVENE'' as applicable; (2) set forth in the heading the
name of the applicant and the project number of the application to
which the filing responds; (3) furnish the name, address, and telephone
number of the person protesting or intervening; and (4) otherwise
comply with the requirements of 18 CFR 385.2001 through 385.2005. All
comments, motions to intervene, or protests must set forth their
evidentiary basis and otherwise comply with the requirements of 18 CFR
4.34(b). All comments, motions to intervene, or protests should relate
to project works which are the subject of the variance. Agencies may
obtain copies of the application directly from the applicant. A copy of
any protest or motion to intervene must be served upon each
representative of the applicant specified in the particular
application. If an intervener files comments or documents with the
Commission relating to the merits of an issue that may affect the
responsibilities of a particular resource agency, they must also serve
a copy of the document on that resource agency. A copy of all other
filings in reference to this application must be accompanied by proof
of service on all persons listed in the service list prepared by the
Commission in this proceeding, in accordance with 18 CFR 4.34(b) and
385.2010.

    Dated: March 30, 2015.
Kimberly D. Bose,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2015-07763 Filed 4-3-15; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 86, Number 244 (Thursday, December 23, 2021)]
[Notices]
[Pages 72937-72938]
[FR Doc No: 2021-27867]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Docket No. CP22-26-000]

Northern Natural Gas Company; Notice of Application and
Establishing Intervention Deadline

    Take notice that on December 3, 2021, Northern Natural Gas Company
(Northern), 1111 South 103rd Street, Omaha, NE 68124, filed an
application under sections 7(c) and 7(b) of the Natural Gas Act (NGA),
and Part 157 of the Commission's regulations requesting authorization
to: (1) Abandon in-place and by removal the A-line and associated
branch line, tie-over piping and aboveground facilities; and (2)
install and operate the replacement North C-line Extension and South
Cline Extension and associated branch line, tie-over piping and
aboveground facilities, all with appurtenances and all located in
Boone, Dallas and Polk counties in Iowa. Specifically, Northern
proposes to abandon approximately 29.63 miles of its 16-inch-diameter
Des Moines IAB65001 A-line (A-line) and appurtenances in Boone, Dallas
and Polk counties, Iowa. Northern also requests authorization to
construct and operate an approximately 9.07-mile extension of its 20-
inch-diameter Des Moines IAB65003 C-line (C-line) and appurtenances in
Boone, Dallas and Polk counties, Iowa, to replace the capacity
associated with the abandoned A-line. Northern estimates the cost of
the project to be $36,981,705, all as more fully set forth in the
application which is on file with the Commission and open for public
inspection.
    In addition to publishing the full text of this document in the
Federal Register, the Commission provides all interested persons an
opportunity to view and/or print the contents of this document via the
internet through the Commission's Home Page (http://ferc.gov) using the
``eLibrary'' link. Enter the docket number excluding the last three
digits in the docket number field to access the document. At this time,
the Commission has suspended access to the Commission's Public
Reference Room, due to the proclamation declaring a National Emergency
concerning the Novel Coronavirus Disease (COVID-19), issued by the
President on March 13, 2020. For assistance, contact the Federal Energy
Regulatory Commission at [email protected] or call toll-free,
(886) 208-3676 or TYY,<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    Any questions regarding the proposed project should be directed to
Michael T. Loeffler, Senior Director of Certificates and External
Affairs for Northern, 1111 South 103rd Street, Omaha, NE 68124, by
telephone at<PHONE_NUMBER>, or by email at [email protected].
    Pursuant to Section 157.9 of the Commission's Rules of Practice and
Procedure,\1\ within 90 days of this Notice the Commission staff will
either: Complete its environmental review and place it into the
Commission's public record (eLibrary) for this proceeding; or issue a
Notice of Schedule for Environmental Review. If a Notice of Schedule
for Environmental Review is issued, it will indicate, among other
milestones, the anticipated date for the Commission staff's issuance of
the final environmental impact statement (FEIS) or environmental
assessment (EA) for this proposal. The filing of an EA in the
Commission's public record for this proceeding or the issuance of a
Notice of Schedule for Environmental Review will serve to notify
federal and state agencies of the timing for the completion of all
necessary reviews, and the subsequent need to complete all federal
authorizations within 90 days of the date of issuance of the Commission
staff's FEIS or EA.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ 18 CFR 157.9.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Public Participation

    There are two ways to become involved in the Commission's review of
this project: You can file comments on the project, and you can file a
motion to intervene in the proceeding. There is no fee or cost for
filing comments or intervening. The deadline for filing a motion to
intervene is 5:00 p.m. Eastern Time on January 7, 2022.

Comments

    Any person wishing to comment on the project may do so. Comments
may include statements of support or objections to the project as a
whole or specific aspects of the project. The more specific your
comments, the more useful they will be. To ensure that your comments
are timely and properly recorded, please submit your comments on or
before January 7, 2022.
    There are three methods you can use to submit your comments to the
Commission. In all instances, please reference the Project docket
number CP22-26-000 in your submission.
    (1) You may file your comments electronically by using the eComment
feature, which is located on the Commission's website at www.ferc.gov
under the link to Documents and Filings. Using eComment is an easy

method for interested persons to submit brief, text-only comments on a
project;
    (2) You may file your comments electronically by using the eFiling
feature, which is located on the Commission's website (www.ferc.gov)
under the link to Documents and Filings. With eFiling, you can provide
comments in a variety of formats by attaching them as a file with your
submission. New eFiling users must first create an account by clicking
on ``eRegister.'' You will be asked to select the type of filing you
are making; first select ``General'' and then select ``Comment on a
Filing''; or
    (3) You can file a paper copy of your comments by mailing them to
the following address below.\2\ Your written comments must reference
the Project docket number (CP22-26-000).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \2\ Hand delivered submissions in docketed proceedings should be
delivered to Health and Human Services, 12225 Wilkins Avenue,
Rockville, Maryland 20852.

Kimberly D. Bose, Secretary, Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
First Street NE, Washington, DC 20426

    The Commission encourages electronic filing of comments (options 1
and 2 above) and has eFiling staff available to assist you at (202)
502-8258 or [email protected]
    Persons who comment on the environmental review of this project
will be placed on the Commission's environmental mailing list, and will
receive notification when the environmental documents (EA or EIS) are
issued for this project and will be notified of meetings associated
with the Commission's environmental review process.
    The Commission considers all comments received about the project in
determining the appropriate action to be taken. However, the filing of
a comment alone will not serve to make the filer a party to the
proceeding. To become a party, you must intervene in the proceeding.
For instructions on how to intervene, see below.

Interventions

    Any person, which includes individuals, organizations, businesses,
municipalities, and other entities,\3\ has the option to file a motion
to intervene in this proceeding. Only intervenors have the right to
request rehearing of Commission orders issued in this proceeding and to
subsequently challenge the Commission's orders in the U.S. Circuit
Courts of Appeal.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ 18 CFR 385.102(d).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    To intervene, you must submit a motion to intervene to the
Commission in accordance with Rule 214 of the Commission's Rules of
Practice and Procedure \4\ and the regulations under the NGA \5\ by the
intervention deadline for the project, which is January 7, 2022. As
described further in Rule 214, your motion to intervene must state, to
the extent known, your position regarding the proceeding, as well as
your interest in the proceeding. [For an individual, this could include
your status as a landowner, ratepayer, resident of an impacted
community, or recreationist. You do not need to have property directly
impacted by the project in order to intervene.] For more information
about motions to intervene, refer to the FERC website at https://www.ferc.gov/resources/guides/how-to/intervene.asp.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ 18 CFR 385.214.
    \5\ 18 CFR 157.10.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    There are two ways to submit your motion to intervene. In both
instances, please reference the Project docket number CP22-26-000 in
your submission.
    (1) You may file your motion to intervene by using the Commission's
eFiling feature, which is located on the Commission's website
(www.ferc.gov) under the link to Documents and Filings. New eFiling
users must first create an account by clicking on ``eRegister.'' You
will be asked to select the type of filing you are making; first select
``General'' and then select ``Intervention.'' The eFiling feature
includes a document-less intervention option; for more information,
visit https://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/efiling/document-less-intervention.pdf.; or
    (2) You can file a paper copy of your motion to intervene, along
with three copies, by mailing the documents to the address below.\6\
Your motion to intervene must reference the Project docket number CP22-
26-000.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ Hand delivered submissions in docketed proceedings should be
delivered to Health and Human Services, 12225 Wilkins Avenue,
Rockville, Maryland 20852.

Kimberly D. Bose, Secretary, Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
First Street NE, Washington, DC 20426

    The Commission encourages electronic filing of motions to intervene
(option 1 above) and has eFiling staff available to assist you at (202)
502-8258 or [email protected]
    Protests and motions to intervene must be served on the applicant
either by mail or email (with a link to the document) at: 1111 South
103rd Street, Omaha, NE 68124 or at [email protected]. Any
subsequent submissions by an intervenor must be served on the applicant
and all other parties to the proceeding. Contact information for
parties can be downloaded from the service list at the eService link on
FERC Online.
    All timely, unopposed \7\ motions to intervene are automatically
granted by operation of Rule 214(c)(1).\8\ Motions to intervene that
are filed after the intervention deadline are untimely, and may be
denied. Any late-filed motion to intervene must show good cause for
being late and must explain why the time limitation should be waived
and provide justification by reference to factors set forth in Rule
214(d) of the Commission's Rules and Regulations.\9\ A person obtaining
party status will be placed on the service list maintained by the
Secretary of the Commission and will receive copies (paper or
electronic) of all documents filed by the applicant and by all other
parties.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ The applicant has 15 days from the submittal of a motion to
intervene to file a written objection to the intervention.
    \8\ 18 CFR 385.214(c)(1).
    \9\ 18 CFR 385.214(b)(3) and (d).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Tracking the Proceeding

    Throughout the proceeding, additional information about the project
will be available from the Commission's Office of External Affairs, at
(866) 208-FERC, or on the FERC website at http://www.ferc.gov using the
``eLibrary'' link as described above. The eLibrary link also provides
access to the texts of all formal documents issued by the Commission,
such as orders, notices, and rulemakings.
    In addition, the Commission offers a free service called
eSubscription which allows you to keep track of all formal issuances
and submittals in specific dockets. This can reduce the amount of time
you spend researching proceedings by automatically providing you with
notification of these filings, document summaries, and direct links to
the documents. For more information and to register, go to
www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/esubscription.asp.
    Intervention Deadline: 5:00 p.m. Eastern Time on January 7, 2022.

    Dated: December 17, 2021.
Kimberly D. Bose,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2021-27867 Filed 12-22-21; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 88, Number 224 (Wednesday, November 22, 2023)]
[Notices]
[Page 81419]
[FR Doc No: 2023-25857]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES

Food and Drug Administration

[Docket No. FDA-2023-P-4223]

Determination That BUPRENEX (Buprenorphine Hydrochloride)
Injection, 0.3 Milligram/Milliliter, Was Not Withdrawn From Sale for
Reasons of Safety or Effectiveness

AGENCY: Food and Drug Administration, HHS.

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: The Food and Drug Administration (FDA, the Agency, or we) has
determined that BUPRENEX (buprenorphine hydrochloride) Injection, 0.3
milligram (mg)/milliliter (mL), was not withdrawn from sale for reasons
of safety or effectiveness. This determination means that FDA will not
begin procedures to withdraw approval of abbreviated new drug
applications (ANDAs) that refer to this drug product, and it will allow
FDA to continue to approve ANDAs that refer to the product as long as
they meet relevant legal and regulatory requirements.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Caitlin Callahan, Center for Drug
Evaluation and Research, Food and Drug Administration, 10903 New
Hampshire Ave., Bldg. 51, Rm. 6269, Silver Spring, MD 20993-0002, 301-
796-3600, [email protected].

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Section 505(j) of the Federal Food, Drug,
and Cosmetic Act (FD&C Act) (21 U.S.C. 355(j)) allows the submission of
an ANDA to market a generic version of a previously approved drug
product. To obtain approval, the ANDA applicant must show, among other
things, that the generic drug product: (1) has the same active
ingredient(s), dosage form, route of administration, strength,
conditions of use, and (with certain exceptions) labeling as the listed
drug, which is a version of the drug that was previously approved and
(2) is bioequivalent to the listed drug. ANDA applicants do not have to
repeat the extensive clinical testing otherwise necessary to gain
approval of a new drug application (NDA).
    Section 505(j)(7) of the FD&C Act requires FDA to publish a list of
all approved drugs. FDA publishes this list as part of the ``Approved
Drug Products With Therapeutic Equivalence Evaluations,'' which is
known generally as the ``Orange Book.'' Under FDA regulations, drugs
are removed from the list if the Agency withdraws or suspends approval
of the drug's NDA or ANDA for reasons of safety or effectiveness or if
FDA determines that the listed drug was withdrawn from sale for reasons
of safety or effectiveness (21 CFR 314.162).
    A person may petition the Agency to determine, or the Agency may
determine on its own initiative, whether a listed drug was withdrawn
from sale for reasons of safety or effectiveness. This determination
may be made at any time after the drug has been withdrawn from sale,
but must be made prior to approving an ANDA that refers to the listed
drug (Sec.  314.161 (21 CFR 314.161)). FDA may not approve an ANDA that
does not refer to a listed drug.
    BUPRENEX (buprenorphine hydrochloride) Injection, 0.3 mg/mL, is the
subject of NDA 018401, held by Indivior, Inc., and initially approved
on December 29, 1981. BUPRENEX is indicated for the management of pain
severe enough to require an opioid analgesic and for which alternate
treatments are inadequate.
    BUPRENEX (buprenorphine hydrochloride) Injection, 0.3 mg/mL, is
currently listed in the ``Discontinued Drug Product List'' section of
the Orange Book. Odin Pharmaceuticals LLC submitted a citizen petition
dated September 27, 2023 (Docket No. FDA-2023-P-4223), under 21 CFR
10.30, requesting that the Agency determine whether BUPRENEX
(buprenorphine hydrochloride) Injection, 0.3 mg/mL, was withdrawn from
sale for reasons of safety or effectiveness.
    After considering the citizen petition and reviewing Agency records
and based on the information we have at this time, FDA has determined
under Sec.  314.161 that BUPRENEX (buprenorphine hydrochloride)
Injection, 0.3 mg/mL, was not withdrawn for reasons of safety or
effectiveness. The petitioner has identified no data or other
information suggesting that this drug product was withdrawn for reasons
of safety or effectiveness. We have carefully reviewed our files for
records concerning the withdrawal of BUPRENEX (buprenorphine
hydrochloride) Injection, 0.3 mg/mL, from sale. We have also
independently evaluated relevant literature and data for possible
postmarketing adverse events. We have found no information that would
indicate that this drug product was withdrawn from sale for reasons of
safety or effectiveness.
    Accordingly, the Agency will continue to list BUPRENEX
(buprenorphine hydrochloride) Injection, 0.3 mg/mL, in the
``Discontinued Drug Product List'' section of the Orange Book. The
``Discontinued Drug Product List'' delineates, among other items, drug
products that have been discontinued from marketing for reasons other
than safety or effectiveness. FDA will not begin procedures to withdraw
approval of approved ANDAs that refer to this drug product. Additional
ANDAs for this drug product may also be approved by the Agency as long
as they meet all other legal and regulatory requirements for the
approval of ANDAs. If FDA determines that labeling for this drug
product should be revised to meet current standards, the Agency will
advise ANDA applicants to submit such labeling.

    Dated: November 17, 2023.
Lauren K. Roth,
Associate Commissioner for Policy.
[FR Doc. 2023-25857 Filed 11-21-23; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4164-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 78, Number 45 (Thursday, March 7, 2013)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 14649-14651]
[FR Doc No: 2013-04829]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 71

[Docket No. FAA-2013-0080; Airspace Docket No. 12-AWA-6]
RIN 2120-AA66

Amendment of Class B Airspace Description; Tampa, FL

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Final rule, technical amendment.

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

SUMMARY: This action amends the description of the Tampa International
Airport, FL, Class B airspace area by changing the references for
defining the

centerpoint of the airspace from the ``airport surveillance radar (ASR)
antenna'' to ``Point of Origin.'' In addition, the description is
edited throughout to improve clarity. These changes are editorial only
and do not alter the current charted boundaries or altitudes or the ATC
procedures for the Tampa Class B airspace area.

DATES: Effective date: April 8, 2013. The Director of the Federal
Register approves this incorporation by reference action under 1 CFR
part 51, subject to the annual revision of FAA Order 7400.9 and
publication of conforming amendments.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Paul Gallant, Airspace Policy and ATC
Procedures Group, Office of Mission Airspace Services, Federal Aviation
Administration, 800 Independence Avenue SW., Washington, DC 20591;
telephone:<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Background

    The Tampa Class B airspace area was established as a ``Terminal
Control Area (TCA)'' on September 20, 1990 (55 FR 19226, May 8, 1990).
In 1993, as part of the Airspace Reclassification Final Rule (56 FR
65638, December 17, 1991), the term ``terminal control area'' was
replaced by ``Class B airspace area.'' Because there was no VHF
Omnidirectional Range (VOR) navigation aid located on the Tampa
International Airport to serve as a reference for describing the
airspace, the area was designed using the latitude/longitude position
of the ASR antenna as the centerpoint. In 2012, the ASR antenna was
moved to another location on the airport. So that there will be no
change to the existing charted boundaries of the Tampa Class B airspace
area, the FAA is retaining the same latitude/longitude of the ``old''
ASR antenna location as the centerpoint for the Class B airspace. To
accomplish this, all references to the ASR in the Tampa Class B
airspace description (as published in FAA Order 7400.9) are replaced by
``Point of Origin.'' This practice is consistent with other Class B
airspace locations that do not have a suitable navigation aid located
on the airport.
    The current Tampa Class B description also refers to the LOC/DME
antenna. However, the FAA's Digital Navigation Products Team reviewed
the charted boundaries and determined that none of the boundaries are
defined from the LOC/DME antenna position. Therefore, those references
are unnecessary and are removed from the description. Additionally, the
description has been edited to eliminate confusing wording and improve
clarity.

The Rule

    The FAA is amending Title 14 Code of Federal Regulations (14 CFR)
part 71 by editing the description of the Tampa. FL, Class B airspace
(as published in FAA Order 7400.9) to remove references to the ``ASR
antenna'' and replace them with ``Point of Origin'' for defining the
centerpoint of the airspace. The Point of Origin uses the same
latitude/longitude of the ``old'' ASR antenna location. The FAA is
taking this action so that the currently charted boundaries of the
Class B airspace area are not affected by the recent relocation of the
ASR antenna to a new position on the airport. The Class B airspace
description is also edited to remove unnecessary references to the LOC/
DME antenna and to improve the clarity of the description.
    Because this action is a minor editorial change that does not alter
the currently charted boundaries or altitudes or ATC procedures for the
Tampa International Airport, I find that notice and public procedure
under 5 U.S.C 553(b) are unnecessary and contrary to the public
interest.
    Class B airspace areas are published in paragraph 3000 of FAA Order
7400.9W dated August 8, 2012, and effective September 15, 2012, which
is incorporated by reference in 14 CFR 71.1. The Class B airspace area
listed in this document will be published subsequently in the Order.
    The FAA has determined that this regulation only involves an
established body of technical regulations for which frequent and
routine amendments are necessary to keep them operationally current.
Therefore, this regulation: (1) Is not a ``significant regulatory
action'' under Executive Order 12866; (2) is not a ``significant rule''
under Department of Transportation (DOT) Regulatory Policies and
Procedures (44 FR 11034; February 26, 1979); and (3) does not warrant
preparation of a regulatory evaluation as the anticipated impact is so
minimal. Since this is a routine matter that will only affect air
traffic procedures and air navigation, it is certified that this rule,
when promulgated, will not have a significant economic impact on a
substantial number of small entities under the criteria of the
Regulatory Flexibility Act.
    The FAA's authority to issue rules regarding aviation safety is
found in Title 49 of the United States Code. Subtitle I, Section 106
describes the authority of the FAA Administrator. Subtitle VII,
Aviation Programs, describes in more detail the scope of the agency's
authority. This rulemaking is promulgated under the authority described
in Subtitle VII, Part A, Subpart I, Section 40103. Under that section,
the FAA is charged with prescribing regulations to assign the use of
the airspace necessary to ensure the safety of aircraft and the
efficient use of airspace. This regulation is within the scope of that
authority as it makes editorial corrections to an existing Class B
airspace description to maintain accuracy.

Environmental Review

    The FAA has determined that this action qualifies for categorical
exclusion under the National Environmental Policy Act in accordance
with 311a, FAA Order 1050.1E, ``Environmental Impacts: Policies and
Procedures.'' This airspace action is an editorial change only and is
not expected to cause any potentially significant environmental
impacts, and no extraordinary circumstances exist that warrant
preparation of an environmental assessment.

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 71

    Airspace, Incorporation by reference, Navigation (air).

Adoption of the Amendment

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

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

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

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

Sec.  71.1  [Amended]

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

Paragraph 3000 Subpart B--Class B Airspace.

* * * * *

ASO FL B Tampa, FL [Amended]

Tampa International Airport (Primary Airport)
    (Lat. 27[deg]58'32'' N., long. 82[deg]32'00'' W.)
Point of Origin
    (Lat. 27[deg]59'15'' N., long. 82[deg]32'40'' W.)

    Boundaries.
    Area A. That airspace extending upward from the surface to and
including 10,000 feet MSL bounded by an area beginning at lat.

27[deg]54'29'' N., long. 82[deg]30'56'' W.; then clockwise along the
5-mile radius of the Point of Origin to lat. 27[deg]57'43'' N.,
long. 82[deg]27'18'' W.; then southwest to the point of beginning.
    Area B. That airspace extending upward from 1,200 feet MSL to
and including 10,000 feet MSL beginning at the intersection of the
Anna Maria Island, FL, shoreline and the 30-mile radius of the Point
of Origin; then north along the shoreline to lat. 27[deg]40'47'' N.,
long. 82[deg]44'14'' W.; then northeast to lat. 27[deg]42'15'' N.,
long. 82[deg]40'45'' W. (the end of the Skyway Bridge); then north
along the shoreline to the 10-mile radius of the Point of Origin;
then clockwise along the 10-mile radius to U.S. Highway 301; then
south along U.S. Highway 301 to Interstate 75; then south along
Interstate 75 to the 10-mile arc of the Sarasota, FL, Class C
airspace area; then counterclockwise along the Sarasota Class C
airspace area 10-mile arc to the 30-mile radius of the Point of
Origin; then clockwise along the 30-mile radius to the point of
beginning.
    Area C. That airspace extending upward from 3,000 feet MSL up to
and including 10,000 feet MSL bounded by a line beginning at the
shoreline (lat. 28[deg]19'48'' N., long. 82[deg]43'37'' W.); then
east to the intersection of Highway 19 and Highway 52; then east
along Highway 52 to Interstate 75; then south along the eastern edge
of Interstate 75 to Highway 54; then east along Highway 54 to
Highway 39-301 at Zephyrhills, FL; then south on Highway 39 to
Highway 60; then west on Highway 60 to lat. 27[deg]56'17'' N., long.
82[deg]11'05'' W.; then south to and along the railroad to Parrish,
FL; then southwest along Highway 301 to the 10-mile DME arc of the
Sarasota Class C airspace area; then counterclockwise along the
Sarasota Class C airspace area 10-mile DME arc to Interstate 75;
then north along Interstate 75 to the 10-mile radius of the Point of
Origin; then counterclockwise along 10-mile radius of the Point of
Origin to the shoreline; then south along the shoreline to lat.
27[deg]42'15'' N., long. 82[deg]40'45'' W.; then direct to the
shoreline at lat. 27[deg]40'47'' N., long. 82[deg]44'14'' W.; then
north along the shoreline to the point of beginning.
    Area D. That airspace extending upward from 6,000 feet MSL to
and including 10,000 feet MSL beginning at the intersection of the
Anna Maria Island, FL, shoreline and the 30-mile radius of the Point
of Origin; then clockwise along the 30-mile radius of the Point of
Origin to long. 83[deg]00'00'' W.; then north along long.
83[deg]00'00'' W. to the 30-mile radius of the Point of Origin; then
clockwise along the 30-mile radius of the Point of Origin to Dade
City, FL; then south on Highway 39-301 to Highway 54 at Zephyrhills,
FL; then west on Highway 54 to Interstate 75; then north on the
eastern edge of Interstate 75 to Highway 52; then west on Highway 52
to the intersection of Highway 52 and Highway 19 at Hudson, FL; then
due west to and south along the shoreline to lat. 27[deg]40'47'' N.,
long. 82[deg]44'14'' W.; then south along the shoreline to the point
of beginning; and that airspace beginning at the intersection of
Highway 301 and the Sarasota Class C airspace area 10-mile DME arc;
then northeast along Highway 301 to Parrish, FL; then northeast
along the railroad to lat. 27[deg]56'17'' N., long. 82[deg]11'05''
W.; then east along Highway 60 to the intersection of Highway 60 and
Highway 39; then south along Highway 39 to the 30-mile radius of the
Point of Origin; then clockwise along the 30-mile radius of the
Point of Origin to the Sarasota, FL, Class C airspace area 10-mile
DME arc; then counterclockwise along the Sarasota Class C airspace
area 10-mile DME arc to the point of beginning.

    Issued in Washington, DC, on February 21, 2013.
Gary A. Norek,
Manager, Airspace Policy and ATC Procedures Group.
[FR Doc. 2013-04829 Filed 3-6-13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


[Federal Register Volume 76, Number 21 (Tuesday, February 1, 2011)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 5472-5473]
[FR Doc No: 2011-2058]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 71

[Docket No. FAA-2010-1035; Airspace Docket No. 10-ACE-12]

Establishment of Class E Airspace; New Hampton, IA

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: This action establishes Class E airspace at New Hampton, IA,
to accommodate new Area Navigation (RNAV) Standard Instrument Approach
Procedures (SIAP) at Mercy Medical Center Heliport, New Hampton, IA.
The FAA is taking this action to enhance the safety and management of
Instrument Flight Rule (IFR) operations at the heliport.

DATES: Effective date: 0901 UTC, May 5, 2011. The Director of the
Federal Register approves this incorporation by reference action under
1 CFR part 51, subject to the annual revision of FAA Order 7400.9 and
publication of conforming amendments.

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

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

History

    On November 8, 2010, the FAA published in the Federal Register a
notice of proposed rulemaking to establish Class E airspace for New
Hampton, IA, creating controlled airspace at Mercy Medical Center
Heliport (75 FR 68558) Docket No. FAA-2010-1035. Interested parties
were invited to participate in this rulemaking effort by submitting
written comments on the proposal to the FAA. No comments were received.
Class E airspace designations are published in paragraph 6005 of FAA
Order 7400.9U dated August 18, 2010, and effective September 15, 2010,
which is incorporated by reference in 14 CFR 71.1. The Class E airspace
designations listed in this document will be published subsequently in
the Order.

The Rule

    This action amends Title 14 Code of Federal Regulations (14 CFR)
part 71 by establishing Class E airspace extending upward from 700 feet
above the surface to accommodate the new COPTER RNAV (POINT-IN-SPACE)
standard instrument approach procedures at Mercy Medical Center
Heliport, New Hampton, IA. This action is necessary for the safety and
management of IFR operations at the heliport.
    The FAA has determined that this regulation only involves an
established body of technical regulations for which frequent and
routine amendments are necessary to keep them operationally current.
Therefore, this regulation: (1) Is not a ``significant regulatory
action'' under Executive Order 12866; (2) is not a ``significant rule''
under DOT Regulatory Policies and Procedures (44 FR 11034; February 26,
1979); and (3) does not warrant preparation of a regulatory evaluation
as the anticipated impact is so minimal. Since this is a routine matter
that will only affect air traffic procedures and air navigation, it is
certified that this rule, when promulgated, will not have a significant
economic impact on a substantial number of small entities under the
criteria of the Regulatory Flexibility Act.
    The FAA's authority to issue rules regarding aviation safety is
found in Title 49 of the U.S. Code. Subtitle 1, section 106, describes
the authority of the FAA Administrator. Subtitle VII, Aviation
Programs, describes in more detail the scope of the agency's authority.
This rulemaking is promulgated under the authority described in
subtitle VII, part A, subpart I, section 40103. Under that section, the
FAA is charged with prescribing regulations to assign the use of
airspace necessary to ensure the safety of aircraft and the efficient
use of airspace. This regulation is within the scope of that authority
as it establishes controlled airspace at Mercy Medical Center Heliport,
New Hampton, IA.

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 71

    Airspace, Incorporation by reference, Navigation (air).

Adoption of the Amendment

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

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

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

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

Sec.  71.1  [Amended]

0
2. The incorporation by reference in 14 CFR 71.1 of the Federal
Aviation Administration Order 7400.9U, Airspace Designations and
Reporting Points, dated August 18, 2010, and effective September 15,
2010, is amended as follows:

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

* * * * *

ACE IA E5 New Hampton, IA [New]

New Hampton, Mercy Medical Center Heliport, IA

Point In Space
    (Lat. 43[deg]03'11'' N., long. 92[deg]19'38'' W.)

    That airspace extending upward from 700 feet above the surface
within a 6-mile radius of the Mercy Medical Center Heliport point in
space at lat. 43[deg]03'11'' N., long. 92[deg]19'38'' W.

    Issued in Fort Worth, Texas, on January 14, 2011.
Richard J. Kervin, Jr.,
Manager Operations Support Group, ATO Central Service Center.
[FR Doc. 2011-2058 Filed 1-31-11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P