[Federal Register Volume 84, Number 46 (Friday, March 8, 2019)]
[Notices]
[Pages 8550-8553]
[FR Doc No: 2019-04265]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Investment Company Act Release No. 33388; 812-14956]

BlackRock Credit Strategies Fund, et al.

March 5, 2019.
AGENCY: Securities and Exchange Commission (``Commission'').

ACTION: Notice.

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

    Notice of an application under section 6(c) of the Investment
Company Act of 1940 (the ``Act'') for an exemption from sections
18(a)(2), 18(c) and 18(i) of the Act, under sections 6(c) and 23(c) of
the Act for an exemption from rule 23c-3 under the Act, and for an
order pursuant to section 17(d) of the Act and rule 17d-1 under the
Act.

Summary of Application:  Applicants request an order to permit certain
registered closed-end management investment companies to issue multiple
classes of shares and to impose asset-based distribution and/or service
fees and early withdrawal charges (``EWCs'').

Applicants: BlackRock Credit Strategies Fund (the ``Fund''), BlackRock
Advisors, LLC (the ``Advisor'') and

BlackRock Investments, LLC (the ``Distributor'').

Filing Dates: The application was filed on September 24, 2018 and
amended on January 15, 2019.

Hearing or Notification of Hearing: An order granting the requested
relief will be issued unless the Commission orders a hearing.
Interested persons may request a hearing by writing to the Commission's
Secretary and serving applicants with a copy of the request, personally
or by mail. Hearing requests should be received by the Commission by
5:30 p.m. on April 1, 2019, and should be accompanied by proof of
service on the applicants, in the form of an affidavit, or, for
lawyers, a certificate of service. Pursuant to rule 0-5 under the Act,
hearing requests should state the nature of the writer's interest, any
facts bearing upon the desirability of a hearing on the matter, the
reason for the request, and the issues contested. Persons who wish to
be notified of a hearing may request notification by writing to the
Commission's Secretary.

ADDRESSES: Secretary, U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission, 100 F
Street NE, Washington, DC 20549-1090; Applicants: Janey Ahn, Esq.,
BlackRock Advisors, LLC, 55 East 52nd Street, New York, NY 10055, and
Thomas A. DeCapo, Esq., Skadden, Arps, Slate, Meagher & Flom LLP, 500
Boylston Street, Boston, MA 02116.

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

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:  The following is a summary of the
application. The complete application may be obtained via the
Commission's website by searching for the file number, or for an
applicant using the Company name box, at or by calling<PHONE_NUMBER>.

Applicants' Representations

    1. The Fund is a Delaware statutory trust that is registered under
the Act as a non-diversified, closed-end management investment company.
The Fund seeks to provide high income and attractive risk adjusted
return. The Fund seeks to achieve its investment objectives by
investing, under normal circumstances, at least 80% of its managed
assets in fixed income securities, with an emphasis on public and
private corporate credit.
    2. The Advisor is registered as an investment adviser under the
Investment Advisers Act of 1940, as amended. The Advisor will serve as
investment adviser to the Fund.
    3. The applicants seek an order to permit the Fund to issue
multiple classes of shares and to impose asset-based distribution and/
or service fees and EWCs.
    4. Applicants request that the order also apply to any continuously
offered registered closed-end management investment company that has
been previously organized or that may be organized in the future for
which the Advisor or Distributor, or any entity controlling, controlled
by, or under common control with the Advisor or Distributor, or any
successor in interest to any such entity,\1\ acts as investment
manager, adviser or principal underwriter and which operates as an
interval fund pursuant to rule 23c-3 under the Act or provides periodic
liquidity with respect to its shares pursuant to rule 13e-4 under the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (``Exchange Act'') (each, a ``Periodic
Repurchase Fund'' and together with the Fund, the ``Periodic Repurchase
Funds'').\2\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ A successor in interest is limited to an entity that results
from a reorganization into another jurisdiction or a change in the
type of business organization.
    \2\ Any Periodic Repurchase Fund relying on this relief in the
future will do so in a manner consistent with the terms and
conditions of the application. Applicants represent that each entity
presently intending to rely on the requested relief is listed as an
applicant.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    5. The Fund will continuously offer common shares to the public.
Applicants state that additional offerings by any Periodic Repurchase
Fund relying on the order may be on a private placement or public
offering basis. Shares of the Fund will not be listed on any securities
exchange nor quoted on any quotation medium. The Fund does not expect
there to be a secondary trading market for its shares.
    6. The Fund will initially offer only one share class at net asset
value (the ``Initial Class''). If the requested relief is granted, the
Fund intends to commence offering a second class of shares (the
``Second Class''). The Initial Class will not be subject to a front-end
sales load, a distribution fee or a service fee. The Second Class will
be subject to a front-end sales load, a distribution fee and/or a
service fee. The Fund and other Periodic Repurchase Funds may in the
future offer additional classes of shares and/or another sales charges
structure. Because of the different distribution fees, services and any
other class expenses that may be attributable to the each class of
shares, the net income attributable to, and the dividends payable on,
each class of shares may differ from each other.
    7. Applicants state that, from time to time, the Periodic
Repurchase Funds may create additional classes of shares, the terms of
which may differ from the initial class in the following respects: (i)
The amount of fees permitted by different distribution plans or
different service fee arrangements; (ii) voting rights with respect to
a distribution plan of a class; (iii) different class designations;
(iv) any differences in dividends and net asset value resulting from
differences in fees under a distribution or service fee arrangement or
in class expenses; (v) any EWC or other sales load structure; and (vi)
exchange or conversion privileges of the classes as permitted under the
Act.
    8. Applicants state that the Fund has adopted a fundamental policy
to repurchase a specified percentage of its shares (no less than 5%) at
net asset value on a quarterly basis. Such repurchase offers will be
conducted pursuant to rule 23c-3 under the Act. Each of the Periodic
Repurchase Funds will likewise adopt fundamental investment policies
and make periodic repurchase offers to its shareholders in compliance
with rule 23c-3 or will provide periodic liquidity with respect to its
shares pursuant to rule 13e-4 under the Exchange Act.\3\ Any repurchase
offers made by a Periodic Repurchase Fund will be made to all holders
of shares of each such Fund.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ Applicants submit that rule 23c-3 and Regulation M under the
Exchange Act permit an interval fund to make repurchase offers to
repurchase its shares while engaging in a continuous offering of its
shares pursuant to Rule 415 under the Securities Act of 1933, as
amended.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    9. Applicants represent that any asset-based service and/or
distribution fees for each class of shares of the Periodic Repurchase
Funds will comply with the provisions of FINRA Rule 2341(d) (``FINRA
Sales Charge Rule'').\4\ Applicants also represent that each Periodic
Repurchase Fund will disclose in its prospectus the fees, expenses and
other characteristics of each class of shares offered for sale by the
prospectus, as is required for open-end multiple class funds under Form
N-1A. As is required for open-end funds, each Periodic Repurchase Fund
will disclose its expenses in shareholder reports, and describe any
arrangements that result in breakpoints in or elimination of sales
loads in its prospectus.\5\ In addition,

applicants will comply with applicable enhanced fee disclosure
requirements for fund of funds, including registered funds of hedge
funds.\6\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ Any reference to the FINRA Sales Charge Rule includes any
successor or replacement to the FINRA Sales Charge Rule.
    \5\ See Shareholder Reports and Quarterly Portfolio Disclosure
of Registered Management Investment Companies, Investment Company
Act Release No. 26372 (Feb. 27, 2004) (adopting release) (requiring
open-end investment companies to disclose fund expenses in
shareholder reports); and Disclosure of Breakpoint Discounts by
Mutual Funds, Investment Company Act Release No. 26464 (June 7,
2004) (adopting release) (requiring open-end investment companies to
provide prospectus disclosure of certain sales load information).
    \6\ Fund of Funds Investments, Investment Company Act Rel. Nos.
26198 (Oct. 1, 2003) (proposing release) and 27399 (Jun. 20, 2006)
(adopting release). See also Rules 12d1-1, et seq. of the Act.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    10. Each Periodic Repurchase Fund will comply with any requirements
that the Commission or FINRA may adopt regarding disclosure at the
point of sale and in transaction confirmations about the costs and
conflicts of interest arising out of the distribution of open-end
investment company shares, and regarding prospectus disclosure of sales
loads and revenue sharing arrangements, as if those requirements
applied to each Periodic Repurchase Fund. In addition, each Periodic
Repurchase Fund will contractually require that any distributor of the
Periodic Repurchase Fund's shares comply with such requirements in
connection with the distribution of such Periodic Repurchase Fund's
shares.
    11. Each Periodic Repurchase Fund will allocate all expenses
incurred by it among the various classes of shares based on the net
assets of that Periodic Repurchase Fund attributable to each class,
except that the net asset value and expenses of each class will reflect
the expenses associated with the distribution plan of that class,
service fees attributable to that class (if any), including transfer
agency fees, and any other incremental expenses of that class. Expenses
of a Periodic Repurchase Fund allocated to a particular class of shares
will be borne on a pro rata basis by each outstanding share of that
class. Applicants state that each Periodic Repurchase Fund will comply
with the provisions of rule 18f-3 under the Act as if it were an open-
end investment company.
    12. Applicants state that each Periodic Repurchase Fund may impose
an EWC on shares submitted for repurchase that have been held less than
a specified period and may waive the EWC for certain categories of
shareholders or transactions to be established from time to time.
Applicants state that each Periodic Repurchase Fund will apply the EWC
(and any waivers or scheduled variations, or elimination of the EWC)
uniformly to all shareholders in a given class and consistently with
the requirements of rule 22d-1 under the Act as if the Periodic
Repurchase Funds were open-end investment companies.
    13. Each Periodic Repurchase Fund operating as an interval fund
pursuant to rule 23c-3 under the Act may offer its shareholders an
exchange feature under which the shareholders of the Periodic
Repurchase Fund may, in connection with such Periodic Repurchase Fund's
periodic repurchase offers, exchange their shares of the Periodic
Repurchase Fund for shares of the same class of (i) registered open-end
investment companies or (ii) other registered closed-end investment
companies that comply with rule 23c-3 under the Act or rule 13e-4 under
the Exchange Act and continuously offer their shares at net asset
value, that are in the Periodic Repurchase Fund's group of investment
companies (collectively, ``Other Funds''). Shares of a Periodic
Repurchase Fund operating pursuant to rule 23c-3 that are exchanged for
shares of Other Funds will be included as part of the amount of the
repurchase offer amount for such Periodic Repurchase Fund as specified
in rule 23c-3 under the Act. Any exchange option will comply with rule
11a-3 under the Act, as if the Periodic Repurchase Fund were an open-
end investment company subject to rule 11a-3. In complying with rule
11a-3, each Periodic Repurchase Fund will treat an EWC as if it were a
contingent deferred sales load (``CDSL'').

Applicants' Legal Analysis

Multiple Classes of Shares

    1. Section 18(a)(2) of the Act provides that a closed-end
investment company may not issue or sell a senior security that is a
stock unless certain requirements are met. Applicants state that the
creation of multiple classes of shares of the Periodic Repurchase Funds
may violate section 18(a)(2) because the Periodic Repurchase Funds may
not meet such requirements with respect to a class of shares that may
be a senior security.
    2. Section 18(c) of the Act provides, in relevant part, that a
closed-end investment company may not issue or sell any senior security
if, immediately thereafter, the company has outstanding more than one
class of senior security. Applicants state that the creation of
multiple classes of shares of the Periodic Repurchase Funds may be
prohibited by section 18(c), as a class may have priority over another
class as to payment of dividends because shareholders of different
classes would pay different fees and expenses.
    3. Section 18(i) of the Act provides that each share of stock
issued by a registered management investment company will be a voting
stock and have equal voting rights with every other outstanding voting
stock. Applicants state that multiple classes of shares of the Periodic
Repurchase Funds may violate section 18(i) of the Act because each
class would be entitled to exclusive voting rights with respect to
matters solely related to that class.
    4. Section 6(c) of the Act provides that the Commission may exempt
any person, security or transaction or any class or classes of persons,
securities or transactions from any provision of the Act, or from any
rule or regulation under the Act, if and to the extent such exemption
is necessary or appropriate in the public interest and consistent with
the protection of investors and the purposes fairly intended by the
policy and provisions of the Act. Applicants request an exemption under
section 6(c) from sections 18(a)(2), 18(c) and 18(i) to permit the
Periodic Repurchase Funds to issue multiple classes of shares.
    5. Applicants submit that the proposed allocation of expenses
relating to distribution and voting rights among multiple classes is
equitable and will not discriminate against any group or class of
shareholders. Applicants submit that the proposed arrangements would
permit a Periodic Repurchase Fund to facilitate the distribution of its
securities and provide investors with a broader choice of shareholder
services. Applicants assert that the proposed closed-end investment
company multiple class structure does not raise the concerns underlying
section 18 of the Act to any greater degree than open-end investment
companies' multiple class structures that are permitted by rule 18f-3
under the Act. Applicants state that each Periodic Repurchase Fund will
comply with the provisions of rule 18f-3 as if it were an open-end
investment company.

Early Withdrawal Charges

    1. Section 23(c) of the Act provides, in relevant part, that no
registered closed-end investment company shall purchase securities of
which it is the issuer, except: (a) On a securities exchange or other
open market; (b) pursuant to tenders, after reasonable opportunity to
submit tenders given to all holders of securities of the class to be
purchased; or (c) under other circumstances as the Commission may
permit by rules and regulations or orders for the protection of
investors.
    2. Rule 23c-3 under the Act permits an ``interval fund'' to make
repurchase offers of between five and twenty-five percent of its
outstanding shares at net asset value at periodic intervals

pursuant to a fundamental policy of the interval fund. Rule 23c-3(b)(1)
under the Act permits an interval fund to deduct from repurchase
proceeds only a repurchase fee, not to exceed two percent of the
proceeds, that is paid to the interval fund and is reasonably intended
to compensate the fund for expenses directly related to the repurchase.
    3. Section 23(c)(3) provides that the Commission may issue an order
that would permit a closed-end investment company to repurchase its
shares in circumstances in which the repurchase is made in a manner or
on a basis that does not unfairly discriminate against any holders of
the class or classes of securities to be purchased.
    4. Applicants request relief under section 6(c), discussed above,
and section 23(c)(3) from rule 23c-3 to the extent necessary for the
Periodic Repurchase Funds to impose EWCs on shares of the Periodic
Repurchase Funds submitted for repurchase that have been held for less
than a specified period.
    5. Applicants state that the EWCs they intend to impose are
functionally similar to CDSLs imposed by open-end investment companies
under rule 6c-10 under the Act. Rule 6c-10 permits open-end investment
companies to impose CDSLs, subject to certain conditions. Applicants
note that rule 6c-10 is grounded in policy considerations supporting
the employment of CDSLs where there are adequate safeguards for the
investor and state that the same policy considerations support
imposition of EWCs in the interval fund context. In addition,
applicants state that EWCs may be necessary for the distributor to
recover distribution costs. Applicants represent that any EWC imposed
by the Periodic Repurchase Funds will comply with rule 6c-10 under the
Act as if the rule were applicable to closed-end investment companies.
The Periodic Repurchase Funds will disclose EWCs in accordance with the
requirements of Form N-1A concerning CDSLs.

Asset-Based Distribution and/or Service Fees

    1. Section 17(d) of the Act and rule 17d-1 under the Act prohibit
an affiliated person of a registered investment company, or an
affiliated person of such person, acting as principal, from
participating in or effecting any transaction in connection with any
joint enterprise or joint arrangement in which the investment company
participates unless the Commission issues an order permitting the
transaction. In reviewing applications submitted under section 17(d)
and rule 17d-1, the Commission considers whether the participation of
the investment company in a joint enterprise or joint arrangement is
consistent with the provisions, policies and purposes of the Act, and
the extent to which the participation is on a basis different from or
less advantageous than that of other participants.
    2. Rule 17d-3 under the Act provides an exemption from section
17(d) and rule 17d-1 to permit open-end investment companies to enter
into distribution arrangements pursuant to rule 12b-1 under the Act.
Applicants request an order under section 17(d) and rule 17d-1 under
the Act to the extent necessary to permit a Periodic Repurchase Fund to
impose asset-based distribution and/or service fees. Applicants have
agreed to comply with rules 12b-1 and 17d-3 as if those rules applied
to closed-end investment companies, which they believe will resolve any
concerns that might arise in connection with a Periodic Repurchase Fund
financing the distribution of its shares through asset-based
distribution fees.
    3. For the reasons stated above, applicants submit that the
exemptions requested under section 6(c) are necessary and appropriate
in the public interest and are consistent with the protection of
investors and the purposes fairly intended by the policy and provisions
of the Act. Applicants further submit that the relief requested
pursuant to section 23(c)(3) will be consistent with the protection of
investors and will insure that applicants do not unfairly discriminate
against any holders of the class of securities to be purchased.
Finally, applicants state that the Periodic Repurchase Funds'
imposition of asset-based distribution and/or service fees is
consistent with the provisions, policies and purposes of the Act and
does not involve participation on a basis different from or less
advantageous than that of other participants.

Applicants' Condition

    Applicants agree that any order granting the requested relief will
be subject to the following condition:
    Each Periodic Repurchase Fund relying on the order will comply with
the provisions of rules 6c-10, 12b-1, 17d-3, 18f-3, 22d-1, and, where
applicable, 11a-3 under the Act, as amended from time to time, as if
those rules applied to closed-end management investment companies, and
will comply with the FINRA Sales Charge Rule, as amended from time to
time, as if that rule applied to all closed-end management investment
companies.

    For the Commission, by the Division of Investment Management,
under delegated authority.
Eduardo A. Aleman,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2019-04265 Filed 3-7-19; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 76, Number 218 (Thursday, November 10, 2011)]
[Notices]
[Pages 70217-70220]
[FR Doc No: 2011-29084]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Administration

[Docket No. PHMSA-2008-0291]

Pipeline Safety: Information Collection Activities

ACTION: Request for public comments and OMB approval of new Information
Collection.

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

AGENCY: Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration
SUMMARY: On December 13, 2010, in accordance with the Paperwork
Reduction Act of 1995, the Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety
Administration (PHMSA) published a notice in the Federal Register of
its intent to create a national registry of pipeline and liquefied
natural gas (LNG) operators. PHMSA received one comment in response to
that notice. PHMSA is publishing this notice to respond to the comment,
to provide the public with an additional 30 days to comment on the
proposed revisions to the operator registry forms, including the form
instructions, and to announce that the revised Information Collections
will be submitted to the Office of Management and Budget for approval.

DATES: Comments on this notice must be received by December 12, 2011 to
be assured of consideration.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Angela Dow by telephone at (202) 366-
1246, by fax at<PHONE_NUMBER>, by email at<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or by
mail at U.S. Department of Transportation, Pipeline and Hazardous
Materials Safety Administration, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., PHP-30,
Washington, DC 20590-0001.

ADDRESSES: You may submit comments identified by the docket number
PHMSA-2008-0291 by any of the following methods:
     Federal eRulemaking Portal: http://www.regulations.gov.
Follow the online instructions for submitting comments.
     Fax: 1<PHONE_NUMBER>.
     Mail: Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, Office
of Management and Budget, 726 Jackson Place NW., Washington, DC 20503,
ATTN: Desk Officer for the U.S. Department of Transportation.
     Email: Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs,
Office of Management and Budget, at the following address<EMAIL_ADDRESS>    Requests for a copy of the Information Collection should be
directed to Angela Dow by telephone at<PHONE_NUMBER>, by fax at (202)
366-4566, by email at<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or by mail at U.S. Department
of Transportation, PHMSA, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., PHP-30,
Washington, DC 20590-0001.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Section 1320.8(d), Title 5, Code of Federal
Regulations requires PHMSA to provide interested members of the public
and affected agencies an opportunity to comment on information
collection and recordkeeping requests. This notice identifies a new
information collection request that PHMSA will be submitting to OMB for
approval. The information collection will be titled: ``National
Registry of Pipeline and Liquefied Natural Gas Operators.'' PHMSA
published a final rule in the Federal Register on November 26, 2010 (75
FR 72878), titled ``Pipeline Safety: Updates to Pipeline and Liquefied
Natural Gas Reporting Requirements.'' That final rule added two new
sections, 49 CFR 191.22 and 195.64, to the pipeline safety regulations
for the establishment of a ``National Registry of Pipeline and
Liquefied Natural Gas Operators,'' which will be used by operators to
obtain an Operator Identification (OPID) number. The following
information is provided for each information collection: (1) Title of
the information collection; (2) Office of Management and Budget (OMB)
control number; (3) Type of request; (4) Abstract of the information
collection activity; (5) Description of affected public; (6) Estimate
of total annual reporting and recordkeeping burden; and (7) Frequency
of collection. PHMSA will request a three-year term of approval for
each information collection activity.
    The comments are summarized and addressed below as specified in the
following outline:

I. Background
II. Summary of Comments/Topics
III. Proposed Information Collection Revisions and Request for
Comments

I. Background

    PHMSA published a final rule in the Federal Register on November
26, 2010, (75 FR 72878), titled ``Pipeline Safety: Updates to Pipeline
and Liquefied Natural Gas Reporting Requirements.'' That final rule
added two new sections, 49 CFR 191.22 and 195.64, to the pipeline
safety regulations for the establishment of a national pipeline
operator registry, which will be used by operators to obtain an
Operator Identification (OPID) number. PHMSA is proposing to use two
forms as part of this information collection. When an operator requests
an initial OPID number, an online form titled ``OPID Assignment Request
(PHMSA F 1000.1)'' will be used. For an operator notifying PHMSA of
certain required changes associated with an OPID (see 49 CFR 191.22 and
195.64) or for operators updating their OPID information, a form titled
``Operator Registry Notification (PHMSA F 1000.2)'' will be used.
Copies of these forms have been placed in the docket and are available
for comment.

II. Summary of Comments/Topics

    During the two month response period, PHMSA received a combined
comment from American Petroleum Institute (API) and American Oil
Pipelines Association (AOPL) on the proposal outlined in the December
2010 Federal Register notice.

A. OPID Assignment Request (Form PHMSA F 1000.1)

    A1. API-AOPL noted that Step 1, ``Enter Basic Information,''
incorrectly implies that some rural low-stress hazardous liquid
pipelines are not subject to part 195 although they are required to
submit reports under Subpart B. They noted that being subject to
Subpart B is being subject to Part 195. They also note that this step
incorrectly implies that unregulated rural gathering lines are subject
to reporting requirements.
    Response: PHMSA agrees and has revised and reordered the elements
of Question 1 in this step to better align these elements with the
degree to which pipelines are subject to part 195.
    A2. In Step 2, API-AOPL requested clarification of the term
``vessels'' in the item ``Hazardous Liquid Breakout Tanks [rarr] Total
Number of Tanks/Caverns/Vessels.''
    Response: This item meant to indicate that the operator should
report the total number of tanks, caverns, or other containers (i.e.,
vessels) that serve as breakout tanks. PHMSA agrees that the term
``vessels,'' is not used elsewhere and could cause confusion. PHMSA
also concludes that the intended clarification is unnecessary and has
revised this item to indicate only that operators should report the
total number of breakout tanks.

    A3. API-AOPL commented that identifying all counties through which
a pipeline passes will be an additional reporting burden. They
suggested that a drop-down list including all counties in each state be
provided as part of the online reporting system.
    Response: PHMSA agrees and will include drop-down lists in the
online reporting system to facilitate providing this information.
    A4. API-AOPL pointed out a formatting error in that the statement
at the bottom of each page indicating that a step continues did not
always refer to the correct question number.
    Response: PHMSA has revised the form to fix this error.
    A5. API-AOPL asked that PHMSA clarify the reason for requesting
right-of-way miles as well as pipeline miles (Step 2, Question 3). They
noted that not all companies calculate right-of-way miles for business
purposes and that reporting this information could result in additional
burden.
    Response: PHMSA has agreed to remove the question concerning right-
of-way miles.
    A6. Step 2, Question 4, asks for a brief description of the
pipelines/facilities covered by an OPID assignment request. API-AOPL
noted that the amount of detail to be provided in this description is
not clear and suggested that PHMSA include examples in the
instructions. They noted that this form is applicable to hazardous
liquid pipelines and gas pipelines as well as LNG facilities and
requested that the examples address all of these types of facilities.
    Response: PHMSA agrees that examples for each facility type would
be useful and has included them in the revised instructions.
    A7. Step 3 collects information concerning PHMSA-required safety
programs. Pipeline operators with systems covered by multiple OPIDs
often manage these as common programs covering all (or multiple) OPIDs.
This step asks that the operator designate the ``primary'' OPID for
each program. API-AOPL requested clarification as to how the
designation of an OPID as ``primary'' is to be made.
    Response: This ``primary'' OPID designation is intended to
represent the OPID that should be the focus of PHMSA inspection
activities covering the specific safety program in question. As such,
it should be the OPID under which that particular safety program is
managed or administered, and typically will be associated with the
physical location where the main documentation and description of the
safety program exist. (For example, if the pipelines covered by an OPID
assignment request for OPID 67890 are part of an Integrity Management
Program that is administered by the operator under its existing OPID
12345, then the primary OPID would be 12345). The designation of which
multiple OPIDs is ``primary'' is at the operator's discretion, but it
is important that once a particular OPID is selected as ``primary,''
the operator continue to list this same OPID as ``primary'' in future
notifications concerning the safety program in question. PHMSA has
clarified this in the instructions.
    A8. Step 4, Question 1, asks for information about the ``operator
contact responsible for assuring compliance'' with PHMSA regulations.
API-AOPL noted that several personnel could fit this description and
requested additional clarification.
    Response: PHMSA agrees that this description was vague. Ultimately,
any operator personnel who perform or manage work required by the
regulations have some responsibility for assuring compliance. This
question was intended to collect information regarding the person who
oversees compliance and typically is the principal contact with PHMSA
to discuss regulatory issues. This would include such titles as
``Manager of Compliance,'' ``Regulatory Compliance Officer,'' ``DOT
Compliance Supervisor,'' ``Pipeline Safety Manager,'' etc. PHMSA has
revised the form to state ``operator contact responsible for overseeing
compliance'' and has included these position titles as examples in the
instructions.
    A9. API-AOPL requested that the contact information collected in
Step 4 be kept confidential.
    Response: PHMSA does not intend to make this information publicly
available. It could be subject to release under a Freedom of
Information Act request, but all such releases are subject to privacy
exemptions in that Act and the Privacy Act.
    A10. API-AOPL noted that the various ``contacts'' included in Step
4 are often located at a common address and asked that the form allow
for entering this information only once.
    Response: PHMSA has revised the online reporting system to allow
designation of a common address for multiple contacts.
    A11. API-AOPL requested that the online reporting system provide a
simple mechanism for updating contact information for an OPID.
    Response: PHMSA agrees that such a mechanism will be useful and has
plans to incorporate such a mechanism in the near future.
    A12. API-AOPL questioned whether this same form would be used to
validate/collect information for existing OPIDs and requested that any
such information collection be delayed until the on-line reporting
system is available.
    Response: 49 CFR 191.22(b) and 195.64(b) require validation of
information for existing OPIDs by gas pipeline/LNG operators and
hazardous liquid pipeline operators, respectively. This same form will
be used for that purpose. PHMSA is planning for the on-line reporting
system to be available to operators for validation purposes before
validation is required.

B. Operator Registry Notification (Form PHMSA F 1000.2)

    B1. API-AOPL noted that Step 1, Question 7, indicates the operator
is to select only one type of facility and asked whether the form was
to be completed multiple times for an operator with more than one type
of facility covered by the same OPID. They also noted that Step 3,
Question 1, allows operators to select all pipeline facility types that
apply, in apparent contradiction to this limitation to one facility
type.
    Response: PHMSA has modified the form to allow operators to select
all facility types that apply.
    B2. API-AOPL requested that PHMSA clarify whether a separate form
is required for each type of change listed in Step 2.
    Response: No. Operators may report multiple types of changes in a
single notification.
    B3. API-AOPL requested clarification as to whether one or both
operators must file a notification in the case of a transfer of assets.
They also questioned whether the date to be reported should be the date
on which ownership or operating responsibility is transferred in cases
where they do not occur simultaneously.
    Response: Both operators are required to file a notification in the
event of a transfer of assets, each reporting the change affecting
their OPID(s). The date should be the date operating responsibility is
transferred. The instructions have been revised to clarify this.
    B4. For changes involving the name of an operator (TYPE A) or the
entity responsible for operation (TYPE B), the form asks an operator to
enter the reason for the change. API-AOPL asked for justification for
requiring this information and why reports are needed for this type of
change when there is no simple mechanism for reporting smaller changes
such as address or name of Senior Executive Officer.

    Response: The operator of a pipeline facility is responsible for
compliance with pipeline safety regulations. Accordingly, PHMSA's
regulatory activities are focused on the operating entity. PHMSA thus
needs to know whether changes of this type reflect a new operating
entity. A change in name of operator can, for example, reflect a
corporate re-branding or it can mean a more significant change in the
operating company. A change in responsible entity could be due to a
sale of assets or to a shift in responsibility from one subsidiary of a
common parent company to another. The potential effect of these changes
on continuity in responsibility for compliance would vary, and
determine PHMSA's follow-up to the notification. This form only
requires reporting of those changes where the regulations require that
an operator notify PHMSA. Changes in address or contact information for
key personnel are not required to be reported. PHMSA plans, however, to
provide on-line means to report such changes in basic information in
the near future.
    B5. For several change types which involve changes in operating
responsibility, the draft form included a question on whether the
operator wanted PHMSA to deactivate the existing OPID. API-AOPL noted
that only the holder of a specific OPID should be able to request
deactivation.
    Response: PHMSA agrees that only the holder of an OPID should be
able to request deactivation and that this question should not be
included on a form that will be completed by both parties involved in a
transfer of responsibilities. PHMSA has deleted this question from the
form. The question was not intended to result in automatic
deactivation, but rather to prompt PHMSA to follow-up with the
reporting operator. PHMSA will instead address the question of OPID
deactivation as part of its normal contact with operators.
    B6. API-AOPL asked for clarification concerning changes of TYPE D
(acquisition/divestiture of 50 or more miles of pipe) and TYPE E
(acquisition/divestiture of a pipeline facility). They noted, for
example, that a ``pipeline facility'' may consist of only a few miles
of pipe and questioned whether acquisition/divestiture of such a
facility should be reported as TYPE E when a transaction involving the
same mileage would not be reported as TYPE D.
    Response: ``Pipeline facility'' is defined in both Parts 192 and
195 and includes ``new and existing pipelines, right-of-ways, and any
equipment, facility, or building used in the transportation'' of the
commodity. (Both definitions are included in the instructions under
TYPE E.) API-AOPL is correct that the acquisition/divestiture of an
entire pipeline consisting of only a few miles would need to be
reported as TYPE E while acquisition/divestiture of the same amount of
pipe that did not involve sale of a complete facility would not need to
be reported. The difference reflects PHMSA's need for the information.
PHMSA regulates the operator of a facility. If a complete facility
changes hands, then PHMSA needs to update its records, inspection
plans, etc., to assure that appropriate attention is paid to the new
operator. If, on the other hand, a larger operator acquires or divests
itself of a few miles of pipe, significant changes in PHMSA oversight
plans are not needed. PHMSA will obtain information about these changes
through routine inspections and update its records/plans as
appropriate. To reduce the aggregate reporting burden associated with
this form, we will not require that operators report acquisition/
divestiture of small amounts of pipe (< 50 miles). PHMSA has made
changes to clarify these distinctions.
    B7. Change TYPE F involves ``rehabilitation, replacement,
modification, upgrade, uprate, or update of facilities, other than a
section of line pipe that costs $10 million or more.'' API-AOPL
requested clarification, including the basis for the stated exclusion.
They asked if rehabilitation of line pipe costing more than $11 million
would need to be reported.
    Response: Construction-type changes are reported as either TYPE F
or G. Pipeline operators continually construct/rehabilitate facilities,
and routine activities of this type are addressed as part of PHMSA's
routine inspection program. These notifications are to collect
information on larger changes for which special inspections may be
required. Thus, a reporting threshold was needed. For line pipe, a
threshold based on miles of pipe to be constructed is appropriate. Cost
is not an appropriate threshold for changes in line pipe because per-
mile construction costs vary significantly depending on the environment
in which construction is to occur (e.g., rural vs. urban). A mileage
threshold alone, however, would not identify other significant changes
(e.g., construction of a new pump/compressor station) for which
construction inspections would be appropriate. Changes not involving
construction of line pipe and which are expected to cost $10 million or
more should be reported as TYPE F. Construction of 10 miles or more of
line pipe, (including replacement of 10 or more miles of an existing
pipeline) should be reported as TYPE G. Construction of line pipe
costing more than $10 million but involving less than 10 miles need not
be reported.
    B8. Changes of TYPES F and G must be submitted 60 days before
planned start of construction. API-AOPL noted that construction dates
often slip. They questioned whether reported dates for anticipated
start of work would need to be updated.
    Response: No. As described above, the purpose of these
notifications is for PHMSA to plan for inspections to be conducted
during construction. Notifications of this type will prompt PHMSA to
contact the operator to arrange for such inspections. PHMSA expects
that the operator will keep PHMSA informed of changes in the
anticipated date of field operations as part of these pre-inspection
interactions.
    B9. API-AOPL commented that it was inappropriate to include an
operations question referring to maximum allowable operating pressure
(MAOP) in an OPID data form (TYPE G).
    Response: PHMSA disagrees. This question applies only to gas
transmission pipelines and asks whether the new pipeline will use
alternate MAOP under 49 CFR 192.620. Pipe to be operated at alternate
MAOP is subject to many requirements not applicable to other pipelines
and for which special inspections by PHMSA may be required. As noted
above, the purpose for notifications of this type is for PHMSA to
manage its inspection resources.
    B10. API-AOPL commented that it was not clear which portions of
Step 3 need to be completed for each change ``Type'' in Step 2.
    Response: The on-line reporting system will be configured so that
only those questions applicable to the change types selected in
Question 2 will be presented for answers. This should resolve the
confusion.
    B11. Step 3, Question 4, asks for a brief description of the
pipelines/facilities covered by this notification. API-AOPL asked that
examples be included indicating the level of detail that PHMSA expects
in these notifications.
    Response: PHMSA has included examples in the instructions.

C. Comments Applicable to Both Forms

    C1. API-AOPL noted that the paper forms are confusing, in large
part because it is difficult to track which questions in later steps
apply to specific change types selected in earlier steps. They
suggested that PHMSA make

maximum use of on-line reporting, with the on-line system limiting the
questions presented for completion, making maximum use of drop-down
menus, etc.
    Response: PHMSA agrees. The new regulation requires on-line
reporting. The purpose of the paper form is to collect public comments.
The on-line system will use ``smart navigation'' that will screen later
questions based on information entered earlier. Drop down menus will be
used whenever possible.
    C2. API-AOPL expects the time it takes to complete the form to
exceed the 15 minutes PHMSA proposed by up to three times as much.
    Response: Completion of the OPID Assignment Request form is
intended to be a one-time effort to collect as much as possible of the
operator's information that PHMSA needs. Once this information is
completed, PHMSA does not require the operator to undertake this effort
again. The Operator Registry Notification form will be used to update
any pertinent information that may have changed based on PHMSA's
notification requirements since the OPID was originally issued.
Operators will not have to complete the entire form. They will only
update the section that is applicable to the change for which PHMSA is
being notified. Given that most companies know this information prior
to informing PHMSA, we estimate that the average time for completing
these forms will be 15 minutes.
    C3. API-AOPL commented that the forms request information not
specified in the rule or discussed in the rulemaking (e.g., the
counties through which involved pipeline is routed). They noted that
this could be construed as rulemaking without notice and comment.
    Response: The rule did not specify the particular information that
must be submitted for each type of notification. That is the purpose of
these forms, and the forms have been subjected to notice and comment.
    C4. API-AOPL suggested that PHMSA expand the instructions, where
possible, to include more detail and specific examples. They noted that
operators want to submit all of the information the agency needs and
that more detailed instructions would help facilitate this.
    Response: PHMSA appreciates API-AOPL's comments on these forms and
pipeline operators' efforts to submit information as needed. PHMSA has
revised the instructions to include more specificity and details. PHMSA
invites stakeholders to submit suggestions for additional changes at
any time, which will be considered for future revisions of these
instructions.

D. Master Meter and Small Petroleum Gas Systems

    The form will specify that operators of master meter systems or
operators that solely operate petroleum gas systems which serve fewer
than 100 customers from a single source (small petroleum gas operators)
do not need to follow the Operator Registry requirements in 49 CFR
191.22 and 195.64. However, this exception does not extend to operators
of these systems who also operate other system types. Small petroleum
gas operators that do not have an OPID and are required to file an
incident report will be able to request an OPID during the incident
filing process.

III. Proposed Information Collection Revisions and Request for Comments

    The forms to be created as a result of this information collection
are the OPID Assignment Request form and the Operator Registry
Notification form. The burden hours associated with these information
collections are specified as follows:
    Title of Information Collection: National Registry of Pipeline and
Liquefied Natural Gas Operators.
    OMB Control Number: Pending.
    Type of Request: New information collection.
    Abstract: PHMSA is requiring each operator to have an OPID number.
The OPID number will contain detailed information on the operator. In
addition, PHMSA is requiring that an operator provide PHMSA with update
notifications for certain changes to information initially provided by
the operator.
    Affected Public: Pipeline Operators.
    Recordkeeping:
    Estimated Number of Respondents: 2,753.
    Estimated Total Annual Burden Hours: 5,506.
    Frequency of collection: On occasion.
    Comments are invited on:
    (a) The need for the proposed collection of information for the
proper performance of the functions of the agency, including whether
the information will have practical utility;
    (b) The accuracy of the agency's estimate of the burden of the
proposed collection of information, including the validity of the
methodology and assumptions used;
    (c) Ways to enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the
information to be collected; and
    (d) Ways to minimize the burden of the collection of information on
those who are to respond, including the use of appropriate automated,
electronic, mechanical, or other technological collection techniques.

    Issued in Washington, DC on November 3, 2011.
Jeffrey D. Wiese,
Associate Administrator for Pipeline Safety.
[FR Doc. 2011-29084 Filed 11-8-11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-60-P


[Federal Register: April 19, 2010 (Volume 75, Number 74)]
[Notices]
[Page 20372]
[DOCID:fr19ap10-50]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Coast Guard

[Docket No. USCG-2010-0186]

Certificate of Alternative Compliance for the Offshore Supply
Vessel RIG RUNNER

AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS.

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: The Coast Guard announces that a Certificate of Alternative
Compliance was issued for the offshore supply vessel RIG RUNNER as
required by 33 U.S.C. 1605(c) and 33 CFR 81.18.

DATES: The Certificate of Alternative Compliance was issued on March 8,
2010.

ADDRESSES: The docket for this notice is available for inspection or
copying at the Docket Management Facility (M-30), U.S. Department of
Transportation, West Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140, 1200 New
Jersey Avenue SE., Washington, DC 20590, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m.,
Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays. You may also find this
docket on the Internet by going to http://www.regulations.gov,
selecting the Advanced Docket Search option on the right side of the
screen, inserting USCG-2010-0186 in the ``Keyword'' box, and then
clicking ``Search.''

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: If you have questions on this notice,
call CWO2 David Mauldin, District Eight, Prevention Branch, U.S. Coast
Guard, telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>. If you have questions on viewing or
submitting material to the docket, call Renee V. Wright, Program
Manager, Docket Operations, telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Background and Purpose

    A Certificate of Alternative Compliance, as allowed under title 33,
Code of Federal Regulations, parts 81 and 89, has been issued for the
offshore supply vessel RIG RUNNER, O.N. 1222591. Full compliance with
72 COLREGS and Inland Rules Act would hinder the vessel's ability to
maneuver within close proximity of offshore platforms. The forward
masthead light may be located on the top forward portion of the
pilothouse 17' above the hull. Placing the forward masthead light at
the height as required by Annex I, paragraph 2(a) of the 72 COLREGS
would result in a masthead light location highly susceptible to damage
when working in close proximity to offshore platforms. Furthermore the
horizontal distance between the forward and aft masthead lights may be
14.1'. Placing the aft masthead light at the horizontal distance from
the forward masthead light as required by Annex I, paragraph 3(a) of
the 72 COLREGS and Annex I, Section 84.05(a) of the Inland Rules Act
would result in an aft masthead light location directly over the aft
cargo deck where it would interfere with loading and unloading
operations.
    A Certificate of Alternative Compliance, as allowed under title 33,
Code of Federal Regulations, parts 81 and 89, has been issued for the
offshore supply vessel RIG RUNNER, O.N. 1222591. The Certificate of
Alternative Compliance allows for the vertical placement of the forward
masthead light to deviate from requirements set forth in Annex I,
paragraph 2(a) of 72 COLREGS. In addition the Certificate of
Alternative Compliance allows for the horizontal separation of the
forward and aft masthead lights to deviate from the requirements of
Annex I, paragraph 3(a) of 72 COLREGS and Annex I, Section 84.05(a) of
the Inland Rules Act.
    This notice is issued under authority of 33 U.S.C. 1605(c), and 33
CFR 81.18.

    Dated: March 26, 2010.
J.W. Johnson,
Commander, U.S. Coast Guard, Chief, Inspections and Investigations
Branch, By Direction of the Commander, Eighth Coast Guard District.
[FR Doc. 2010-8858 Filed 4-16-10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 9110-04-P


[Federal Register Volume 86, Number 22 (Thursday, February 4, 2021)]
[Notices]
[Page 8246]
[FR Doc No: 2021-02264]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-91011; File No. SR-NYSE-2020-98]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; New York Stock Exchange LLC;
Notice of Designation of a Longer Period for Commission Action on a
Proposed Rule Change To Amend Its Rules To Prohibit Member
Organizations From Seeking Reimbursement, in Certain Circumstances,
From Issuers for Forwarding Proxy and Other Materials to Beneficial
Owners

January 29, 2021.
    On November 30, 2020, New York Stock Exchange LLC filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission (``Commission''), pursuant to
Section 19(b)(1) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (``Act'') \1\
and Rule 19b-4 thereunder,\2\ a proposed rule change to amend its rules
to prohibit member organizations from seeking reimbursement from
issuers for forwarding proxy and other materials to beneficial owners
who received shares of a security from their broker at no cost or at a
price substantially less than the market price in connection with a
promotion by the broker. The proposed rule change was published for
comment in the Federal Register on December 18, 2020.\3\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1).
    \2\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4.
    \3\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 90653 (December 14,
2020), 85 FR 82539. Certain comments filed in response to File No.
SR-NYSE-2020-96 by Paul Conn, President, Global Capital Markets,
Computershare, dated January 11, 2021, and Niels Holch, Executive
Director, Shareholder Communications Coalition, dated January 20,
2021, also address this proposed rule change. These comments on the
proposed rule change are available at: https://www.sec.gov/comments/sr-nyse-2020-96/srnyse202096.htm.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Section 19(b)(2) of the Act \4\ provides that, within 45 days of
the publication of notice of the filing of a proposed rule change, or
within such longer period up to 90 days as the Commission may designate
if it finds such longer period to be appropriate and publishes its
reasons for so finding, or as to which the self-regulatory organization
consents, the Commission shall either approve the proposed rule change,
disapprove the proposed rule change, or institute proceedings to
determine whether the proposed rule change should be disapproved. The
45th day after publication of the notice for this proposed rule change
is February 1, 2021. The Commission is extending this 45-day time
period.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(2).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Commission finds that it is appropriate to designate a longer
period within which to take action on the proposal so that it has
sufficient time to consider the proposed rule change and the comments
received. Accordingly, the Commission, pursuant to Section 19(b)(2) of
the Act,\5\ designates March 18, 2021, as the date by which the
Commission shall either approve or disapprove, or institute proceedings
to determine whether to disapprove, the proposed rule change (File No.
SR-NYSE-2020-98).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ Id.

    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets,
pursuant to delegated authority.\6\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(31).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

J. Matthew DeLesDernier,
Assistant Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2021-02264 Filed 2-3-21; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


[Federal Register: October 19, 2009 (Volume 74, Number 200)]
[Notices]
[Page 53581-53583]
[DOCID:fr19oc09-115]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration

[Docket No. FMCSA-1999-5578; FMCSA-1999-6480; FMCSA-2001-9561; FMCSA-
2003-15892; FMCSA-2007-27897; FMCSA-2007-28695]

Qualification of Drivers; Exemption Applications; Vision

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

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

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

SUMMARY: FMCSA announces its decision to renew the exemptions from the
vision requirement in the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Regulations for
19 individuals. FMCSA has statutory authority to exempt individuals
from the vision requirement if the exemptions granted will not
compromise safety. The Agency has concluded that granting these
exemption renewals will provide a level of safety that is equivalent
to, or greater than, the level of safety maintained without the
exemptions for these commercial motor vehicle (CMV) drivers.

DATES: This decision is effective October 30, 2009. Comments must be
received on or before November 18, 2009.

ADDRESSES: You may submit comments bearing the Federal Docket
Management System (FDMS) Docket ID FMCSA-1999-5578; FMCSA-1999-6480;
FMCSA-2001-9561; FMCSA-2003-15892; FMCSA-2007-27897; FMCSA-2007-28695,
using any of the following methods.
     Federal eRulemaking Portal: Go to http://
www.regulations.gov. Follow the on-line instructions for submitting
comments.
     Mail: Docket Management Facility; U.S. Department of
Transportation, 1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE., West Building Ground
Floor, Room W12-140, Washington, DC 20590-0001.
     Hand Delivery or Courier: West Building Ground Floor, Room
W12-140, 1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE., Washington, DC, between 9 a.m.
and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal Holidays.
     Fax: 1-202-493-2251.
    Each submission must include the Agency name and the docket number
for

this Notice. Note that DOT posts all comments received without change
to http://www.regulations.gov, including any personal information
included in a comment. Please see the Privacy Act heading below.
    Docket: For access to the docket to read background documents or
comments, go to http://www.regulations.gov at any time or Room W12-140
on the ground level of the West Building, 1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE.,
Washington, DC, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday,
except Federal holidays. The FDMS is available 24 hours each day, 365
days each year. If you want acknowledgment that we received your
comments, please include a self-addressed, stamped envelope or postcard
or print the acknowledgement page that appears after submitting
comments on-line.
    Privacy Act: Anyone may search the electronic form of all comments
received into any of our dockets by the name of the individual
submitting the comment (or of the person signing the comment, if
submitted on behalf of an association, business, labor union, etc.).
You may review the DOT's complete Privacy Act Statement in the Federal
Register published on April 11, 2000 (65 FR 19476). This information is
also available at http://www.regulations.gov.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Dr. Mary D. Gunnels, Director, Medical
Programs,<PHONE_NUMBER><EMAIL_ADDRESS>FMCSA, Department of
Transportation, 1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE., Room W64-224, Washington,
DC 20590-0001. Office hours are from 8:30 a.m. to 5 p.m. Monday through
Friday, except Federal holidays.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Background

    Under 49 U.S.C. 31136(e) and 31315, FMCSA may renew an exemption
from the vision requirements in 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10), which applies to
drivers of CMVs in interstate commerce, for a two-year period if it
finds ``such exemption would likely achieve a level of safety that is
equivalent to, or greater than, the level that would be achieved absent
such exemption.'' The procedures for requesting an exemption (including
renewals) are set out in 49 CFR part 381.

Exemption Decision

    This notice addresses 19 individuals who have requested a renewal
of their exemption in accordance with FMCSA procedures. FMCSA has
evaluated these 19 applications for renewal on their merits and decided
to extend each exemption for a renewable two-year period. They are:

Lauren C. Allen
Tracey A. Ammons
David N. Cleveland
Randy B. Combs
Robert L. Cross, Jr.
James D. Davis
Thomas E. Dixon
Edward J. Genovese
Dewayne E. Harms
Mark D. Kraft
David F. LeClerc
Charles D. Oestreich
Carson E. Rohrbaugh
Donald J. Snider
John A. Sortman
Jesse L. Townsend
James A. Welch
Edward W. Yeates, Jr.
Michael E. Yount
    These exemptions are extended subject to the following conditions:
(1) That each individual have a physical examination every year (a) by
an ophthalmologist or optometrist who attests that the vision in the
better eye continues to meet the standard in 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10), and
(b) by a medical examiner who attests that the individual is otherwise
physically qualified under 49 CFR 391.41; (2) that each individual
provide a copy of the ophthalmologist's or optometrist's report to the
medical examiner at the time of the annual medical examination; and (3)
that each individual provide a copy of the annual medical certification
to the employer for retention in the driver's qualification file and
retain a copy of the certification on his/her person while driving for
presentation to a duly authorized Federal, State, or local enforcement
official. Each exemption will be valid for two years unless rescinded
earlier by FMCSA. The exemption will be rescinded if: (1) The person
fails to comply with the terms and conditions of the exemption; (2) the
exemption has resulted in a lower level of safety than was maintained
before it was granted; or (3) continuation of the exemption would not
be consistent with the goals and objectives of 49 U.S.C. 31136(e) and
31315.

Basis for Renewing Exemptions

    Under 49 U.S.C. 31315(b)(1), an exemption may be granted for no
longer than two years from its approval date and may be renewed upon
application for additional two year periods. In accordance with 49
U.S.C. 31136(e) and 31315, each of the 19 applicants has satisfied the
entry conditions for obtaining an exemption from the vision
requirements (64 FR 27027; 64 FR 51568; 66 FR 48504; 68 FR 54775; 70 FR
61165; 72 FR 58359; 64 FR 68195; 65 FR 20251; 67 FR 17102; 66 FR 30502;
66 FR 41654; 68 FR 52811; 68 FR 61860; 72 FR 39879; 72 FR 52419; 72 FR
58359; 72 FR 46261) Each of these 19 applicants has requested renewal
of the exemption and has submitted evidence showing that the vision in
the better eye continues to meet the standard specified at 49 CFR
391.41(b)(10) and that the vision impairment is stable. In addition, a
review of each record of safety while driving with the respective
vision deficiencies over the past two years indicates each applicant
continues to meet the vision exemption standards. These factors provide
an adequate basis for predicting each driver's ability to continue to
drive safely in interstate commerce. Therefore, FMCSA concludes that
extending the exemption for each renewal applicant for a period of two
years is likely to achieve a level of safety equal to that existing
without the exemption.

Request for Comments

    FMCSA will review comments received at any time concerning a
particular driver's safety record and determine if the continuation of
the exemption is consistent with the requirements at 49 U.S.C. 31136(e)
and 31315. However, FMCSA requests that interested parties with
specific data concerning the safety records of these drivers submit
comments by November 18, 2009.
    FMCSA believes that the requirements for a renewal of an exemption
under 49 U.S.C. 31136(e) and 31315 can be satisfied by initially
granting the renewal and then requesting and evaluating, if needed,
subsequent comments submitted by interested parties. As indicated
above, the Agency previously published notices of final disposition
announcing its decision to exempt these 19 individuals from the vision
requirement in 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10). The final decision to grant an
exemption to each of these individuals was based on the merits of each
case and only after careful consideration of the comments received to
its notices of applications. The notices of applications stated in
detail the qualifications, experience, and medical condition of each
applicant for an exemption from the vision requirements. That
information is available by consulting the above cited Federal Register
publications.
    Interested parties or organizations possessing information that
would otherwise show that any, or all of these drivers, are not
currently achieving the statutory level of safety should immediately
notify FMCSA. The

Agency will evaluate any adverse evidence submitted and, if safety is
being compromised or if continuation of the exemption would not be
consistent with the goals and objectives of 49 U.S.C. 31136(e) and
31315, FMCSA will take immediate steps to revoke the exemption of a
driver.

    Issued on: October 8, 2009.
Larry W. Minor,
Associate Administrator for Policy and Program Development.
[FR Doc. E9-25069 Filed 10-16-09; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4910-EX-P


[Federal Register: October 24, 2007 (Volume 72, Number 205)]
[Notices]
[Page 60347-60348]
[DOCID:fr24oc07-74]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Project No. 2413-095]

Georgia Power Company; Notice of Amendment of License and
Soliciting Comments, Motions To Intervene, and Protests

October 16, 2007.
    Take notice that the following application has been filed with the
Commission and is available for public inspection:
    a. Application Type: Non-Project Use of Project Lands and Waters.
    b. Project No: 2413-095.
    c. Date filed: October 4, 2007.
    d. Applicant: Georgia Power Company.
    e. Name of Project: Wallace Project.
    f. Location: The project is located on Lake Oconee in Putnam
County, Georgia. The project does not occupy federal lands.
    g. Filed Pursuant to: Federal Power Act, 16 U.S.C. 791(a)-825(r)
and 799 and 801.
    h. Applicant Contact: Mr. Lee Glenn, Georgia Power Company, 125
Wallace Dam Road, NE., Eatonton, GA 31024,<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    i. FERC Contact: Rebecca Martin at<PHONE_NUMBER>, or e-mail
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
    j. Deadline for filing comments and or motions: November 16, 2007.
    All documents (original and eight copies) should be filed with:
Kimberly D. Bose, Secretary, Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888
First Street, NE., Washington, DC 20426. Please include the project
number (P-2413-095) on any comments or motions filed. Comments,
protests, and interventions may be filed electronically via the
Internet in lieu of paper. See, 18 CFR 385.2001(a)(1)(iii) and the
instructions on the Commission's Web site under the ``e-Filing'' link.
The Commission strongly encourages e-filings.
    The Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedure require all
intervenors filing documents with the Commission to serve a copy of
that document on each person whose name appears on the official service
list for the project. Further, if an intervenor 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 any motion to intervene must also be served upon each representative
of the Applicant specified in the particular application.
    k. Description of Application: The licensee requests Commission
approval to allow Hilpine Builders to construct a 4-slip community dock
and a 10-slip community dock near an existing 10-slip dock. The
applicant would also construct an additional 100 linear feet of
seawall. The docks would be part of the Phoenix Shores Phase II
Development on the Lick Creek section of Lake Oconee.
    l. Location of 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 using the ``eLibrary''

link. 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 e-mail of new filings and issuances related to this or
other pending projects. For assistance, call 1-866-208-3676 or e-mail
<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,
385.211, 385.214. 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 filings must
bear in all capital letters the title ``COMMENTS'', ``RECOMMENDATIONS
FOR TERMS AND CONDITIONS'', ``PROTEST'', OR ``MOTION TO INTERVENE'', as
applicable, and the Project Number of the particular application to
which the filing refers. A copy of any motion to intervene must also be
served upon each representative of the Applicant specified in the
particular application.
    p. Agency Comments: Federal, State, and local agencies are invited
to file comments on the described application. A copy of the
application may be obtained by agencies directly from the Applicant. If
an agency does not file comments within the time specified for filing
comments, it will be presumed to have no comments. One copy of an
agency's comments must also be sent to the Applicant's representatives.
    q. Comments, protests and interventions may be filed electronically
via the Internet in lieu of paper. See, 18 CFR 385.2001(a)(1)(iii) and
the instructions on the Commission's Web

site at http://www.ferc.gov under the ``e-Filing'' link.

Kimberly D. Bose,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. E7-20873 Filed 10-23-07; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6717-01-P