[Federal Register: December 5, 2005 (Volume 70, Number 232)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Page 72565-72571]
[DOCID:fr05de05-20]

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

Part IV

Securities and Exchange Commission

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

17 CFR Parts 200 and 201

Adoption of Amendments to the Rules of Practice and Related Provisions
and Delegations of Authority of the Commission; Final Rule

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

17 CFR Parts 200 and 201

[Release No. 34-52846; File No. S7-05-05]

Adoption of Amendments to the Rules of Practice and Related
Provisions and Delegations of Authority of the Commission

AGENCY: Securities and Exchange Commission.

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: The Securities and Exchange Commission (``Commission'') is
amending its Rules of Practice, certain related provisions, and its
delegations of authority to the staff as a result of its experience
with these rules and to correct typographical errors and change certain
citations. The amendments are intended to enhance the transparency and
facilitate parties' understanding of the rules and to make practice
under the rules easier and more efficient.

DATES: Effective January 4, 2006.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Diane V. White, Office of the General
Counsel,<PHONE_NUMBER>, Securities and Exchange Commission, 100 F
Street, NE., Washington, DC 20549-9010.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: On April 21, 2005, the Commission proposed
amendments to the Rules of Practice.\1\ The Commission proposed
amendments to its Rules of Practice and related provisions as a result
of the Commission's experience with its existing rules and in order to
correct references and change certain citations. Additional amendments
were proposed to correct typographical errors and change certain
citations to conform to the amended rules. The majority of these
proposals were technical and procedural.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ Proposed Amendments to the Rules of Practice and Related
Provisions, Exchange Act Rel. No. 51595, 70 FR 22224 (Apr. 28,
2005).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

I. Discussion

    The Commission requested comment on the proposed amendments from
interested persons. The Commission received no comments in response to
its requests. The Commission is adopting the amendments to the Rules of
Practice and related provisions, essentially as proposed.
    A. Rule 141(a)(2)(ii) now generally authorizes service on other
corporations or entities by delivering a copy of the order instituting
proceedings (``OIP'') to an officer, managing or general agent, or
authorized agent by personal service or by mail.\2\ Particularly, in
proceedings instituted under Section 12(j) of the Securities Exchange
Act of 1934, 15 U.S.C. 78l(j), to revoke or suspend the registration of
a class of securities for failure to make timely periodic filings, it
sometimes has been difficult to serve the issuer of the securities. An
issuer that is delinquent in its filings often does not keep current
with the Commission the name of a valid agent to receive notice of the
proceeding. In certain instances, the Commission's staff has sought to
accomplish service on such an issuer by serving multiple copies of the
OIP on various persons, such as the issuer's officers or directors.\3\
The Commission is amending Rule 141(a)(2)(ii) to authorize service on
an issuer at the most recent address set forth in its most recent
filing with the Commission, with confirmation of attempted delivery.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \2\ Rule 141(a)(2)(ii) states that notice to a corporation or
other entity of a proceeding ``shall be made'' by ``delivering a
copy of the order instituting proceedings to an officer, managing or
general agent, or any other agent authorized by appointment or by
law to receive such notice, by any method specified in paragraph
(a)(2)(i) of this rule.''
    Rule 141(a)(2)(i) authorizes delivery by ``handing a copy of the
order to the individual; or leaving a copy at the individual's
office with a clerk or other person in charge thereof; or leaving a
copy at the individual's dwelling house or usual place of abode with
some person of suitable age and discretion then residing therein; or
sending a copy of the order addressed to the individual by U.S.
Postal Service certified, registered or Express Mail and obtaining
confirmation of receipt; or giving confirmed telegraphic notice.''
    \3\ See, e.g., Alcohol Sensors Int'l, Ltd., Exchange Act Rel.
No. 50150 (Aug. 5, 2004), 83 SEC Docket 1748, 1749 n.1 (stating that
more than 430 copies of the OIP were served in order to accomplish
service on seventeen respondents in a Section 12(j) proceeding).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Commission also is adopting Rule 141(a)(2)(vi) to authorize
service on persons registered with self-regulatory organizations at the
most recent address shown in the Central Registration Depository, with
confirmation of attempted delivery. We requested comment as to whether
this method would provide adequate notice of a proceeding. We recognize
that the Central Registration Depository requires that addresses be
kept current for only two years after a person ceases to be associated
with a member of a self-regulatory organization. We further requested
comment as to whether the rule should refer explicitly to such a two-
year period. However, we received no comment in response to either
request. We have determined to adopt the amendments to the rule as
proposed.
    B. Currently, Rule 430(a) provides that any person aggrieved by an
action made by authority delegated in Sec. Sec.  200.30-1 through
200.30-8 or Sec. Sec.  200.30-11 through 200.30-18 may seek review of
the action pursuant to Rule 430(b). Rule 430(b) now provides that
Commission review is to be sought by filing a written notice of
intention to petition for review within five days ``after actual notice
to the party of the action or service of notice pursuant to Sec.
201.141(b), whichever is earlier.'' Although the current rule permits
appeals by any aggrieved person of action taken by delegated authority,
an aggrieved person who is not a party may not receive actual notice or
learn of service of notice promptly after the action. Nonetheless, it
is important that a deadline for the filing of a notice of intention to
petition for review be established, so it is possible to know when an
action is beyond challenge. The amendment therefore provides that both
parties and aggrieved persons may seek Commission review of the action
by filing a written notice of intention to petition for review within
five days after actual notice of the action to that party or aggrieved
person, or 15 days after publication of the notice of action in the
Federal Register, or five days after service of notice of the action
pursuant to Sec.  201.141(b), whichever is the earliest. The Commission
requested comment on whether this form of publication would provide
adequate notice, or whether another form of publication should be used
to supplement the Federal Register. The Commission also sought comment
on whether posting of a notice of action pursuant to delegated
authority on the Commission's Web site would aid in giving notice to
persons who might be aggrieved by such action. Although we received no
comment in response to this request, the Commission intends to post, as
appropriate, delegated actions on its Web site.\4\ The Commission also
requested comment as to whether 15 days after publication would allow
parties and aggrieved persons sufficient time to file a notice.\5\
Again, we received no comment. We have determined to adopt the rule as
proposed.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ There are certain circumstances in which notice of an action
taken by delegated authority will not be posted on the Commission's
Web site or published in the Federal Register. For example, the
Commission does not publish a delegated decision to grant or deny
confidential treatment where the requestor has asked for
confidential treatment for the request itself.
    \5\ See 44 U.S.C. 1508 (stating that time between publication of
notice in Federal Register and date fixed in notice for hearing or
termination of opportunity to be heard should generally be not less
than fifteen days unless otherwise specifically prescribed by Act of
Congress).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    C. Currently, Rule 55, which governs the conduct of Equal Access to
Justice

Act (``EAJA'') proceedings before an administrative law judge,
authorizes the law judge considering an application for an award of
fees and expenses under the EAJA, 5 U.S.C. 504, to order all
proceedings that are otherwise available under Rule 8(d) of the Rules
of Practice. Former Rule 8(d) authorized the conduct of prehearing
conferences and briefings. When the Commission comprehensively revised
and renumbered its Rules of Practice in 1995, former Rule 8(d) was
incorporated into Rules 221 and 222(a).\6\ However, the reference to
Rule 8(d) contained in EAJA Rule 55 was not changed at that time. The
amendment replaces the reference to Rule 8(d) with a reference to Rules
221 and 222(a).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ See Exchange Act Rel. No. 35833 (June 23, 1995), 59 SEC
Docket 1546, 1631 tbl. III.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    D. Current Rule 102(e)(3)(iii) provides that Commission review of a
hearing officer's initial decision on a petition to lift a temporary
suspension of a person from appearing and practicing before the
Commission will be governed by the time limits set forth in Sec.
201.531. The amendment corrects the reference to Sec.  201.540, which
governs the appeal and Commission review of certain initial decisions.
    E. Currently, Rule 111(h) provides no time limit within which a law
judge is required to rule upon a motion to correct a manifest error of
fact in an initial decision. The amendment provides that such a ruling
must be made within 20 days of the filing of any brief in opposition.
The amendment further states that any brief in opposition must be filed
within five days after service of the motion.
    The Commission has received motions purportedly filed pursuant to
Rule 111(h) that challenge the merits of an initial decision. However,
Rule 111(h) has a much more limited purpose. Rule 111(h) is therefore
amended to make clear that motions to correct manifest error are
properly filed under this Rule only if they contest a patent
misstatement of fact in the initial decision. Motions purporting to
contest the substantive merits of the initial decision will be treated
as a petition for review under Rule 410.
    F. Current Rule 152(d) provides that an original and three copies
of all papers shall be filed. The Commission is adopting the rule
substantially as proposed. The amendment makes clear that if filing is
made by facsimile pursuant to Rule 151, the filer must transmit only
one non-facsimile original with a manual signature and does not need to
transmit additional non-facsimile copies. The rule as adopted provides
that the non-facsimile original must be accompanied by a statement of
the date on which, and the facsimile number to which, the party made
transmission of the facsimile filing.
    G. Currently, Rule 154(c) and Rule 250(c) provide page limitations
for, respectively, motions in general and motions for summary
disposition. Rule 450(c), however, now sets word-count limitations,
instead of page limitations, for briefs filed with the Commission. The
amendment to Rule 154(c) substitutes a limitation for motions of 7,000
words, exclusive of any table of contents, table of authority, or
addendum of applicable cases, legislative provisions, or exhibits. Rule
470(b), which currently requires motions for reconsideration to comply
with the page length limitation in Rule 154(c), is amended to refer to
the word limitation in amended Rule 154(c).
    The amendment to Rule 250(c) sets a limitation of 9,800 words for a
motion for summary disposition and any supporting memorandum of points
and authorities. The limitation excludes declarations, affidavits, or
attachments. Motions for summary dispositions are often made in cases
where a respondent has been criminally convicted or an injunction has
been entered and the conviction or injunction provides the basis for an
administrative order against the respondent. In such cases, documents
establishing the conviction or injunction must be included as exhibits
to the motion; these documents alone can total more than the entire
word limitation allotted to the motion. The amendment excludes such
attachments from the word-count restriction.
    H. Current Rule 201(b) provides that, by order of the Commission,
any proceeding may be severed with respect to some or all parties. The
amendment allows severance with respect to ``one or more'' parties,
making clear that severance is available as to a single party, under
appropriate circumstances.
    I. Current Rule 210(a)(2) contains a reference to Sec.  201.612.
Section 612 was renumbered as Sec.  201.1103, effective April 19, 2004.
The amendment changes the reference accordingly.\7\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ Language was inadvertently deleted from Rule 210(b) in an
earlier revision of the Rules of Practice. This language is now
being reinstated.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    J. Current Rule 411(c) refers to ``any brief in opposition to a
petition for review permitted pursuant to Sec.  201.410(d).'' The Rules
of Practice no longer provide for briefs in opposition to a petition
for review, and Section 410(d) was removed and reserved effective April
19, 2004. The amendment deletes the reference.
    K. Currently, Rule 601(a) provides that funds due pursuant to an
order by a hearing officer shall be paid on the first day after the
order becomes final pursuant to Rule 360. Under Rule 360(d)(2) as
revised, effective April 19, 2004, an initial decision no longer
becomes final automatically. That rule now provides that the Commission
will issue an order stating that a decision has become final. Rule
360(d)(2) further provides for the order of finality to state the date
on which sanctions, if any, take effect. Amended Rule 601(a) clarifies
that funds due pursuant to an order by a hearing officer are to be paid
in accordance with the order of finality.
    L. Current Rule 900(b) requires the Chief Administrative Law Judge
to apprise the Commission specifically if a proceeding assigned to an
administrative law judge has not been concluded ``within 30 days of the
guidelines established in paragraph (a) of this section.'' Paragraph
(a) no longer contains guidelines relevant to the timely conclusion of
proceedings before law judges; these guidelines are now found in Sec.
201.360(a)(2). Rule 360(a)(3) requires the Chief Administrative Law
Judge to submit a motion for an extension to the Commission if it is
determined that an initial decision cannot be issued within the period
specified in the guidelines. The submission of such motions renders the
specific apprisal by the Chief Administrative Law Judge under Rule
900(b) unnecessary. The amendment eliminates that requirement.
    M. In proceedings where an order issued by the Commission requires
a respondent to pay disgorgement and assesses a civil penalty against
that respondent, current Rule 1100 allows the Commission to create a
Fair Fund for the benefit of investors who were harmed by the violation
found. The amendment makes clear that in such cases, hearing officers
also have the authority to create Fair Funds.
    N. Tables I, II, and III of Subpart D of the Commission Rules of
Practice have been superseded by subsequent amendments to the federal
securities laws and these rules, and are of little utility to the
public. The amendment deletes these tables.
    O. Although not previously proposed for comment, Rule 104, which
sets the business hours of the Commission, is amended to reflect the
new address of the Commission Headquarters office, which relocated to
100 F Street, NE., Washington, DC 20549 after the above amendments were
proposed.

    P. The Commission is also correcting existing delegations and
making new delegations of authority to the staff. Title 17 CFR 200.30-7
(Delegation of authority to the Secretary of the Commission) currently
delegates to the Commission's Secretary the authority, among other
things, to extend the time within which to make filings and to enlarge
the length limitation on those filings. The Commission is amending
Sec.  200.30-7(a)(4), which currently authorizes the Secretary to grant
or deny extensions of time to make filings in administrative
proceedings, to clarify that the Secretary is authorized to grant
extensions to parties making filings related to the establishment and
administration of Fair Funds and disgorgement plans under part 201,
subpart F of the Commission's Rules of Practice, Sec.  201.1100 et seq.
    The Commission also is amending Sec.  200.30-7(a)(5) and Sec.
200.30-10(a)(5), which currently permit the Secretary or the Chief
Administrative Law Judge, respectively, to authorize the filing of
briefs exceeding 50 pages ``in accordance with Rule 450(c).'' Because
Rule 450(c) now sets word-count limitations, instead of page
limitations, for briefs filed with the Commission, the delegations are
corrected to provide that the Secretary or the Chief Administrative Law
Judge may authorize a party to file briefs exceeding 14,000 words. The
Commission also amends Sec.  200.30-7(a)(5) to delegate to the
Secretary the authority to permit the filing of motions exceeding 7,000
words in length, pursuant to amended Rule 154(c) of the Commission's
Rules of Practice.
    The Commission amends Sec.  200.30-14(g)(1)(xii), which delegates
to the General Counsel the authority to determine requests for leave to
file an opposition to a petition for review. This delegation is no
longer necessary, as the Rules of Practice no longer provide for briefs
in opposition to a petition for review. The Commission has enacted a
new delegation to permit the General Counsel to set the effective date
of sanctions imposed on a party that previously were stayed pending
appeal to the federal courts, once the mandate affirming the imposition
of sanctions has been issued by the court.

II. Administrative Procedure Act, Regulatory Flexibility Act, and
Paperwork Reduction Act

    The Commission finds, in accordance with Section 533(b)(3)(A) of
the Administrative Procedure Act,\8\ that this revision relates solely
to agency organization, procedure, or practice. It is therefore not
subject to the provisions of the Administrative Procedure Act requiring
notice, opportunity for public comment, and publication.\9\ The
Regulatory Flexibility Act\10\ therefore does not apply. Because these
rules relate to ``agency organization, procedure or practice that does
not substantially affect the rights or obligations of non-agency
parties,'' they are not subject to the Small Business Regulatory
Enforcement Fairness Act.\11\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \8\ 5 U.S.C. 553(b)(3)(A).
    \9\ Nonetheless, the Commission had previously determined that
it would be useful to publish most of these proposed rules for
notice and comment before adoption. See 5 U.S.C. 603. The Commission
received no comments in response to its request.
    \10\ 5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.
    \11\ 5 U.S.C. 804(3)(C).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    These rules do not contain any collection of information
requirements as defined by the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, as
amended.\12\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \12\ 44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

III. Costs and Benefits of the Proposed Amendments

    Taken as a whole, the Commission's Rules of Practice create
governmental review and remedial processes. That is, they are
procedural and administrative in nature. The benefits to the parties
are the familiar benefits of due process: Notice, opportunity to be
heard, efficiency, and fairness. The costs of these processes fall
largely on the Commission.
    The amendments set forth in this release variously clarify existing
practice, relate to internal agency management, increase the efficiency
of proceedings, or promote due process. The Commission requested data
to quantify the costs and the value of the benefits identified. We
received no comments in response to this request.

IV. Effect on Efficiency, Competition, and Capital Formation

    Section 2(b) of the Securities Act of 1933,\13\ Section 3(f) of the
Exchange Act,\14\ Section 2(c) of the Investment Company Act of
1940,\15\ and Section 202(c) of the Investment Advisers Act of 1940
\16\ require us, when engaging in rulemaking that requires us to
consider or determine whether an act is necessary or appropriate in the
public interest, to consider whether the action will promote
efficiency, competition, and capital formation. Section 23(a)(2) of the
Exchange Act \17\ prohibits us from adopting any rule that would impose
a burden on competition not necessary or appropriate in furtherance of
the purposes of the Exchange Act. These rules and amendments are
intended to enhance the transparency and facilitate parties'
understanding of the Rules. The amendments are also intended to clarify
existing practice and increase the efficiency of Commission enforcement
and self-regulatory organization disciplinary review proceedings. The
rules and amendments apply to all persons involved in administrative
proceedings before the Commission, and therefore the Commission does
not expect the rules and amendments to have an anti-competitive effect.
To the extent the rules and amendments would foster making whole
victims of securities laws violations and would increase the
transparency and efficiency of the Commission's administrative
proceedings, there might be an increase in investor confidence in
market fairness and efficiency. However, the magnitude of the effect of
the amendments in this regard is difficult to quantify. We requested
comment on the possible effects of our rule proposals on efficiency,
competition, and capital formation. We received no comments in response
to this request.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \13\ 15 U.S.C. 77b(b).
    \14\ 15 U.S.C. 78c(f).
    \15\ 15 U.S.C. 80a-2(c).
    \16\ 15 U.S.C. 80b-2(c).
    \17\ 15 U.S.C. 78w(a)(2).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

V. Statutory Basis and Text of Proposed Amendments

    These amendments to the Rules of Practice and related provisions
are being adopted pursuant to statutory authority granted to the
Commission, including section 3 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, 15
U.S.C. 7202; section 19 of the Securities Act, 15 U.S.C. 77s; sections
4A, 19, and 23 of the Exchange Act, 15 U.S.C. 78d-1, 78s, and 78w;
section 20 of the Public Utility Holding Company Act of 1935, 15 U.S.C.
79t; section 319 of the Trust Indenture Act of 1939, 15 U.S.C. 77sss;
sections 38 and 40 of the Investment Company Act, 15 U.S.C. 80a-37 and
80a-39; and section 211 of the Investment Advisers Act, 15 U.S.C. 80b-
11.

List of Subjects

17 CFR Part 200

    Administrative practice and procedure, Authority delegations
(Government Agencies).

17 CFR Part 201

    Administrative practice and procedure.

Text of the Adopted Rules

0
For the reasons set out in the preamble, Title 17, Chapter II of the
Code of Federal Regulations is amended as follows:

PART 200--ORGANIZATION; CONDUCT AND ETHICS; AND INFORMATION AND
REQUESTS

0
1. The authority citation for part 200, subpart A continues to read in
part as follows:

    Authority: 15 U.S.C. 77s, 77o, 77sss, 78d, 78d-1, 78d-2, 78w,
78ll(d), 78mm, 79t, 80a-37, 80b-11, and 7202, unless otherwise
noted.
* * * * *

0
2. Section 200.30-7 is amended by revising paragraphs (a)(4) and (a)(5)
to read as follows:

Sec.  200.30-7  Delegation of authority to Secretary of the Commission.

* * * * *
    (a) * * *
    (4) To grant or deny extensions of time within which to file papers
with the Commission under Rule 161 of the Commission's Rules of
Practice, Sec.  201.161 of this chapter, or under part 201, subpart F
of the Commission's Rules pertaining to Fair Fund and Disgorgement
Plans, Sec. Sec.  201.1100-201.1106;
    (5) To permit the filing of briefs with the Commission exceeding
14,000 words in length, pursuant to Rule 450(c) of the Commission's
Rule of Practice, Sec.  201.450(c) of this chapter, and to permit the
filing of motions with the Commission in excess of 7,000 words pursuant
to Rule 154(c) of the Commission's Rules of Practice, Sec.  201.154(c)
of this chapter;
* * * * *

Sec.  200.30-10  [Amended]

0
3. In Sec.  200.30-10, paragraph (a)(5), remove the words ``50 pages''
and, in their place, add the words ``14,000 words''.

0
4. Section 200.30-14 is amended by revising paragraph (g)(1)(xii) to
read as follows:

Sec.  200.30-14  Delegation of authority to the General Counsel.

* * * * *
    (g)(1) * * *
    (xii) To issue an order setting the effective date of sanctions
that were stayed pending appeal to the federal courts, upon issuance of
the mandate affirming the Commission's order imposing those sanctions.
* * * * *

PART 201--RULES OF PRACTICE

0
5. The authority citation for part 201 continues to read as follows:

    Authority: 15 U.S.C. 77s, 78w, 78x, 79t, 77sss, 80a-37 and 80b-
11; 5 U.S.C. 504(c)(1).

Subpart B--Regulations Pertaining to the Equal Access to Justice
Act

Sec.  201.55  [Amended]

0
6. In Sec.  201.55(a), in the third sentence, remove the words ``Rule
8(d) of the Commission's Rules of Practice'' and, in their place, add
the words ``Sec.  201.221 and Sec.  201.222(a)''.

0
7. The authority citation for Part 201, subpart D, continues to read as
follows:

    Authority: 15 U.S.C. 77f, 77g, 77h, 77h-1, 77j, 77s, 77u,
78c(b), 78d-1, 78d-2, 78l, 78m, 78n, 78o(d), 78o-3, 78s, 78u-2, 78u-
3, 78v, 78w, 79c, 79s, 79t, 79z-5a, 77sss, 77ttt, 80a-8, 80a-9, 80a-
37, 80a-38, 80a-39, 80a-40, 80a-41, 80a-44, 80b-3, 80b-9, 80b-11,
80b-12, 7202, 7215, and 7217.

Sec.  201.102  [Amended]

0
8. In Sec.  201.102(e)(3)(iii), in the last sentence, remove the cite
``Sec.  201.531'' and, in its place, add the cite ``Sec.  201.540''.

Sec.  201.104  [Amended]

0
9. In Sec.  201.104, remove the words ``450 Fifth Street, NW.,
Washington, DC 20549'' and, in their place, add the words ``100 F
Street, NE., Washington, DC 20549''.

0
10. Section 201.111 is amended by revising paragraph (h) to read as
follows:

Sec.  201.111  Hearing officer: Authority.

* * * * *
    (h) Subject to any limitations set forth elsewhere in these Rules
of Practice, considering and ruling upon all procedural and other
motions, including a motion to correct a manifest error of fact in the
initial decision. A motion to correct is properly filed under this Rule
only if the basis for the motion is a patent misstatement of fact in
the initial decision. Any motion to correct must be filed within ten
days of the initial decision. A brief in opposition may be filed within
five days of a motion to correct. The hearing officer shall have 20
days from the date of filing of any brief in opposition filed to rule
on a motion to correct;
* * * * *

0
11. Section 201.141 is amended by:
0
a. Revising paragraph (a)(2)(ii); and
0
b. Adding paragraph (a)(2)(vi).
    The revision and addition read as follows.

Sec.  201.141  Orders and decisions: Service of orders instituting
proceedings and other orders and decisions.

    (a) * * *
    (2) * * *
    (ii) To corporations or entities. Notice of a proceeding shall be
made to a person other than a natural person by delivering a copy of
the order instituting proceedings to an officer, managing or general
agent, or any other agent authorized by appointment or law to receive
such notice, by any method specified in paragraph (a)(2)(i) of this
section, or, in the case of an issuer of a class of securities
registered with the Commission, by sending a copy of the order
addressed to the most recent address shown on the entity's most recent
filing with the Commission by U.S. Postal Service certified,
registered, or Express Mail and obtaining a confirmation of attempted
delivery.
* * * * *
    (vi) To persons registered with self-regulatory organizations.
Notice of a proceeding shall be made to a person registered with a
self-regulatory organization by any method specified in paragraph
(a)(2)(i) of this section, or by sending a copy of the order addressed
to the most recent address for the person shown in the Central
Registration Depository by U.S. Postal Service certified, registered,
or Express Mail and obtaining a confirmation of attempted delivery.
* * * * *

0
12. Section 201.152 is amended by revising paragraph (d) to read as
follows:

Sec.  201.152  Filing of papers: Form.

* * * * *
    (d) Number of copies. An original and three copies of all papers
shall be filed, unless filing is made by facsimile in accordance with
Sec.  201.151. If filing is made by facsimile, the filer shall also
transmit to the Office of the Secretary one non-facsimile original with
a manual signature, contemporaneously with the facsimile transmission.
The non-facsimile original must be accompanied by a statement of the
date on which, and the facsimile number to which, the party made
transmission of the facsimile filing.
* * * * *

0
13. Section 201.154 is amended by revising paragraph (c) to read as
follows:

Sec.  201.154  Motions.

* * * * *
    (c) Length limitation. No motion (together with the brief in
support of the motion), brief in opposition to the motion, or reply
brief shall exceed 7,000 words, exclusive of any table of contents or
table of authorities. The word limit shall not apply to any addendum
that consists solely of copies of applicable cases, pertinent
legislative provisions or rules, or relevant exhibits. Requests for
leave to file motions and briefs in excess of 7,000 words are
disfavored. A motion

or brief, together with any accompanying brief, that does not exceed 15
pages in length, exclusive of pages containing the table of contents,
table of authorities, and any addendum that consists solely of copies
of applicable cases, pertinent legislative provisions, or rules and
exhibits, but inclusive of pleadings incorporated by reference, is
presumptively considered to contain no more than 7,000 words. Any
motion or brief that exceeds these page limits must include a
certificate by the attorney, or an unrepresented party, stating that
the document complies with the length limitation set forth in this
paragraph and stating the number of words in the document. The person
preparing the certificate may rely on the word count of a word-
processing program to prepare the document.

0
14. Section 201.201 is amended by revising the first sentence of
paragraph (b) to read as follows:

Sec.  201.201  Consolidation and severance of proceedings.

* * * * *
    (b) * * * By order of the Commission, any proceeding may be severed
with respect to one or more parties. * * *

0
15. Section 201.210 is amended by:
0
a. In paragraph (a)(2), removing the cite ``Sec.  201.612'' and, in its
place, adding the cite ``Sec.  201.1103'';
0
b. At the end of the introductory text of paragraph (b)(1), removing
the colon and in its place adding a period; and
0
c. Adding a sentence at the end of the introductory text of paragraph
(b)(1).
    The addition reads as follows:

Sec.  201.210  Parties, limited participants and amici curiae.

* * * * *
    (b) * * * (1) * * * No person, however, shall be admitted as a
party to a proceeding by intervention unless it is determined that
leave to participate pursuant to paragraph (c) of this section would be
inadequate for the protection of the person's interests.
* * * * *

0
16. Section 201.250 is amended by revising paragraph (c) to read as
follows:

Sec.  201.250  Motion for summary disposition.

* * * * *
    (c) The motion for summary disposition, together with any
supporting memorandum of points and authorities (exclusive of any
declarations, affidavits, or attachments), shall not exceed 9,800
words. Requests for leave to file motions and accompanying documents in
excess of 9,800 words are disfavored. A motion that does not, together
with any accompanying memorandum of points and authorities, exceed 35
pages in length, inclusive of pleadings incorporated by reference (but
excluding any declarations, affidavits, or attachments) is
presumptively considered to contain no more than 9,800 words. Any
motion that exceeds these page limits must include a certificate by the
attorney, or an unrepresented party, stating that the brief complies
with the length limitation set forth in this paragraph and stating the
number of words in the motion. The person preparing the certificate may
rely on the word count of a word-processing program to prepare the
document.

0
17. Section 201.411 is amended by revising the first sentence in
paragraph (c) to read as follows:

Sec.  201.411  Commission consideration of initial decisions by hearing
officers.

* * * * *
    (c) * * * The Commission may, on its own initiative, order review
of any initial decision, or any portion of any initial decision, within
21 days after the end of the period established for filing a petition
for review pursuant to Sec.  210.410(b). * * *
* * * * *

0
18. Section 201.430 is amended by revising paragraph (b)(1) to read as
follows:

Sec.  201.430  Appeal of actions made pursuant to delegated authority.

* * * * *
    (b) * * * (1) Notice of intention to petition for review. A party
to an action made pursuant to delegated authority, or a person
aggrieved by such action, may seek Commission review of the action by
filing a written notice of intention to petition for review within five
days after actual notice of the action to that party or aggrieved
person, or 15 days after publication of the notice of action in the
Federal Register, or five days after service of notice of the action on
that party or aggrieved person pursuant to Sec.  201.141(b), whichever
is the earliest.
* * * * *

0
19. Section 201.470 is amended by revising the third sentence of
paragraph (b) to read as follows:

Sec.  201.470  Reconsideration.

* * * * *
    (b) * * * A motion for reconsideration shall conform to the
requirements, including the limitation on the numbers of words,
provided in Sec.  201.154. * * *

0
20. Section 201.601 is amended by revising paragraph (a) to read as
follows:

Sec.  201.601  Prompt payment of disgorgement, interest and penalties.

    (a) Timing of payments. Unless otherwise provided, funds due
pursuant to an order by the Commission requiring the payment of
disgorgement, interest, or penalties shall be paid no later than 21
days after service of the order, and funds due pursuant to an order by
a hearing officer shall be paid in accordance with the order of
finality issued pursuant to Sec.  201.360(d)(2).
* * * * *

0
21. Section 201.900 is amended by revising the last sentence in
paragraph (b) to read as follows:

Sec.  201.900  Informal Procedures and Supplementary Information
Concerning Adjudicatory Proceedings.

* * * * *
    (b) * * * In connection with these periodic reports, if a
proceeding pending before the Commission has not been concluded within
30 days of the guidelines established in paragraph (a) of this section,
the General Counsel shall specifically apprise the Commission of that
fact, and shall describe the procedural posture of the case, project an
estimated date for conclusion of the proceeding, and provide such other
information as is necessary to enable the Commission to determine
whether additional steps are necessary to reach a fair and timely
resolution of the matter.
* * * * *

Subpart D [Amended]

0
22. Part 201, subpart D, is amended by removing Tables I, II, and III
at the end of the subpart.

Subpart F--Fair Fund and Disgorgement Plans

0
23. The authority citation for subpart F continues to read as follows.

    Authority: 15 U.S.C. 77h-1, 77s, 77u, 78c(b), 78d-1, 78d-2, 78u-
2, 78u-3, 78v, 78w, 80a-9, 80a-37, 80a-39, 80a-40, 80b-3, 80b-11,
80b-12, and 7246.

0
24. Section 201.1100 is revised to read as follows:

Sec.  201.1100  Creation of Fair Fund.

    In any agency process initiated by an order instituting proceedings
in which the Commission or the hearing officer issues an order
requiring the payment of disgorgement by a respondent and also
assessing a civil money penalty against that respondent, the Commission
or the hearing officer may order that the amount of disgorgement and of
the civil penalty, together with any funds received pursuant to 15
U.S.C. 7246(b),

be used to create a fund for the benefit of investors who were harmed
by the violation.

    Dated: November 29, 2005.

    By the Commission.
Jonathan G. Katz,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 05-23613 Filed 12-2-05; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 8010-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 80, Number 16 (Monday, January 26, 2015)]
[Notices]
[Pages 4035-4036]
[FR Doc No: 2015-01204]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

National Highway Traffic Safety Administration

[Docket No. NHTSA-2014-0028; Notice 2]

Toyota Motor Engineering & Manufacturing North America, Inc.,
Grant of Petition for Decision of Inconsequential Noncompliance

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

ACTION: Grant of petition.

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

SUMMARY: Toyota Motor Engineering & Manufacturing North America, Inc.,
on behalf of Toyota Motor Corporation and certain Toyota manufacturing
entities (collectively referred to as ``Toyota'') have determined that
specific model year (MY) 2013-2014 Toyota vehicles do not fully comply
with paragraph S4 of Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard (FMVSS) No.
302, Flammability of Interior Materials. Toyota has filed an
appropriate report dated January 29, 2014 as amended on February 20,
2014 pursuant to 49 CFR part 573, Defect and Noncompliance
Responsibility and Reports.

ADDRESSES: For further information on this decision contact Michael
Cole, Office of Vehicle Safety Compliance, National Highway Traffic
Safety Administration (NHTSA), telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>, facsimile
(202) 366-5930.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
    I. Toyota's Petition: Pursuant to 49 U.S.C. 30118(d) and 30120(h)
and the rule implementing those provisions at 49 CFR part 556, Toyota
has petitioned for an exemption from the notification and remedy
requirements of 49 U.S.C. Chapter 301 on the basis that this
noncompliance is inconsequential to motor vehicle safety.
    Notice of receipt of Toyota's petition was published, with a 30-Day
public comment period, on March 11, 2014 in the Federal Register (FR
13733). No comments were received. To view the petition and all
supporting documents log onto the Federal Docket Management System
(FDMS) Web site at: http://www.regulations.gov/. Then follow the online
search instructions to locate docket number ``NHTSA-2014-0028.''
    II. Vehicles Involved: Affected are approximately 206,271 MY 2012-
14 Camry, Avalon, Corolla, Sienna, Tundra, and Tacoma model Toyota
vehicles. Refer to the amended report that Toyota filed pursuant to 49
CFR part 573, Defect and Noncompliance Responsibility and Reports that
Toyota included as attachment to its petition for identification of the
associated Toyota manufacturing entities as well as additional details
about the vehicles involved.
    III. Noncompliance: Toyota explains that the noncompliance is that
the front and rear seat cushions and front and rear seat backs in the
subject vehicles fail to fully meet the requirements of paragraph S4 of
FMVSS No. 302 because seat cushion and seat back components, when
tested separately, failed to meet the burn rate requirements of
paragraph S4.3. Toyota identified the noncompliant components as seat
heater assemblies. Toyota also states that all other components of the
seat required to meet FMVSS No. 302 are in compliance with the
standard.
    IV. Rule Text: Paragraph S4 of FMVSS No. 302 requires in pertinent
part:

    S4.1 The portions described in S4.2 of the following components
of vehicle occupant compartments shall meet the requirements of
S4.3: seat cushions, seat backs, seat belts, headlining, convertible
tops, arm rests, all trim panels including door, front, rear, and
side panels, compartment shelves, head restraints, floor coverings,
sun visors, curtains, shades, wheel housing covers, engine
compartment covers, mattress covers, and any other interior
materials, including padding and crash-deployed elements, that are
designed to absorb energy on contact by occupants in the event of a
crash . . .
    S4.2 Any portion of a single or composite material which is
within 13 mm of the occupant compartment air space shall meet the
requirements of S4.3.
    S4.2.1 Any material that does not adhere to other material(s) at
every point of contact shall meet the requirements of S4.3 when
tested separately . . .
    S4.3 (a) When tested in accordance with S5, material described
in S4.1 and S4.2 shall not burn, nor transmit a flame front across
its surface, at a rate of more than 102 mm per minute. The
requirement concerning transmission of a flame front shall not apply
to a surface created by cutting a test specimen for purposes of
testing pursuant to S5.
    (b) If a material stops burning before it has burned for 60
seconds from the start of timing, and has not burned more than 51 mm
from the point where the timing was started, it shall be considered
to meet the burn-rate requirement of S4.3(a).

    V. Summary of Toyota's Analyses: Toyota stated its belief that the
subject noncompliance is inconsequential to motor vehicle safety for
the following reasons:
    1. Toyota believes that its testing shows that the seat heater
assemblies comply with FMVSS No. 302 when tested as a ``composite'' as
installed in the vehicle, i.e., along with the surrounding FMVSS No.
302 compliant seat cover, plus pad, and foam pad.
    2. Toyota believes that its testing and design review of the seat
heater assemblies indicates that the chance of fire or flame induced by
a malfunctioning seat heater is essentially zero.
    3. Toyota believes that the purpose of FMVSS No. 302 is to ``. . .
reduce the deaths and injuries to motor vehicle occupants caused by
vehicle fires, especially those originating in the interior of the
vehicle from sources such

as matches or cigarettes.\1\'' The noncompliant seat heater assemblies
would normally not be exposed to open flame or an ignition source (like
matches or cigarettes) in its installed application, because it is
installed within and surrounded by complying materials that meet FMVSS
No. 302.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ Paragraph S2 of FMVSS No. 302 Flammability of Interior
Materials.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    4. The seat heater assembly is a very small portion of the overall
mass of the soft material portions comprising the entire seat assembly
(i.e. less than 1%), and is significantly less in relation to the
entire vehicle interior surface area that could potentially be exposed
to flame. Therefore, Toyota believes that it would have an
insignificant adverse effect on interior material burn rate and the
potential for occupant injury due to interior fire.
    5. Toyota is not aware of any data suggesting that fires have
occurred in the field due to the installation of the non-complying seat
heater assemblies.
    6. Toyota also expressed its belief that in similar situations
NHTSA has granted petitions for inconsequential noncompliance relating
to FMVSS No. 302 requirements.
    Toyota additionally informed NHTSA that it has corrected the
noncompliance so that all future production vehicles will comply with
FMVSS No. 302.
    Toyota also provided Transport Canada's October 1, 2014, grant
letter to exempt it from conducting a recall and remedy campaign for
the identical issue for vehicles that were sold in Canada.\2\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \2\ Docket ID: NHTSA-2014-0028-0003.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In summation, Toyota believes that the described noncompliance of
the subject vehicles is inconsequential to motor vehicle safety, and
that its petition, to exempt Toyota from providing recall notification
of noncompliance as required by 49 U.S.C. 30118 and remedying the
recall noncompliance as required by 49 U.S.C. 30120 should be granted.

NHTSA Decision

    NHTSA Analysis: NHTSA has reviewed and accepts Toyota's analyses
that the subject noncompliance is inconsequential to motor vehicle
safety. Specifically, the fact that the front and rear seat cushions
and front and rear seat backs in the subject vehicles fail to meet the
burn rates requirement, poses little if any risk to motor vehicle
safety.
    NHTSA's greatest concern was that as a seat heater, the device
itself is the most likely ignition source. However, Toyota stated that
it is not aware of any data suggesting that vehicle fires have occurred
in the field due to the non-complying seat heaters. NHTSA searched its
complaints database from the year 2000 to current and also found no
complaints concerning the subject vehicles. We did find four Toyota
seat heater complaints concerning older vehicles (three Toyota Sienna's
model years 2006 and two 2004's and a 2007 Toyota Camry). While these
complaints appear to show that seat heaters can be potential ignition
sources, the hazard does not appear to be widespread or an issue with
the subject vehicles. Toyota also conducted various testing to show
that the seat heater element would not act as an ignition source when
overdriven electrically, nor would it accommodate a flame rate beyond
what is permitted by FMVSS No. 302 when exposed directly to an open
flame in the installed condition (as a composite). Toyota also
demonstrated that the seat heater is a very small portion of the
overall mass of the seat assembly and that NHTSA has granted prior
inconsequentiality petitions for similar issues.
    Based on its review of Toyota's submission, the agency has
concluded that the ``seat heaters'' in the noncompliant vehicles are
unlikely to pose a flammability risk. This conclusion is consistent
with Transport Canada's review of the identical issue. NHTSA's
evaluation of the consequentiality of this noncompliance should not be
interpreted as a diminution of the agency's safety concern for the
flammability of interior materials. Rather, it represents NHTSA's
assessment of the gravity of this specific noncompliance based upon the
likely consequences. Ultimately, the issue is whether this particular
noncompliance is likely to create a risk to safety. NHTSA is not aware
of any occupant injuries regarding these seat heaters. Based on the
foregoing, NHTSA has decided that Toyota has met its burden of
persuasion that the noncompliance herein described is inconsequential
to motor vehicle safety.
    To avoid confusion, NHTSA would like to note that an existing NHTSA
safety recall campaign involving approximately 3,233 Toyota vehicles is
unaffected by this inconsequential noncompliance decision. That safety
recall campaign is being conducted by an independent motor vehicle
distributor that modified Toyota vehicles with defective aftermarket
seat heaters that can malfunction and burn holes in the seating
materials. For more information refer to NHTSA Recall ID Number 14V-743
at: http://www.safercar.gov.
    NHTSA Decision: In consideration of the foregoing, NHTSA has
decided that Toyota has met its burden of persuasion that the FMVSS No.
302 noncompliance is inconsequential to motor vehicle safety.
Accordingly, Toyota's petition is hereby granted and Toyota is exempted
from the obligation of providing notification of, and a remedy for,
that noncompliance under 49 U.S.C. 30118 and 30120.
    NHTSA notes that the statutory provisions (49 U.S.C. 30118(d) and
30120(h)) that permit manufacturers to file petitions for a
determination of inconsequentiality allow NHTSA to exempt manufacturers
only from the duties found in sections 30118 and 30120, respectively,
to notify owners, purchasers, and dealers of a defect or noncompliance
and to remedy the defect or noncompliance. Therefore, any decision on
this petition only applies to the subject vehicles that Toyota no
longer controlled at the time it determined that the noncompliance
existed. However, the granting of this petition does not relieve Toyota
distributors and dealers of the prohibitions on the sale, offer for
sale, or introduction or delivery for introduction into interstate
commerce of the noncompliant vehicles under their control after Toyota
notified them that the subject noncompliance existed.

    Authority: 49 U.S.C. 30118, 30120: delegations of authority at
49 CFR 1.95 and 501.8.

Jeffrey M. Giuseppe,
Acting Director, Office of Vehicle Safety Compliance.
[FR Doc. 2015-01204 Filed 1-23-15; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-59-P


[Federal Register Volume 77, Number 52 (Friday, March 16, 2012)]
[Notices]
[Pages 15841-15843]
[FR Doc No: 2012-6315]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

Notice of Passenger Facility Charge (PFC) Approvals and
Disapprovals

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Monthly Notice of PFC Approvals and Disapprovals.

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

SUMMARY: The FAA publishes a monthly notice, as appropriate, of PFC
approvals and disapprovals under the provisions of the Aviation Safety
and Capacity Expansion Act of 1990 (Title IX of the Omnibus Budget
Reconciliation Act of 1990) (Pub. L. 101-508) and Part 158 of the
Federal Aviation Regulations (14 CFR part 158). This notice is
published pursuant to paragraph (d) of Sec.  158.29. In February
2012,there were six applications approved. Additionally, 11 approved
amendments to previously approved applications are listed.

PFC Applications Approved

    Public Agency: County and City of Yakima, Washington.
    Application Number: 12-14-C-00-YKM.
    Application Type: Impose and use a PFC.
    PFC Level: $4.50.
    Total PFC Revenue Approved in this Decision: $703,801.
    Earliest Charge Effective Date: August 1, 2012.
    Estimated Charge Expiration Date: February 1, 2014.
    Class of Air Carriers Not Required To Collect PFCs:
    Air taxi/commercial operators--nonscheduled/on-demand air carriers
filing FAA Form 1800-31.
    Determination: Approved. Based on information contained in the
public agency's application, the FAA has determined that the approved
class accounts for less than 1 percent of the total annual enplanements
at Yakima Air Terminal--McAllister Field Airport.

Brief Description of Projects Approved for Collection and Use

    Snow removal equipment purchase--design.
    Terminal apron rehabilitation--design.
    Taxiway Alpha and connectors rehabilitation--design.
    Snow removal equipment purchase.
    Terminal apron rehabilitation.
    Taxiway Alpha and connectors rehabilitation.
    Acquire runway friction tester (decelerometer).
    Acquire miscellaneous equipment.
    Environmental mitigation.
    Security enhancement.
    Decision Date: February 2, 2012.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mary Vargas, Seattle Airports District
Office,<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    Public Agency: City of Modesto, California.
    Application Number: 12-08-C-00-MOD.
    Application Type: Impose and use a PFC.
    PFC Level: $4.50.
    Total PFC Revenue Approved in this Decision: $111,806.
    Earliest Charge Effective Date: April 1, 2012.
    Estimated Charge Expiration Date: December 1, 2012.
    Class of Air Carriers Not Required to Collect PFC'S: None.

Brief Description of Projects Approved for Collection and Use

    Conduct miscellaneous studies.
    Procure Americans with Disabilities Act lift.
    Reconstruct northwest apron.
    Construct new windsocks.
    Construct new perimeter security fence.
    Environmental study.
    PFC administration costs.

Brief Description of Withdrawn Projects

    Apron rehabilitation.
    Enhance runway safety area.
    Date of Withdrawal: February 9, 2012.
    Decision Date: February 10, 2012.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Arlene Draper, San Francisco Airports
District Office,<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    Public Agency: City of Columbia, Missouri.
    Application Number: 12-03-C-00-COU.
    Application Type: Impose and use a PFC.
    PFC Level: $4.50.
    Total PFC Revenue Approved in this Decision: $2,140,461.
    Earliest Charge Effective Date: February 1, 2013.
    Estimated Charge Expiration Date: December 1, 2026.
    Class of Air Carriers Not Required To Collect PFCs: None.

Brief Description of Projects Approved for Collection and Use

    Airport master plan update.
    Wildlife management assessment of hazards.
    Environmental assessment.
    Terminal restroom renovation.
    Taxiway A reconstruction.
    Snow removal equipment.
    Update airport exhibit A property map.
    Aircraft rescue and firefighting truck.
    PFC audit fees.

Brief Description of Projects Approved for Collection

    Expand air carrier auto parking lot.
    Wildlife deterrent fence.
    Airport land acquisition.
    Rehabilitate runway 13/31 and taxiway B.
    Extend runway 13/31 and taxiway B.
    Re-align Route H and Rangeline Road.
    Extend runway 2/20 and navigational aids.
    Aircraft rescue and firefighting building expansion.
    Decision Date: February 10, 2012.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Todd Madison, Central Region Airports
Division,<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    Public Agency: City of Midland, Texas.
    Application Number: 12-06-C-00-MAF.
    Application Type: Impose and use a PFC.
    PFC Level: $4.50.
    Total PFC Revenue Approved in this Decision: $1,319,287.
    Earliest Charge Effective Date: August 1, 2015.
    Estimated Charge Expiration Date: May 1, 2016.
    Classes of Air Carriers Not Required to Collect PFCs:
    (1) Part 135 air taxi/commercial operators filing FAA Form 1800-31;
(2) commuter and small certificated air carriers filing Department of
Transportation Form T-100 for nonscheduled operations; and (3) large
certificated route air carriers filing Department of Transportation
Form T-100 for non-scheduled operations.
    Determination: Approved. Based on information contained in the
public agency's application, the FAA has determined that each approved
class accounts for less than 1 percent of the total annual enplanements
at Midland International Airport.

Brief Description of Projects Approved for Collection and Use

    Terminal building rehabilitation.
    Executive apron reconstruction.
    Northwest taxilane and emergency perimeter roadway extension.
    Wildlife hazard assessment.
    Runways 4/22 and 16U34R rehabilitation design.
    Emergency perimeter roadway and gates rehabilitation.
    Airport drainage improvements--phase 1.
    Entrance road guidance signage rehabilitation.
    Airport radio communication system upgrade.
    Airfield lighting cable replacement.
    Taxiway V apron expansion.
    Decision Date: February 13, 2012.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Marcelino Sanchez, Texas Airports
Development Office,<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    Public Agency: County of Pitkin, Aspen, Colorado.
    Application Number: 12-08-C-00-ASE.
    Application Type: Impose and use a PFC.
    PFC Level: $4.50.
    Total PFC Revenue Approved in this Decision: $3,211,592.
    Earliest Charge Effective Date: August 1, 2012.
    Estimated Charge Expiration Date: February 1, 2016.
    Class of Air Carriers Not Required to Collect PFCs: Nonscheduled/
on-demand air carriers filing FAA Form 1800-31.
    Determination: Approved. Based on information contained in the
public agency's application, the FAA has determined that the approved
class accounts for less than 1 percent of the

total annual enplanements at Aspen/Pitkin County Airport.

Brief Description of Projects Approved for Collection and Use

    Acquire snow removal equipment (plow).
    Extend runway 15/33.
    Construct connector taxiway.
    Construct south deice pad apron.
    Improve runway safety area.
    PFC application and administration fees.
    Decision Date: February 17, 2012.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Jesse Lyman, Denver Airports District
Office,<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    Public Agency: City of Klamath Falls, Oregon.
    Application Number: 12-03-C-00-LMT.
    Application Type: Impose and use a PFC.
    PFC Level: $4.50.
    Total PFC Revenue Approved in This Decision: $987,785.
    Earliest Charge Effective Date: April 1, 2012.
    Estimated Charge Expiration Date: October 1, 2023.
    Class of Air Carriers Not Required To Collect PFCs: None.

Brief Description of Projects Approved for Collection and Use

    Terminal enhancements.
    Security enhancements.
    Construct north end perimeter road.
    Conduct miscellaneous studies.
    Rehabilitate runway 14/32.
    Rehabilitate runway 7/25.
    Environmental mitigation.
    Acquire snow removal equipment.
    PFC administration costs.

    Decision Date: February 27, 2012.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Trang Tran, Seattle Airports District
Office,<PHONE_NUMBER>.

                                           Amendments to PFC Approvals
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                Original         Amended
                                     Amendment       Original         Amended        estimated       estimated
   Amendment No., City, State      approved date   approved net    approved net     charge exp.     charge exp.
                                                    PFC revenue     PFC revenue        date            date
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
03-06-C-01-ACV; Arcata, CA......         2/01/12        $578,450        $523,597        03/01/05        03/01/05
05-07-C-01-ACV; Arcata, CA......         2/02/12         392,265         336,981        10/01/05        10/01/05
09-03-C-02-PGV; Greenville, NC..         2/03/12         596,985         396,985        10/01/11        10/01/11
03-02-C-01-MCW; Mason City, IA..         2/08/12         379,500         303,061        02/01/12        02/01/12
08-07-C-01-MOD; Modesto, CA.....         2/10/12         395,134         337,634        12/01/15        04/01/12
99-02-C-07-MCI; Kansas City, MO.         2/14/12       7,375,439       6,741,254        05/01/11        04/01/11
09-09-C-02-BUR; Burbank, CA.....         2/16/12      21,965,000      24,965,000        05/01/15        09/01/15
09-06-C-01-PUW; Pullman, WA.....         2/17/12         255,998         271,077        05/01/11        12/01/10
10-11-C-02-ATL; Atlanta, GA.....         2/21/12     422,480,178     347,373,302        01/01/23        07/01/22
94-01-C-04-RIC; Richmond, VA....         2/23/12      11,847,867      11,846,842        05/01/98        05/01/98
01-04-C-04-RIC; Richmond, VA....         2/23/12       3,401,433       2,647,868        11/01/16       114/01/16
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Issued in Washington, DC on March 8, 2012.
Joe Hebert,
Manager, Financial Analysis and Passenger Faculty Charge Branch.
[FR Doc. 2012-6315 Filed 3-15-12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-M