[Federal Register Volume 83, Number 12 (Thursday, January 18, 2018)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 2535-2536]
[FR Doc No: 2018-00713]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 71

[Docket No. FAA-2017-0949; Airspace Docket No. 17-ACE-11]

Amendment of Class E Airspace; Charles City, IA

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: This action modifies Class E airspace extending upward from
700 feet above the surface at Northeast Iowa Regional Airport, Charles
City, IA. This action is required due to the decommissioning of the
Charles City non-directional radio beacon (NDB), and the cancellation
of the associated instrument approach procedures. Additionally, the
name of the airport is being updated to coincide with the FAA's
aeronautical database. This action enhances the safety and management
of instrument flight rules (IFR) operations at the airport.

DATES: Effective 0901 UTC, March 29, 2018. The Director of the Federal
Register approves this incorporation by reference action under Title 1,
Code of Federal Regulations, part 51, subject to the annual revision of
FAA Order 7400.11 and publication of conforming amendments.

ADDRESSES: FAA Order 7400.11B, Airspace Designations and Reporting
Points, and subsequent amendments can be viewed online at http://www.faa.gov/air_traffic/publications/. For further information, you can
contact the Airspace Policy Group, Federal Aviation Administration, 800
Independence Avenue SW, Washington, DC 20591; telephone: (202) 267-
8783. The Order is also available for inspection at the National
Archives and Records Administration (NARA). For information on the
availability of FAA Order 7400.11B at NARA, call<PHONE_NUMBER>, or go
to https://www.archives.gov/federal-register/cfr/ibr-locations.html.
    FAA Order 7400.11, Airspace Designations and Reporting Points, is
published yearly and effective on September 15.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Jeffrey Claypool, Federal Aviation
Administration, Operations Support Group, Central Service Center, 10101
Hillwood Parkway, Fort Worth, TX 76177; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Authority for This Rulemaking

    The FAA's authority to issue rules regarding aviation safety is
found in Title 49 of the United States Code. Subtitle I, Section 106
describes the authority of the FAA Administrator. Subtitle VII,
Aviation Programs, describes in more detail the scope of the agency's
authority. This rulemaking is promulgated under the authority described
in Subtitle VII, Part A, Subpart I, Section 40103. Under that section,
the FAA is charged with prescribing regulations to assign the use of
airspace necessary to ensure the safety of aircraft and the efficient
use of airspace. This regulation is within the scope of that authority
as it amends Class E airspace extending upward from 700 feet above the
surface at Northeast Iowa Regional Airport, Charles City, IA, to
support IFR operations at this airport.

History

    The FAA published a notice of proposed rulemaking in the Federal
Register (82 FR 48010; October 16, 2017) for Docket No. FAA-2017-0949
to modify Class E airspace extending upward from 700 feet above the
surface at Northeast Iowa Regional Airport, Charles City, IA.
Interested parties were invited to participate in this rulemaking
effort by submitting written comments on the proposal to the FAA. No
comments were received.
    Class E airspace designations are published in paragraph 6005 of
FAA Order 7400.11B, dated August 3, 2017, and effective September 15,
2017, which is incorporated by reference in 14 CFR 71.1. The Class E
airspace designations listed in this document will be published
subsequently in the Order.

Availability and Summary of Documents for Incorporation by Reference

    This document amends FAA Order 7400.11B, Airspace Designations and
Reporting Points, dated August 3, 2017, and effective September 15,
2017. FAA Order 7400.11B is publicly available as listed in the
ADDRESSES section of this document. FAA Order 7400.11B lists Class A,
B, C, D, and E airspace areas, air traffic service routes, and
reporting points.

The Rule

    This amendment to title 14, Code of Federal Regulations (14 CFR)
part 71 modifies Class E airspace extending upward from 700 feet above
the surface to within a 6.4-mile radius (reduced from a 7-mile radius)
of Northeast Iowa Regional Airport (formerly Charles City Municipal
Airport), Charles City, IA, and updates the name of the airport to

coincide with the FAA's aeronautical database.
    Airspace reconfiguration is necessary due to cancellation of the
instrument approach procedures associated with the decommissioned
Charles City NDB, and to bring the airspace in compliance with FAA
Order 7400.2L, Procedures for Handling Airspace Matters. Controlled
airspace is necessary for the safety and management of IFR operations
at this airport.

Regulatory Notices and Analyses

    The FAA has determined that this regulation only involves an
established body of technical regulations for which frequent and
routine amendments are necessary to keep them operationally current, is
non-controversial and unlikely to result in adverse or negative
comments. It, therefore: (1) Is not a ``significant regulatory action''
under Executive Order 12866; (2) is not a ``significant rule'' under
DOT Regulatory Policies and Procedures (44 FR 11034; February 26,
1979); and (3) does not warrant preparation of a regulatory evaluation
as the anticipated impact is so minimal. Since this is a routine matter
that only affects air traffic procedures and air navigation, it is
certified that this rule, when promulgated, does not have a significant
economic impact on a substantial number of small entities under the
criteria of the Regulatory Flexibility Act.

Environmental Review

    The FAA has determined that this action qualifies for categorical
exclusion under the National Environmental Policy Act in accordance
with FAA Order 1050.1F, ``Environmental Impacts: Policies and
Procedures,'' paragraph 5-6.5.a. This airspace action is not expected
to cause any potentially significant environmental impacts, and no
extraordinary circumstances exist that warrant preparation of an
environmental assessment.

Lists of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 71

    Airspace, Incorporation by reference, Navigation (air).

Adoption of the Amendment

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

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

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

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

Sec.  71.1  [Amended]

0
2. The incorporation by reference in 14 CFR 71.1 of FAA Order 7400.11B,
Airspace Designations and Reporting Points, dated August 3, 2017, and
effective September 15, 2017, is amended as follows:

Paragraph 6005 Class E Airspace Areas Extending Upward From 700 Feet
or More Above the Surface of the Earth.
* * * * *

ACE IA E5 Charles City, IA [Amended]

Northeast Iowa Regional Airport, IA
    (Lat. 43[deg]04'21'' N, long. 92[deg]36'39'' W)

That airspace extending upward from 700 feet above the surface
within a 6.4-mile radius of Northeast Iowa Regional Airport.

    Issued in Fort Worth, Texas, on January 10, 2018.
Christopher L. Southerland,
Acting Manager, Operations Support Group, ATO Central Service Center.
[FR Doc. 2018-00713 Filed 1-17-18; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


[Federal Register Volume 83, Number 93 (Monday, May 14, 2018)]
[Notices]
[Pages 22308-22309]
[FR Doc No: 2018-10167]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

[Summary Notice No. PE-2018-48]

Petition for Exemption; Summary of Petition Received; The Boeing
Company

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Notice of petition for exemption received.

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

SUMMARY: This notice contains a summary of a petition seeking relief
from specified requirements of Federal Aviation Regulations. The
purpose of this notice is to improve the public's awareness of, and
participation in, the FAA's exemption process. Neither publication of
this notice nor the inclusion or omission of information in the summary
is intended to affect the legal status of the petition or its final
disposition.

DATES: Comments on this petition must identify the petition docket
number and must be received on or before June 4, 2018.

ADDRESSES: Send comments identified by docket number FAA-2017-0613
using any of the following methods:
     Federal eRulemaking Portal: Go to http://www.regulations.gov and follow the online instructions for sending your
comments electronically.

     Mail: Send comments to Docket Operations, M-30; U.S.
Department of Transportation (DOT), 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE, Room
W12-140, West Building Ground Floor, Washington, DC 20590-0001.
     Hand Delivery or Courier: Take comments to Docket
Operations in Room W12-140 of the West Building Ground Floor at 1200
New Jersey Avenue SE, Washington, DC, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday
through Friday, except Federal holidays.
     Fax: Fax comments to Docket Operations at<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    Privacy: In accordance with 5 U.S.C. 553(c), DOT solicits comments
from the public to better inform its rulemaking process. DOT posts
these comments, without edit, including any personal information the
commenter provides, to http://www.regulations.gov, as described in the
system of records notice (DOT/ALL-14 FDMS), which can be reviewed at
http://www.dot.gov/privacy.
    Docket: Background documents or comments received may be read at
http://www.regulations.gov at any time. Follow the online instructions
for accessing the docket or go to the Docket Operations in Room W12-140
of the West Building Ground Floor at 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE,
Washington, DC, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday,
except Federal holidays.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Deana Stedman, AIR-673, Federal
Aviation Administration, 2200 South 216th Street, Des Moines, WA 98198,
phone<PHONE_NUMBER>, email [email protected]; or Alphonso
Pendergrass, ARM-200, Office of Rulemaking, Federal Aviation
Administration, 800 Independence Avenue SW, Washington, DC 20591, phone
202-267-4713, email [email protected]. This notice is
published pursuant to 14 CFR 11.85.

    Issued in Renton, Washington, on May 8, 2018.
Victor Wicklund,
Manager, Transport Standards Branch.

Petition for Exemption

    Docket No.: FAA-2017-0613.
    Petitioner: The Boeing Company.
    Section(s) of 14 CFR Affected: Sec.  25.807(g)(7).
    Description of Relief Sought: The Boeing Company requests that the
FAA amend some of the conditions and operating limitations of Exemption
No. 17768.

[FR Doc. 2018-10167 Filed 5-11-18; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


[Federal Register Volume 87, Number 157 (Tuesday, August 16, 2022)]
[Notices]
[Pages 50368-50369]
[FR Doc No: 2022-17526]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[SEC File No. 270-244, OMB Control No. 3235-0208]

Proposed Collection; Comment Request; Extension: Rule 17a-1

Upon Written Request, Copies Available From: Securities and Exchange
Commission, Office of FOIA Services, 100 F Street NE, Washington, DC
20549-2736

    Notice is hereby given that, pursuant to the Paperwork Reduction
Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.), the Securities and Exchange
Commission (``Commission'') is soliciting comments on the existing
collection of information provided for in Rule 17a-1 (17 CFR 240.17a-1)
under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended (the ``Act'') (15
U.S.C. 78a et seq.). The Commission plans to submit this existing
collection of information to the Office of Management and Budget
(``OMB'') for extension and approval.
    Rule 17a-1 requires that every national securities exchange,
national securities association, registered clearing agency, and the
Municipal Securities Rulemaking Board keep on file for a period of not
less than five years, the first two years in an easily accessible
place, at least one copy of all documents, including all
correspondence, memoranda, papers, books, notices, accounts, and other
such records made or received by it in the course of its business as
such and in the conduct of its self-regulatory activity, and that such
documents be available for examination by the Commission.
    There are 35 entities required to comply with the rule: 24 national
securities exchanges, 1 national securities association, 9 registered
clearing agencies, and the Municipal Securities Rulemaking Board. The
Commission staff estimates that the average number of hours necessary
for compliance with the requirements of Rule 17a-1 is 52 hours per
year. In addition, 4 national securities exchanges notice-registered
pursuant to

Section 6(g) of the Act (15 U.S.C. 78f(g)) are required to preserve
records of determinations made under Rule 3a55-1 under the Act (17 CFR
240.3a55-1), which the Commission staff estimates will take 1 hour per
exchange per year, for a total of 4 hours per year. Accordingly, the
Commission staff estimates that the total number of hours necessary to
comply with the requirements of Rule 17a-1 is 1,824 hours per year. The
total internal cost of compliance for all respondents is $142,272 per
year, based on an average cost per hour of $78.
    Written comments are invited on (a) whether the proposed collection
of information is necessary for the proper performance of the functions
of the Commission, including whether the information shall have
practical utility; (b) the accuracy of the Commission's estimate of the
burden of the proposed collection of information; (c) ways to enhance
the quality, utility, and clarity of the information collected; and (d)
ways to minimize the burden of the collection of information on
respondents, including through the use of automated collection
techniques or other forms of information technology. Consideration will
be given to comments and suggestions submitted in writing by October
17, 2022.
    An agency may not conduct or sponsor, and a person is not required
to respond to, a collection of information under the PRA unless it
displays a currently valid OMB control number.
    Please direct your written comments to: David Bottom, Director/
Chief Information Officer, Securities and Exchange Commission, c/o John
Pezzullo, 100 F Street NE, Washington, DC 20549, or send an email to:
[email protected].

    Dated: August 10, 2022.
J. Matthew DeLesDernier,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2022-17526 Filed 8-15-22; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 85, Number 210 (Thursday, October 29, 2020)]
[Notices]
[Pages 68607-68611]
[FR Doc No: 2020-23919]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-90264; File No. SR-FINRA-2020-034]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; Financial Industry Regulatory
Authority, Inc.; Notice of Filing of a Proposed Rule Change To Modify
TRACE Dissemination Protocols Regarding Agency Pass-Through MBS or SBA-
Backed ABS Traded in Specified Pool Transactions

October 23, 2020.
    Pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934
(``Act'') \1\ and Rule 19b-4 thereunder,\2\ notice is hereby given that
on October 15, 2020, the Financial Industry Regulatory Authority, Inc.
(``FINRA'') filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (``SEC''
or ``Commission'') the proposed rule change as described in Items I,
II, and III below, which Items have been prepared by FINRA. The
Commission is publishing this notice to solicit comments on the
proposed rule change from interested persons.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

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

    FINRA is proposing to modify Trade Reporting and Compliance Engine
(``TRACE'') dissemination protocols regarding Agency Pass-Through
Mortgage-Backed Securities or Small Business Administration (SBA)-
Backed Asset-Backed Securities traded in Specified Pool Transactions.
    The text of the proposed rule change is available on FINRA's
website at http://www.finra.org, at the principal office of FINRA and
at the Commission's Public Reference Room.

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

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

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

1. Purpose
Background
    FINRA commenced dissemination of Specified Pool Transactions in
2013.\3\ A ``Specified Pool Transaction'' is defined as a transaction
in an Agency Pass-Through Mortgage-Backed Security (``Agency Pass-
Through MBS'') \4\ or an SBA-Backed Asset-Backed Security (``SBA-Backed
ABS'') \5\ requiring the delivery at settlement of a pool or pools that
is identified by a unique pool identification number at the Time of
Execution.\6\ As described in the Specified Pool Dissemination Filing,
FINRA currently does not disseminate a CUSIP for Specified Pool
transactions, but rather disseminates reference data elements,
including approximations of information widely used to project cash
flows and prepayment rates, such as loan-to-value (LTV) information.
FINRA is proposing changes to the LTV rounding convention used for the
information publicly disseminated through TRACE for these types of
transactions in Agency Pass-Through MBSs and SBA-Backed ABSs.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 68084 (October 23,
2012), 77 FR 65436 (October 26, 2012) (Order Approving File No. SR-
FINRA-2012-042) (``Specified Pool Dissemination Filing''). Among
other things, the filing provided for dissemination of transactions
in Agency Pass-Through Mortgage-Backed Securities traded in
specified pools and transactions in SBA-Backed Asset-Backed
Securities traded in specified pools or to be announced (``TBA''),
and reduced the reporting timeframe for such transactions.
    \4\ FINRA Rule 6710(v) generally defines an ``Agency Pass-
Through Mortgage-Backed Security'' as a type of Securitized Product
issued in conformity with a program of an Agency or a Government-
Sponsored Enterprise (``GSE'') for which the timely payment of
principal and interest is guaranteed by the Agency or GSE,
representing ownership interest in a pool (or pools) of mortgage
loans structured to ``pass through'' the principal and interest
payments to the holders of the security on a pro rata basis.
    \5\ FINRA Rule 6710(bb) defines an ``SBA-Backed ABS'' as a
Securitized Product issued in conformity with a program of the SBA,
for which the timely payment of principal and interest is guaranteed
by the SBA, representing ownership interest in a pool (or pools) of
loans or debentures and structured to ``pass through'' the principal
and interest payments made by the borrowers in such loans or
debentures to the holders of the security on a pro rata basis.
    \6\ See FINRA Rule 6710(x).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In the process of developing the approach adopted in the Specified
Pool Dissemination Filing, FINRA, among other things, considered
industry feedback regarding the nature of the market for Specified Pool
Transactions (also, ``Specified Pools''), including concerns regarding
information leakage. Market participants' concerns included that
dissemination of the specific CUSIP of a Specified Pool may result in
information leakage regarding trading strategies, positions and other
sensitive information, which may negatively impact trading interest and
liquidity in the market for these securities.\7\ In response, FINRA
modified the proposal such that the disseminated information regarding
Specified Pool Transactions would not include the CUSIP. Instead, FINRA
adopted an approach whereby, in lieu of a CUSIP, FINRA disseminates
reference data elements, including approximations of information widely
used to project cash flows and prepayment rates.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ See Specified Pool Dissemination Filing, supra note 3.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Pursuant to this approach, FINRA groups Agency Pass-Through MBSs
and SBA-Backed ABSs into cohorts, as discussed further below, using
data elements that are integral to describing and valuing these types
of securities, such as the pool's LTV ratio. The cohort groupings are
established using rounded or truncated figures for the underlying data
elements, so that numeric values within each cohort may be understood
within defined ranges. Each cohort is assigned a unique identification
number--the Reference Data Identifier (``RDID''). After a member
reports a Specified Pool Transaction to TRACE, FINRA disseminates the
corresponding RDID in lieu of disseminating the CUSIP. The underlying
data elements that correspond to each RDID are made available to
members through the TRACE system.
    Specifically, FINRA uses the following ten data elements \8\ to
form the RDID cohorts that describe the underlying security traded in a
Specified Pool Transaction: (1) Issuer; (2) Product Type; (3)
Amortization Type; (4) Coupon; (5) Original Maturity;

(6) Weighted Average Coupon (``WAC''); (7) Weighted Average Maturity
(``WAM''); (8) Weighted Average Loan Age (``WALA''); (9) Current
Average Loan Size (``ALS''); and (10) Loan-to-Value ratio (``LTV'').
For example, RDID #A1234 may represent: (1) Issuer = FNMA; (2) Product
Type = Co-Op; (3) Amortization Type = ARM; (4) Coupon = 2.0; (5)
Original Maturity = 360; (6) WAC = 2.5; (7) WAM = 200; (8) WALA = 160;
(9) ALS = 100; and (10) Original LTV = 50. Whenever a transaction in a
CUSIP that falls within this cohort occurs, TRACE would disseminate
RDID #A1234 along with transaction-related (rather than security-
related) information, such as the price, execution time, reporting and
contra-party types and whether the transaction was a buy or a sell.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \8\ Issuing agencies make the data elements publicly available
on a monthly basis. Therefore, TRACE updates RDIDs at least monthly.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The values for items (4) through (10) are rounded or truncated in
creating cohort groupings to reduce the risk that the specific security
traded and the market participant that engaged in the transaction may
be identified. Currently, the rounding and truncation conventions that
are used for Specified Pool Transactions are as follows.\9\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \9\ In Regulatory Notice 12-56 (December 2012), FINRA published
summary information regarding the data elements and the truncation
or rounding conventions that would apply to dissemination for
Specified Pools.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

     Coupon--Rounded down to the nearest quarter percentage
point--e.g., an interest rate of 5.12% is rounded to 5%.
     Original Maturity--Rounded up to the nearest 10--e.g., an
original maturity of 358 months is rounded to 360 months.
     WAC--Truncated to a single decimal--e.g., a WAC of 7.13%
is truncated to 7.1%.
     WAM--Rounded down to the nearest 10--e.g., a WAM of 87
months is rounded to 80 months.
     WALA--Rounded up to the nearest 10--e.g., a WALA of 163
months is rounded to 170 months.
     ALS--Rounded down to the nearest 25--e.g., an ALS of 113
(i.e., $113,000 average loan size) is rounded to 100 (i.e., $100,000
average loan size).
     LTV--Rounded down to the nearest 25--e.g., an original LTV
of 72% is rounded to 50%.
    As noted in the Specified Pool Dissemination Filing, FINRA believes
that the transaction information disseminated through TRACE should
provide investors with sufficient information to assess the value and
price of a security, which, for Securitized Products, includes
information necessary to make assumptions about cash flows and
prepayment rates. FINRA anticipated that providing the data elements,
as described above, would supply market participants with information
that would allow them to perform this analysis.
    Since that time, FINRA has continued to evaluate the market for
Specified Pools, including discussing with market participants the
value of the information currently disseminated by TRACE. As a result
of these efforts, FINRA is proposing to modify the LTV rounding
convention used for purposes of the dissemination protocols for
Specified Pool Transactions. FINRA believes that the currently
disseminated LTV information is useful, but can be improved upon, as
discussed below, to create more granular cohorts and, therefore, more
meaningful information to the marketplace.\10\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \10\ The original LTV ratio expresses the amount of a first
mortgage lien as a percentage of the total appraised value of real
property.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Proposal
    As described above, one of the data elements FINRA uses for
organizing cohorts is the original LTV, which currently is rounded down
to the nearest 25 (e.g., an original LTV of 72% is shown as 50%). FINRA
is proposing to revise the rounding methodology used for purposes of
cohort groupings for Specified Pool Transaction dissemination to
increase the granularity and usefulness of the information available to
market participants. Specifically, FINRA proposes a revised rounding
convention whereby LTV ratios would be segmented into eight categories
between zero and 121+, and FINRA would organize the cohorts such that
each cohort would represent the LTV as the upper limit of the
applicable category, as follows: For an LTV up to 20%, the cohorts
would represent the LTV as 20% (such that an original LTV of 12% would
be shown as 20%); for an LTV between 21% and 40%, the cohorts would
represent the LTV as 40% (such that an original LTV of 21% would be
shown as 40%); for an LTV between 41% and 60%, the cohorts would
represent the LTV as 60% (such that an original LTV of 60% would be
shown as 60%); for an LTV between 61% and 80%, the cohorts would
represent the LTV as 80% (such that an original LTV of 70% would be
shown as 80%); for an LTV between 81% and 93%, the cohorts would
represent the LTV as 93% (such that an original LTV of 90% would be
shown as 93%); for an LTV between 94% and 100%, the cohorts would
represent the LTV as 100% (such that an original LTV of 100% would be
shown as 100%); for an LTV between 101% and 120%, the cohorts would
represent the LTV as 120% (such that an original LTV of 105% would be
shown as 120%); and for an LTV of 121% or greater, the cohorts would
represent the LTV as 121+ (such that an original LTV of 125% would be
shown as 121+).

                       Proposed LTV Ratio Segments
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                           Disseminated
                     LTV ratio  (%)                             (%)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
up to 20................................................              20
21 to 40................................................              40
41 to 60................................................              60
61 to 80................................................              80
81 to 93................................................              93
94 to 100...............................................             100
101 to 120..............................................             120
121 or greater..........................................            121+
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In developing the proposed approach, FINRA sought to balance the
goal of making more detailed information available to the market with
concerns regarding the potential risk of identifying the particular
security being traded and the market participant that engaged in the
transaction. FINRA believes that the revised LTV rounding convention
will provide more meaningful information to market participants by
grouping securities with more similar characteristics. In particular,
the groupings are anticipated to improve how disseminated TRACE data
reflects the role of LTV ratios in MBS valuations. For example,
separating pools with LTV ratios at or below 80 from those with LTV
ratios of 81 or higher delineates the pools with mortgages that may
require mortgage insurance from those that may not require mortgage
insurance. Similarly, the revised rounding methodology for LTV ratios
of 81 or more are more consistent with the way mortgage originators
view loan characteristics and the way that the market determines
pricing.\11\ For instance, a LTV ratio of 95 or higher may reflect a
``pay-up'' in the Fannie Mae market because that is the threshold at
which Fannie Mae loan level price adjustments increase
significantly.\12\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \11\ CUSIPs with LTVs from 81% to 100% are likely to have a
greater proportion of underlying mortgages that carry insurance or
that have the minimum down payment required for a mortgage to
conform to GSE guidelines.
    \12\ ``MBS pools typically receive specified pay-ups when the
underlying loans have characteristics that make the borrower less
likely to refinance as compared to other loans with similar note
rates. . . . Given the projected stable behavior of these loans,
investors are willing to pay a premium above generic To Be Announced
(TBA) security prices for pools of loans of this type. The premium
over a TBA security is referred to as the specified pool pay-up.''
See Fannie Mae, Specified Pay-ups in Pricing & Execution--Whole
Loan[supreg], https://singlefamily.fanniemae.com/media/5056/display.

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

    FINRA considered that the revised LTV rounding convention may
increase the potential risk that market participants may be able to
identify the particular security being traded and the market
participant that engaged in the transaction. FINRA believes that the
highest potential risk regarding information leakage is present for
cohorts with only one CUSIP. Therefore, FINRA analyzed the changes to
the total number of cohorts, and the total number of cohorts with only
one CUSIP. Applying the proposed LTV tiers to TRACE reference data as
of December 2019 would have resulted in an increase of 10.9% in the
number of total cohorts, and an increase of 14.3% in the number of
cohorts with only one CUSIP. FINRA also analyzed the 787,691 Specified
Pool Transactions executed in 2019 totaling $5.8 trillion in volume.
Applying the proposed LTV tiers to the 2019 transaction data would have
resulted in a 12.8% increase in the number of trades for cohorts with
only one CUSIP, and a 10.2% increase in the number of trades for
cohorts with only one CUSIP and by only one dealer.
    FINRA believes, however, that the proposed modifications to the LTV
rounding convention represents an improvement to the current framework
by increasing the precision in the RDID cohorts, particularly around a
significant threshold. Thus, the proposal balances the goal of
providing information of increased value to the marketplace with risks
relating to the possible reverse engineering of disseminated
transactions to identify a specific pool or market participant. FINRA
believes that this change to LTV rounding is a measured change that
provides more granular information regarding the LTV of the pool
traded, which should improve the value of the disseminated information
for market participants.
    If the Commission approves the proposed rule change, FINRA will
announce the effective date of the proposed rule change in a Regulatory
Notice to be published no later than 60 days following Commission
approval. The effective date will be no later than 270 days following
publication of the Regulatory Notice announcing Commission approval.
2. Statutory Basis
    FINRA believes that the proposed rule change is consistent with the
provisions of Section 15A(b)(6) of the Act,\13\ which requires, among
other things, that FINRA rules must be designed to prevent fraudulent
and manipulative acts and practices, to promote just and equitable
principles of trade, and, in general, to protect investors and the
public interest. FINRA believes that the proposed rule change to
improve transparency for Specified Pool Transactions is designed to
prevent fraudulent and manipulative acts and practices, to promote just
and equitable principles of trade, and, generally to protect investors
and the public.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

    FINRA believes that the proposed changes to the LTV ratio rounding
convention for Specified Pool Transactions should enhance the
usefulness of TRACE data. FINRA believes that this change to LTV
dissemination is a measured change that provides more granular
information regarding the LTV of the pool traded, which should improve
the value of the disseminated information for market participants.

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

    FINRA does not believe that the proposed rule change will result in
any burden on competition that is not necessary or appropriate in
furtherance of the purposes of the Act. FINRA has undertaken an
economic impact assessment, as set forth below, to analyze the
regulatory need for the proposed rule change, its potential economic
impacts, including anticipated costs and benefits, and the alternatives
FINRA considered in assessing how to best meet its regulatory
objectives.
Economic Impact Assessment
(a) Regulatory Need
    The transaction information made available through TRACE provides
market participants with information to assess the value and price of a
TRACE-Eligible Security. FINRA is proposing changes to modify the LTV
rounding convention to increase the precision of the cohort groupings,
thereby providing more valuable information to the market.
(b) Economic Baseline
    The economic baseline for the proposal is the current rounding
convention for Agency Pass-Through MBS or an SBA-Backed ABS traded in
Specified Pool Transactions. The proposal is expected to affect market
participants that transact in these securities or related derivatives.
    As discussed above, FINRA groups Specified Pools into cohorts
identified by a unique RDID. When a transaction in a Specified Pool
occurs, FINRA disseminates the corresponding RDID in lieu of the CUSIP
to reduce the disclosure of information regarding trading strategies,
positions, and other sensitive information. Potential information
leakage may negatively impact trading interest and liquidity in the
market for these securities. Although disseminating RDIDs in lieu of
specific CUSIPs may reduce the amount of information leakage, it also
may decrease the value of the disseminated information. The value of
RDIDs and corresponding reference information, and its resultant effect
on price transparency, is dependent on the similarity of the CUSIPs
within each cohort (i.e., how well a cohort assignment represents the
characteristics of all CUSIPs within a given cohort).
(c) Economic Impact
    The application of the proposed LTV tiers to the December 2019 data
would have increased the total number of cohorts by 10.9% (from 287,802
to 319,188). The average number of CUSIPs in a cohort would have
decreased by 10.0% (from 4.0 to 3.6), and the number of cohorts with
only one CUSIP would have increased 14.3% (from 163,215 to 186,521). We
discuss the benefits and costs of the application of the proposed LTV
dissemination categories below, including the potential risk to market
participants relating to the number of transactions for cohorts with
only one CUSIP.\14\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \14\ The economic analysis will more accurately reflect the
potential impact of the proposal to the extent that previous market
conditions and distribution of LTVs remain similar. For example, the
distribution of LTVs remained similar from 2015 to 2019 with a mean
and median of approximately 78.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    FINRA believes that the proposal will enhance transparency by
increasing the precision of the RDID cohorts. The rounding convention
under the proposal will create tighter bands around LTVs within a
cohort. Currently, the median difference between the minimum and
maximum LTV within a cohort (i.e., LTV spread) is 17.0. The LTV spread
also has an interquartile range (the difference between the 25th and
75th percentile) of 12.0. Under the proposal, however, the median LTV
spread within a cohort would be 11.0, a decrease of 35.3%, and an
interquartile range of 10.0.\15\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \15\ These measures include only those 898,345 CUSIPs that are
in a cohort with more than one CUSIP both before and after the
application of the proposed revised rounding convention.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The tighter bands around LTV would increase the similarity of the
CUSIPs within a given cohort, and therefore the

representativeness of prices, in the cohort. This would benefit market
participants by increasing the value of price information as it relates
to LTV, and thereby contributing to more efficient pricing and better
execution quality.\16\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \16\ Transactions in Securitized Products began being reported
to TRACE in May 2011 on a next-day basis. See Securities Exchange
Act Release No. 63223 (November 1, 2010), 75 FR 68654 (November 8,
2010) (Notice of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of File No. SR-
FINRA-2010-054). In 2015, transactions were required to be reported
to TRACE within 15 minutes of execution. See Securities Exchange Act
Release No. 71607 (February 24, 2014), 79 FR 11481 (February 28,
2014) (Order Approving File No. SR-FINRA-2013-046). See An He &
Bruce Mizrach, Analysis of Securitized Asset Liquidity, (2017),
FINRA Office of the Chief Economist, Research Note. The authors
study the changes in the liquidity of securitized assets between
2012 and 2016. Although they did not directly test for a causal link
between transparency and liquidity, the improved liquidity for MBS
securities during a time of increasing trade transparency is a
positive indicator of the value of transparency for these
securities. The authors also note that the bid-ask spread for MBSs
decreased by 37% during the period while average daily trading
volume increased. An improvement in execution quality as a result of
the proposal may further decrease the bid-ask spreads for MBSs.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The rounding convention under the proposal also would increase the
similarity of CUSIPs when LTV is relatively more important for pricing
purposes (i.e., LTVs from 81% up to 100%). Various factors may be more
important for mortgages in this range (e.g., the premium or ``pay-up''
for Specified Pools relative to generic TBA security prices),\17\ and
further demarcation around LTV ratios also would mirror mortgage
origination practices. The rounding conventions with respect to the
other security characteristics and its effect on price variation,
however, would not change.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \17\ See supra note 12.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Alternatively, the rounding convention under the proposal could
increase the potential for and the costs associated with information
leakage. In particular, the rounding convention may increase the
potential for information leakage as a result of an increase in the
number of cohorts with only one CUSIP and the small number of dealers
that trade any one CUSIP.\18\ This may negatively impact trading
interest and liquidity in the market for these securities.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \18\ For example, among the 123,481 CUSIPs that traded in 2019,
47.7% (58,859) were traded by one dealer (as proxied by the market
participant identifier (MPID)). In addition, two dealers traded
20.8% (or 25,671) of the CUSIPs, and three dealers traded 12.0% (or
14,840) of the CUSIPs. Four or more dealers traded the remaining
19.5% (or 24,111) of CUSIPs.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The proposal would increase the number of cohorts with only one
CUSIP from 163,215 to 186,521. As noted above, the number of Specified
Pool Transactions for cohorts with only one CUSIP would increase under
the proposal by 12.8% from 77,234 (9.8% of all transactions) to 87,096
(11.1% of all transactions). The percentage of transactions for cohorts
with only one CUSIP that were made by only one dealer also would
increase under the proposal by 10.2% from 12,203 (1.5% of total trades)
to 13,445 (1.7% of total trades).
    The 12.8% increase in the number of transactions for cohorts with
only one CUSIP and the 10.2% increase in the number of transactions for
those cohorts by only one dealer may increase the risk to market
participants from disclosing information relating to trading
strategies, positions, and other sensitive information. As noted above,
this may reduce market participation and liquidity in those CUSIPs.\19\
However, FINRA believes that the proposal properly balances this
potential risk related to information leakage with providing more
valuable information to market participants.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \19\ The number of counterparties for MBS securities decreased
between 2012 and 2016, consistent with brokers experiencing higher
risk from increased transparency. See He & Mizrach (2017), supra
note 16.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

(d) Alternatives Considered
    Plausible alternatives to the proposal would be using different LTV
categories and rounding conventions. For example, the rounding
convention could have further segmented the LTV ratios in the range of
81% to 100%. The rounding convention also could have incorporated a
catch-all tier of 141+ for LTVs of 141% or more instead of the catch-
all tier of 121+ for LTVs of 121% or more. In general, tighter (looser)
bands would increase (decrease) the number of cohorts with only one
CUSIP but increase (decrease) the similarity of the specified pools
within the same cohort. FINRA believes that the costs associated with
the LTV rounding convention proposed herein is appropriate given the
potential increase in the precision of the cohorts and value of the
transaction information. FINRA will continue to evaluate the market for
Specified Pools and evaluate the conventions that are used for
disseminating these transactions.

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

    Written comments were neither solicited nor received.

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

    Within 45 days of the date of publication of this notice in the
Federal Register or within such longer period (i) as the Commission may
designate up to 90 days of such date if it finds such longer period to
be appropriate and publishes its reasons for so finding or (ii) as to
which the self-regulatory organization consents, the Commission will:
    (A) By order approve or disapprove such proposed rule change, or
    (B) institute proceedings to determine whether the proposed rule
change should be disapproved.

IV. Solicitation of Comments

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

Electronic Comments

     Use the Commission's internet comment form (http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml); or
     Send an email to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Please include
File Number SR-FINRA-2020-034 on the subject line.

Paper Comments

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

All submissions should refer to File Number SR-FINRA-2020-034. This
file number should be included on the subject line if email is used. To
help the Commission process and review your comments more efficiently,
please use only one method. The Commission will post all comments on
the Commission's internet website (http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml).
Copies of the submission, all subsequent amendments, all written
statements with respect to the proposed rule change that are filed with
the Commission, and all written communications relating to the proposed
rule change between the Commission and any person, other than those
that may be withheld from the public in accordance with the provisions
of 5 U.S.C. 552, will be available for website viewing and printing in
the Commission's Public Reference Room, 100 F Street NE, Washington, DC
20549 on official business days between the hours of 10:00 a.m. and
3:00 p.m. Copies of such

filing also will be available for inspection and copying at the
principal office of FINRA. All comments received will be posted without
change. Persons submitting comments are cautioned that we do not redact
or edit personal identifying information from comment submissions. You
should submit only information that you wish to make available
publicly. All submissions should refer to File Number SR-FINRA-2020-
034, and should be submitted on or before November 19, 2020.

    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets,
pursuant to delegated authority.\20\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \20\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

J. Matthew DeLesDernier,
Assistant Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2020-23919 Filed 10-28-20; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 82, Number 238 (Wednesday, December 13, 2017)]
[Notices]
[Pages 58602-58603]
[FR Doc No: 2017-26778]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

[EPA-HQ-OPPT-2015-0437; FRL-9967-78-OEI]

Agency Information Collection Activities; Safer Choice Product
Recognition Program; Submitted to OMB for Review and Approval; Comment
Request

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: EPA has submitted the following information collection request
(ICR) to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for review and
approval in accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA): ``Safer
Choice Product Recognition Program'' and identified by EPA ICR No.
2302.03 and OMB Control No. 2070-0178. The ICR, which is available in
the docket along with other related materials, provides a detailed
explanation of the collection activities and the burden estimate that
is only briefly summarized in this document. EPA did not receive any
comments in response to the previously provided public review
opportunity issued in the Federal Register on March 8, 2016 (81 FR
12097). With this submission, EPA is providing an additional 30 days
for public review.

DATES: Comments must be received on or before January 12, 2018.

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by docket identification
(ID) number EPA-HQ-OPPT-2015-0437, to (1) EPA online using http://www.regulations.gov (our preferred method) or by mail to: EPA Docket
Center, Environmental Protection Agency, Mail Code 28221T, 1200
Pennsylvania Ave. NW, Washington, DC 20460 and (2) OMB via email to
[email protected]. Address comments to OMB Desk Officer for
EPA.
    EPA's policy is that all comments received will be included in the
docket without change, including any personal information provided,
unless the comment includes profanity, threats, information claimed to
be Confidential Business Information (CBI), or other information whose
disclosure is restricted by statute. Do not submit electronically any
information you consider to be CBI or information whose disclosure is
restricted by statute.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Colby Lintner, Environmental
Assistance Division (7408M), Office of Pollution Prevention and Toxics,
Environmental Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave. NW, Washington,
DC 20460-0001; telephone number:<PHONE_NUMBER>; email address: [email protected].

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
    Docket: Supporting documents, including the ICR that explains in
detail the information collection activities and the related burden and
cost estimates that are summarized in this document, are available in
the docket. The docket can be viewed online at http://www.regulations.gov or in person at the EPA Docket Center, West William
Jefferson Clinton Bldg., Rm. 3334, 1301 Constitution Ave. NW,
Washington, DC. The telephone number for the Docket Center is (202)
566-1744. For additional information about EPA's public docket, visit
http://www.epa.gov/dockets.
    ICR status: This ICR expire on August 31, 2016. Under PRA, 44
U.S.C. 3501 et seq., an agency may not conduct or sponsor, and a person
is not required to respond to, a collection of information, unless it
displays a currently valid OMB control number. The OMB control numbers
are displayed either by publication in the Federal Register or by other
appropriate means, such as on the related collection instrument or
form, if applicable. The display of OMB control numbers for certain EPA
regulations is consolidated in 40 CFR part 9.
    Abstract: EPA's Safer Choice program formally recognizes safer
products where all ingredients have an environmental and human health
profile showing that they are the safest in their functional use class.
Under the encouragement of this program, leading companies have made
great progress in developing safer, highly effective chemical products.
Since the program's inception in 1997, formulators have used the
program as a portal to EPA's unique chemical expertise, information
resources, and guidance on greener chemistry. Safer Choice program
partners enjoy Agency recognition, including the use of the Safer
Choice program logo on products with the safest possible formulations.
In the future, EPA expects much greater program participation due to
rising demand for safer products. This information collection enables
EPA to accommodate participation by more than nine formulators each
year and to enhance program transparency.
    Information collection activities associated with this program will
assist the Agency in meeting the goals of the Pollution Prevention Act
(PPA) by providing resources and recognition for businesses committed
to promoting and using safer chemical products. In turn, the program
will help businesses meet corporate sustainability goals by providing
the means to, and an objective measure of, environmental stewardship.
Investment analysts and advisers seek these types of measures in
evaluating a corporation's sustainability profile and investment
worthiness. Safer Choice Product Recognition program partnership is an
important impetus for prioritizing and completing the transition to
safer chemical products. The Safer Choice Product Recognition program
is also needed to promote greater use of safer chemical products by
companies unaware of the benefits of such a change.
    EPA has tailored its request for information, and especially the
Safer Choice Product Recognition program application forms, to ensure
that the Agency requests only that information essential to verify
applicants' eligibility for recognition.
    Respondents/Affected Entities: Companies engaged in the formulation
of end-use, for-sale products that have

furthered the goals of the Safer Choice program through participation
in and promotion of the program, and that wish to receive recognition
for their achievements.
    Respondent's obligation to respond: Responses to the collection of
information are voluntary. Respondents may claim all or part of a
response confidential. EPA will disclose information that is covered by
a claim of confidentiality only to the extent permitted by, and in
accordance with, the procedures in TSCA section 14 and 40 CFR part 2.
    Estimated total number of potential respondents: 157.
    Frequency of response: On occasion.
    Estimated total burden: 1,596 hours (per year). Burden is defined
at 5 CFR 1320.3(b).
    Estimated total costs: $ 652,359 (per year), includes no annualized
capital investment or maintenance and operational costs.
    Changes in the estimates: There is an increase of 362 hours in the
total estimated respondent burden compared with that identified in the
ICR currently approved by OMB. This increase reflects EPA's estimate of
a greater number of respondents, due to historical experience and
increases in the expected future number of responses due to greater
consumer awareness and demand for products with the Safer Choice label.
This increase is partially offset by reduced per-response burden
estimates based on expected efficiencies created by using the
Salesforce-based Safer Choice Community on the part of respondents.
This change is an adjustment.

Courtney Kerwin,
Director, Regulatory Support Division.
[FR Doc. 2017-26778 Filed 12-12-17; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


ZEBRA MUSSEL STATES State NameAbbreviation Alaska AK No Alabama AL Zebra Arkansas AR No Arizona AZ No California CA No Colorado CO No ConnecticuCT Zebra Disrtict of CDC No Delaware DE No Florida FL No Georgia GA No Hawaii HI No Iowa IA Zebra Idaho ID No Illinois IL Zebra Indiana IN Zebra Kansas KS No Kentucky KY Zebra Louisiana LA Zebra MassachusMA No Maryland MD No Maine ME No Michigan MI Zebra Minnesota MN Zebra Missouri MO Zebra Mississippi MS Zebra Montana MT No North CarolNC No North DakoND No Nebraska NE No New HampsNH No New JerseyNJ No New MexicoNM No Nevada NV No New York NY Zebra Ohio OH Zebra Oklahoma OK Zebra Oregon OR No PennsylvanPA Zebra Puerto RicoPR No Rhode IslanRI No South CaroSC No South DakoSD No TennesseeTN Zebra Texas TX No Virginia VA No Vermont VT Zebra WashingtonWA No List of States with Wisconsin WI Zebra West VirginWV Zebra Wyoming WY No Virgin IslanVI No


MEMORANDUM

DATE:		November 21, 2014

TO:		Carbon Power Plan for Existing Power Plants; Docket Id: OAR - 2013-0602

FROM:	Region 7, EPA

SUBJECT:	June 11, 2014, Conference Call Regarding Proposed Carbon Power Plan for Existing Power Plants  --------------------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY

      A conference call was held between EPA and the attendees listed below on June 11, 2014 to announce and discuss the proposed Carbon Power Plan for Existing Power Plants. The majority of the discussion centered on how goals were established for the states in Region 7: Iowa, Kansas, Missouri, and Nebraska. The Carbon Power Plan for Existing Power Plants was proposed on June 2, 2014.        ATTENDEES

EPA Region 7: Rebecca Weber Josh Tapp Mark A. Smith Ward Burns Toni Gargas

Iowa Department of Natural Resources Catharine Fitzsimmons

Kansas Department of Health and Environment Rick Brunetti Tom Gross

Missouri Department of Natural Resources  Kyra Moore

Nebraska Department of Environmental Quality Shelly Schneider


[Federal Register Volume 86, Number 128 (Thursday, July 8, 2021)]
[Notices]
[Page 36178]
[FR Doc No: 2021-14538]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Railroad Administration

[Docket Number FRA-2016-0086]

Petition for Waiver of Compliance

    Under part 211 of title 49 Code of Federal Regulations (CFR), this
document provides the public notice that on June 11, 2021, Kansas City
Southern Railway Company (KCS) petitioned the Federal Railroad
Administration (FRA) to join an existing waiver of compliance from
certain provisions of the Federal railroad safety regulations contained
at 49 CFR parts 232 (Brake System Safety Standards for Freight and
Other Non-Passenger Trains and Equipment; End-Of-Train Devices), and
229 (Railroad Locomotive Safety Standards). The relevant FRA Docket
Number is FRA-2016-0086.
    Specifically, KCS requests to join a waiver previously granted to
CSX Transportation (CSX) and BNSF Railway (BNSF), and be granted relief
from 49 CFR 232.205(c)(1)(iii), Class I brake test-initial terminal
inspection, and 229.29(b), Air brake system calibration, maintenance,
and testing, related to air flow method (AFM) indicator calibration
intervals. The relief granted to CSX and BNSF allows the railroads to
test extending the AFM test intervals from 92 days to 184 days on
locomotives equipped with the New York Air Brake (NYAB) CCB-II air
brake systems. KCS seeks to form a test waiver team operating under the
current test committee overseeing the relief in FRA-2016-0086 to test
376 NYAB CCBII-equipped locomotives owned by KCS. KCS states that it
has been an active member of the Association of American Railroads
Locomotive Committee and is familiar with the work performed by the
FRA-2016-0086 test committee.
    A copy of the petition, as well as any written communications
concerning the petition, is available for review online at
www.regulations.gov.
    Interested parties are invited to participate in these proceedings
by submitting written views, data, or comments. FRA does not anticipate
scheduling a public hearing in connection with these proceedings since
the facts do not appear to warrant a hearing. If any interested party
desires an opportunity for oral comment and a public hearing, they
should notify FRA, in writing, before the end of the comment period and
specify the basis for their request.
    All communications concerning these proceedings should identify the
appropriate docket number and may be submitted by any of the following
methods:
     Website: http://www.regulations.gov. Follow the online
instructions for submitting comments.
     Fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>.
     Mail: Docket Operations Facility, U.S. Department of
Transportation (DOT), 1200 New Jersey Ave. SE, W12-140, Washington, DC
20590.
    Communications received by August 23, 2021 will be considered by
FRA before final action is taken. Comments received after that date
will be considered if practicable.
    Anyone can search the electronic form of any written communications
and comments received into any of our dockets by the name of the
individual submitting the comment (or signing the document, if
submitted on behalf of an association, business, labor union, etc.).
Under 5 U.S.C. 553(c), DOT solicits comments from the public to better
inform its processes. DOT posts these comments, without edit, including
any personal information the commenter provides, to
www.regulations.gov, as described in the system of records notice (DOT/
ALL-14 FDMS), which can be reviewed at https://www.transportation.gov/privacy. See also https://www.regulations.gov/privacy-notice for the
privacy notice of regulations.gov.

    Issued in Washington, DC.
John Karl Alexy,
Associate Administrator for Railroad Safety, Chief Safety Officer.
[FR Doc. 2021-14538 Filed 7-7-21; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-06-P