| Page Range | 14319-14417 | |
| FR Document |
| Page and Subject | |
|---|---|
| 82 FR 14384 - Government in the Sunshine Act Meeting Notice | |
| 82 FR 14365 - Sunshine Act Notice | |
| 82 FR 14355 - Privacy Act of 1974; Computer Matching Program | |
| 82 FR 14365 - Sunshine Act; Notice of Board Member Meeting | |
| 82 FR 14319 - Clarification of When Products Made or Derived From Tobacco Are Regulated as Drugs, Devices, or Combination Products; Amendments to Regulations Regarding “Intended Uses”; Further Delayed Effective Date; Request for Comments | |
| 82 FR 14341 - Homeland Security Acquisition Regulation (HSAR); Safeguarding of Controlled Unclassified Information (HSAR Case 2015-001); Information Technology Security Awareness Training (HSAR Case 2015-002); Privacy Training (HSAR Case 2015-003)-Extension of Comment Periods | |
| 82 FR 14415 - Sunshine Act Meeting | |
| 82 FR 14354 - Sunshine Act Meeting Notice | |
| 82 FR 14332 - 340B Drug Pricing Program Ceiling Price and Manufacturer Civil Monetary Penalties Regulation | |
| 82 FR 14325 - Technical Correction to the National Ambient Air Quality Standards for Particulate Matter | |
| 82 FR 14362 - Information Collections Being Submitted for Review and Approval to the Office of Management and Budget | |
| 82 FR 14364 - Information Collection Being Reviewed by the Federal Communications Commission | |
| 82 FR 14341 - Alabama: Final Authorization of State Hazardous Waste Management Program Revisions | |
| 82 FR 14361 - Request for Public Comments on Peer Review Candidates for Proposed Modeling Approaches for a Health-Based Benchmark for Lead in Drinking Water | |
| 82 FR 14327 - Alabama: Final Authorization of State Hazardous Waste Management Program Revisions | |
| 82 FR 14324 - Further Delay of Effective Dates for Five Final Regulations Published by the Environmental Protection Agency Between December 12, 2016 and January 17, 2017 | |
| 82 FR 14386 - NASA Advisory Council; Science Committee; Meeting | |
| 82 FR 14373 - Accreditation and Approval of Camin Cargo Control, Inc., as a Commercial Gauger and Laboratory | |
| 82 FR 14374 - Kansas; Amendment No. 4 to Notice of a Major Disaster Declaration | |
| 82 FR 14416 - Notice of Public Meeting of the International Telecommunication Advisory Committee and Preparations for Upcoming International Telecommunications Meetings | |
| 82 FR 14416 - Overseas Schools Advisory Council Charter Renewal | |
| 82 FR 14366 - Request for Public Input on the Application of the Criminal Conflict of Interest Prohibition to Certain Beneficial Interests in Discretionary Trusts; Extension of Comment Period | |
| 82 FR 14336 - Final Flood Elevation Determinations | |
| 82 FR 14334 - Final Flood Elevation Determinations | |
| 82 FR 14379 - Final Flood Hazard Determinations | |
| 82 FR 14374 - Changes in Flood Hazard Determinations | |
| 82 FR 14417 - Enhanced-Use Lease of U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) Real Property for the Development of Permanent Supportive Housing Facility at the VA Greater Los Angeles Healthcare System-West Los Angeles, Los Angeles, California | |
| 82 FR 14383 - Certain Automated Teller Machines, ATM Modules, Components Thereof, and Products Containing the Same; Notice of Request for Statement on the Public Interest | |
| 82 FR 14353 - Pacific Fishery Management Council (Pacific Council); Public Meetings | |
| 82 FR 14352 - New England Fishery Management Council; Public Meeting | |
| 82 FR 14416 - Advisory Committee on Homeless Veterans, Notice of Meeting | |
| 82 FR 14346 - Certain Carbon and Alloy Steel Cut-to-Length Plate From the People's Republic of China: Countervailing Duty Order | |
| 82 FR 14349 - Certain Carbon and Alloy Steel Cut-to-Length Plate From the People's Republic of China: Antidumping Duty Order | |
| 82 FR 14360 - ADG Group Inc.; Supplemental Notice That Initial Market-Based Rate Filing Includes Request for Blanket Section 204 Authorization | |
| 82 FR 14361 - Combined Notice of Filings | |
| 82 FR 14360 - Combined Notice of Filings | |
| 82 FR 14357 - Combined Notice of Filings #1 | |
| 82 FR 14357 - Combined Notice of Filings #2 | |
| 82 FR 14359 - Combined Notice of Filings #1 | |
| 82 FR 14364 - Senior Executive Service Performance Review Board | |
| 82 FR 14349 - Lightweight Thermal Paper From the People's Republic of China: Notice of Rescission of Countervailing Duty Administrative Review; 2015 | |
| 82 FR 14344 - Certain Steel Nails From the People's Republic of China: Final Results of Antidumping Duty Administrative Review, Final Determination of No Shipments and Final Partial Rescission; 2014-2015 | |
| 82 FR 14381 - Receipt of Application for Incidental Take Permit; Low-Effect Habitat Conservation Plan for California Flats Solar Project Operations and Maintenance Activities, Monterey and San Luis Obispo Counties, California | |
| 82 FR 14343 - Submission for OMB Review; Comment Request | |
| 82 FR 14382 - Certain Mobile Electronic Devices; Commission Determination Not to Review an Initial Determination Terminating the Investigation Based Upon a Settlement Agreement and Withdrawal of the Complaint; Termination of the Investigation | |
| 82 FR 14382 - Invasive Species Advisory Committee | |
| 82 FR 14384 - Agency Information Collection Activities; Request for Comments; Revision of the BJS Confidentiality Pledge | |
| 82 FR 14387 - New Postal Products | |
| 82 FR 14372 - Agency Information Collection Activities: Proposed Collection; Comment Request | |
| 82 FR 14366 - Identification and Characterization of the Infectious Disease Risks of Human Cells, Tissues, and Cellular and Tissue-Based Products; Public Workshop; Correction | |
| 82 FR 14365 - Office of Federal High-Performance Green Buildings; Green Building Advisory Committee; Notification of Upcoming Public Committee Meeting and Conference Calls | |
| 82 FR 14367 - Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposed Collection; Comment Request; Medical Devices; Reports of Corrections and Removals | |
| 82 FR 14369 - Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposed Collection; Comment Request; Voluntary National Retail Food Regulatory Program Standards | |
| 82 FR 14355 - Agency Information Collection Activities; Comment Request; Special Education-Individual Reporting on Regulatory Compliance Related to the Personnel Development Program's Service Obligation and the Government Performance and Results Act (GPRA) | |
| 82 FR 14415 - Georgia Disaster Number GA-00092 | |
| 82 FR 14415 - South Dakota Disaster #SD-00073 | |
| 82 FR 14388 - Self-Regulatory Organizations; NASDAQ PHLX LLC; Notice of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of Proposed Rule Change To Amend Pricing for NDX and MNX | |
| 82 FR 14392 - Self-Regulatory Organizations; NASDAQ PHLX LLC; Notice of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of Proposed Rule Change To Amend the Address of the Exchange and Its Shareholder | |
| 82 FR 14410 - Self-Regulatory Organizations; Bats BZX Exchange, Inc.; Notice of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of a Proposed Rule Change Related to Fees | |
| 82 FR 14393 - Self-Regulatory Organizations; NASDAQ PHLX LLC; Notice of Designation of Longer Period for Commission Action on Proposed Rule Change To Permit the Listing and Trading of P.M.-Settled NASDAQ-100 Index® Options on a Pilot Basis | |
| 82 FR 14413 - Self-Regulatory Organizations; ISE Gemini, LLC; Notice of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of Proposed Rule Change, as Modified by Amendment No. 1, To Amend Supplementary Material .03 to Rule 713 | |
| 82 FR 14395 - Self-Regulatory Organizations; The Nasdaq Stock Market LLC; Notice of Filing of Proposed Rule Change To List and Trade Exchange-Traded Managed Funds | |
| 82 FR 14394 - Self-Regulatory Organizations; Fixed Income Clearing Corporation; Notice of Designation of Longer Period for Commission Action on Proposed Rule Change To (1) Implement the Margin Proxy, (2) Modify the Calculation of the Coverage Charge in Circumstances Where the Margin Proxy Applies, and (3) Make Certain Technical Corrections | |
| 82 FR 14401 - Self-Regulatory Organizations; Fixed Income Clearing Corporation; Notice of Filing of Proposed Rule Change To Implement the Capped Contingency Liquidity Facility in the Government Securities Division Rulebook | |
| 82 FR 14384 - Notice of Lodging of Proposed Consent Decree Under the Clean Air Act | |
| 82 FR 14394 - Equity Market Structure Advisory Committee | |
| 82 FR 14354 - Meeting of the Board of Advisors (BOA) to the President of the Naval War College (NWC) Subcommittee | |
| 82 FR 14338 - Connect America Fund, ETC Annual Reports and Certifications, Developing a Unified Intercarrier Compensation Regime |
International Trade Administration
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
Navy Department
Federal Energy Regulatory Commission
Food and Drug Administration
Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration
Federal Emergency Management Agency
U.S. Customs and Border Protection
Fish and Wildlife Service
Consult the Reader Aids section at the end of this issue for phone numbers, online resources, finding aids, and notice of recently enacted public laws.
To subscribe to the Federal Register Table of Contents electronic mailing list, go to https://public.govdelivery.com/accounts/USGPOOFR/subscriber/new, enter your e-mail address, then follow the instructions to join, leave, or manage your subscription.
Food and Drug Administration, HHS.
Final rule; further delay of effective date; request for comments.
The Food and Drug Administration (FDA or we) is further delaying the effective date of a final rule published in the
You may submit comments as follows:
Submit electronic comments in the following way:
•
• If you want to submit a comment with confidential information that you do not wish to be made available to the public, submit the comment as a written/paper submission and in the manner detailed (see “Written/Paper Submissions” and “Instructions”).
Submit written/paper submissions as follows:
•
• For written/paper comments submitted to the Division of Dockets Management, FDA will post your comment, as well as any attachments, except for information submitted, marked and identified, as confidential, if submitted as detailed in “Instructions.”
• Confidential Submissions—To submit a comment with confidential information that you do not wish to be made publicly available, submit your comments only as a written/paper submission. You should submit two copies total. One copy will include the information you claim to be confidential with a heading or cover note that states “THIS DOCUMENT CONTAINS CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION.” The Agency will review this copy, including the claimed confidential information, in its consideration of comments. The second copy, which will have the claimed confidential information redacted/blacked out, will be available for public viewing and posted on
Robert Berlin, Office of Policy, Food and Drug Administration, 10903 New Hampshire Ave., Bldg. 32, Rm. 4238, Silver Spring, MD 20993, 301-796-8828.
In the
The proposed amendments to the existing intended use regulations were not intended to reflect a change in FDA's approach regarding evidence of intended use for drugs and devices: FDA's longstanding position is that, in determining a product's intended use, FDA may look to any relevant source of evidence (see 80 FR 57756 at 57757) (the product's labeling, promotional claims, and advertising, oral or written statements by a manufacturer or its representatives, circumstances surrounding the distribution or sale of a product, and other relevant evidence).
In the
In issuing the amendments to the intended use regulations in the final rule, FDA's goal remained the same as it had intended in the proposed rule: To clarify that FDA would not regard a firm as intending an unapproved new use for an approved or cleared drug or device based solely on that firm's knowledge that its product was being prescribed or used by healthcare providers for such use (see 82 FR 2193 at 2206-07). Because of the comments described above, FDA decided that its clarification goals would be better achieved by amending the last sentence of each intended use regulation, rather than by deleting the sentences, and we revised the regulations accordingly (see 82 FR 2193 at 2206). The revised language was intended to achieve the goal described in the proposed rule, by amending the last sentence so that it no longer suggests that a manufacturer's mere knowledge that its approved or cleared product was being prescribed or used for an unapproved use would, on its own, be sufficient to establish a new intended use (see 82 FR 2193 at 2206). The revised sentence was also intended to embody FDA's longstanding position, discussed in the preamble to the proposed rule, that intended use can be based on “any relevant source of evidence,” including a variety of direct and circumstantial evidence (see 82 FR 2193 at 2206). The text of the final rule used the phrase “the totality of evidence” to accomplish these goals (see 82 FR 2193 at 2206).
The rule was published with an effective date of February 8, 2017. On February 7, 2017, in accordance with the memorandum of January 20, 2017, from the Assistant to the President and Chief of Staff, entitled “Regulatory Freeze Pending Review,” FDA delayed the effective date of the rule until March 21, 2017 (82 FR 9501).
FDA has decided to delay the effective date for the final rule from March 21, 2017, until March 19, 2018. To the extent that 5 U.S.C. 553 applies to the delay of effective date from March 21, 2017, until March 19, 2018, the action is exempt from notice and comment because it constitutes a rule of procedure under 5 U.S.C. 553(b)(A).
Alternatively, FDA's implementation of this action without opportunity for public comment, effective immediately upon publication in the
Petitioners ask that the final rule be stayed indefinitely and reconsidered for
These issues raised by the petition and similar concerns provide good cause to extend to the effective date of the rule without comment on the extension, so as to receive full public comments on these underlying issues and afford us enough time to collect and consider those comments.
Seeking public comment on this delay of the effective date is impracticable, unnecessary, and contrary to the public interest. The delay in the effective date until March 19, 2018, is necessary to give the public a fair opportunity to fully comment, and FDA the opportunity to further evaluate and consider the issues raised by the petition in addition to any other pertinent information or comments stakeholders submit to this docket regarding the final rule. Given the imminence of the effective date, seeking prior public comment on this delay would have been impracticable, as well as contrary to the public interest in the orderly issuance and implementation of regulations. However, in accordance with 21 CFR 10.40(e)(1), FDA will also accept comments for a period of 60 days on whether this rule delaying the effective date should be modified or revoked.
This action is being taken under FDA's authority under 21 CFR 10.35(a). The Commissioner of Food and Drugs finds that this delay of the effective date is in the public interest.
In addition to other comments, FDA is soliciting comments from interested persons in particular on the issues raised in the petition. For ease of reference, these comments should be submitted to this existing public docket, FDA-2015-N-2002. We request that any additional data and information be submitted to FDA by May 19, 2017 to allow us to fully consider it. Late, untimely filed comments will not be considered. Electronic comments must be submitted on or before May 19, 2017. The
We are interested in comments on the petitioners' views on the proper interpretation of “intended use.” FDA solicits comment on the appropriateness of the various limitations suggested by petitioners, including limiting the evidence that may be considered to establish a product's intended use to the manufacturer's or distributor's promotional statements; requiring that a manufacturer make an explicit promotional claim before FDA may find a new intended use; and allowing an exception for relying on circumstantial evidence “only when its probative value is sufficient to
As explained in the preambles to the proposed and final rules: In determining intended use, the consideration of evidence such as the circumstances surrounding the distribution of a product, the known effects of a product or substance, and/or the context in which the product is sold often ensures that firms that attempt to evade FDA's medical product regulation by making no claims, or at least no explicit claims, about their products can be held accountable (see 80 FR 57756 at 57757; 82 FR 2193 at 2196). A few examples of situations in which evidence of intended use has been derived from sources other than explicit promotional claims are:
• Persons distributing substances which are known to be used recreationally to get high, such as Dextromethorphan (the active ingredient in some cough suppressants) and Nitrous Oxide (which is a prescription drug). See,
• Persons distributing synthetic drugs, such as synthetic marijuana, labeled as incense, potpourri, or bath
• Persons distributing imitation drugs claimed to be incense or dietary supplements, such as imitation cocaine or imitation Ecstasy. See,
• Persons distributing products containing the active ingredients in prescription drugs, such as VIAGRA, CIALIS, LEVITRA, or BOTOX, as less expensive alternatives to the approved products, with labeling that states that they are “all natural” or “herbal” supplements or “for research only.” See,
• Other instances where a person's claims about the intended use of a product are belied by the person's activities or non-promotional statements or by circumstantial evidence. See,
In these situations, the evidence relied on has included general knowledge of actual use by customers to get high or to achieve some other mind-altering effect; the known effects of a product or substance; implied claims from using names that sound similar to the names of controlled substances; the circumstances surrounding the sale (
Evidence other than promotional claims has also been used to establish that products offered for import into the United States without labeling or other claims that identify them as a drug or device are in fact intended for use as a drug or device, and are therefore subject to refusal if they fail to meet certain requirements for importing medical products (see 21 U.S.C. 381(a)(3)). For example, the defendants in
With respect to the petitioners' suggested approaches to: (1) Limit the evidence relevant to determining the intended use of a medical product to promotional claims; (2) require that a manufacturer make an explicit promotional claim before FDA may find a new intended use; and/or (3) allow an exception for relying on circumstantial evidence “only when its probative value is sufficient to
1. How should FDA consider situations such as those outlined above where companies and individuals distribute medical products and/or seek to import medical products without explicit promotional claims as we evaluate whether to adopt any of petitioners' suggested approaches to determining intended use?
2. What are the potential public health consequences, positive and negative, that should be considered in evaluating whether to adopt any of petitioners' suggested approaches to determining intended use? What other policy considerations are relevant when assessing approaches to intended use?
3. To the extent that your comment cites to First Amendment considerations as the legal rationale underlying your recommendations, how (if at all) do those considerations apply to the use of non-speech evidence in determining intended use, such as the circumstances surrounding the distribution of a product or the context in which it is sold?
4. In light of the petitioners' concerns about the language in the final rule, do stakeholders believe there is a distinction between considering “any relevant source of evidence” and “the totality of evidence”? Do stakeholders have suggestions about what wording provides the most clarity to regulated entities?
These questions are not meant to be exhaustive; we are also interested in any other pertinent comments or information stakeholders would like to share regarding the final rule, including whether there are other approaches to “intended use” that FDA should consider. Please note that, as mentioned in the final rule (see 82 FR 2193 at 2209), FDA is currently engaged in a comprehensive review of its regulations and policies governing firms' communications about unapproved uses of approved/cleared medical products, and has established a separate public docket to receive written comments on that topic (see 81 FR 60299, September 1, 2016, available at:
We have examined the impacts of the final rule under Executive Order 12866, Executive Order 13563, Executive Order 13771, the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601-612), and the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (Pub. L. 104-4). Executive Orders 12866 and 13563 direct us to assess all costs and benefits of available regulatory alternatives and, when regulation is necessary, to select regulatory approaches that maximize net benefits (including potential economic, environmental, public health and safety, and other advantages; distributive impacts; and equity). We have developed a comprehensive Economic Analysis of Impacts that assesses the impacts of the final rule. We believe that this final rule is not a significant regulatory action as defined by Executive Order 12866 and Executive Order 13771.
The Regulatory Flexibility Act requires us to analyze regulatory options that would minimize any significant impact of a rule on small entities. Because the clarifications in this final rule will not significantly increase costs on manufacturers of products made or derived from tobacco, we certify that the final rule will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities.
The Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (section 202(a)) requires us to prepare a written statement, which includes an assessment of anticipated costs and benefits, before issuing “any rule that includes any Federal mandate that may result in the expenditure by State, local, and tribal governments, in the aggregate, or by the private sector, of $100,000,000 or more (adjusted annually for inflation) in any one year.” The current threshold after adjustment for inflation is $146 million, using the most current (2015) Implicit Price Deflator for the Gross Domestic Product. This final rule will not result in an expenditure in any year that meets or exceeds this amount.
We will delay the effective date of the final rule by 1 year. As shown in table 1, this action will generate a cost savings of $112,865 in one-time costs with a 7 percent discount rate and a cost savings of $50,249 in one-time costs with a 3 percent discount rate. Annualized over 10 years, a 1-year delay will save $16,069 with a 7 percent discount rate and $5,891 with a 3 percent discount rate. We expect that the final rule will reduce regulatory ambiguity and uncertainty, and, thus, reduce the regulatory and compliance burdens associated with such ambiguity. Although we did not quantify these benefits, we anticipate that delaying the effective date will reduce the benefits by a similar magnitude as the cost savings. For any final rule issued during or after the 1-year delay, we will analyze the impacts of such a rule.
Table 2 shows the revised estimate of costs and benefits with a 1-year delay of the effective date.
The full analysis of economic impacts is available in the docket for this final rule (FDA-2015-N-2002) and at
The following references are on display in the Division of Dockets Management (see
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7. U.S. Department of Justice, “Atlanta Man Convicted of Illegally Importing and Distributing Male Enhancement Products from China”, Feb. 16, 2017, available at
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
Final rule; further delay of effective dates.
In accordance with the Presidential directive as expressed in the memorandum of January 20, 2017, from the Assistant to the President and Chief of Staff, entitled “Regulatory Freeze Pending Review,” and the
This regulation is effective March 21, 2017. The effective date of each regulation listed in the table below is delayed to a new effective date of May 22, 2017.
Sarah Rees, Director, Office of Regulatory Policy and Management, Office of Policy, Mail code 1804, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave NW., Washington, DC 20460; (202) 564-1986;
On January 26, 2017, EPA published a document in the
The January 20 Memo also directs that where appropriate and as permitted by applicable law, agencies should consider a rule to delay the effective date for regulations beyond that 60-day period. In this document, EPA is taking action to further delay the effective dates for five regulations listed in the table below until May 22, 2017. EPA is taking this action to give recently arrived Agency officials the opportunity to learn more about these regulations and to decide whether they would like to conduct a substantive review of any of those regulations. If Agency officials decide to conduct a substantive review
The Agency's implementation of this action without opportunity for public comment is based on the good cause exception in 5 U.S.C. 553(b)(B). (The good cause exception is also referenced in section 307(d) of the Clean Air Act (CAA).) The Agency has determined that seeking public comment is impracticable, unnecessary and contrary to the public interest. The further temporary delay in effective date until May 22, 2017, is necessary to give Agency officials the opportunity to decide whether they would like to conduct a substantive review of the five regulations, consistent with the January 20 Memo. The intent of the January 20 Memo was to delay the effective dates of rules that had recently been promulgated to give the new Administration time to review them. When that delay was implemented through the January 26 Document, the EPA believed 60 days would be sufficient time for incoming Agency officials to review rules recently promulgated by the EPA. However, given the length of the confirmation process for the EPA Administrator and the fact that the Agency lacks Senate-confirmed officials elsewhere, the new Administration has not had the time contemplated by the January 20 Memo for this review. Thus, the EPA is deferring the effective date for the five regulations listed in the table below for another 62 days to allow Agency officials to conduct this review. Given the imminence of the effective date, seeking prior public comment on this further temporary delay would be impractical, as well as contrary to the public interest in the orderly promulgation and implementation of regulations. Specifically, the Agency has been faced with circumstances beyond its control; as was the case on January 26, it is difficult to predict when the appropriate officials might assume their responsibilities. Indeed, as noted above, even today the EPA has only one Senate-confirmed official in place. Furthermore, allowing these regulations to go into effect without first deciding whether to undertake a substantive review may create public confusion. In addition, to the extent this extension is a procedural rule, it is exempt from notice and comment under 5 U.S.C. 553(b)(A), which is also referenced in CAA section 307(d).
For the foregoing reasons, the EPA relies on the good cause exceptions in 5 U.S.C. 553(b)(B) and 553(d)(3) to make today's action effective on March 21, 2017.
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
Final rule.
The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is taking final action to make a technical correction to equation 2 in appendix N to part 50, section 4.4(b) of the National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) for Particulate Matter. Equation 2 in appendix N describes an intermediate step in the calculation of the design value for the annual PM
This final rule is effective on May 19, 2017.
The EPA has established a docket for this action under Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2016-0408. All documents in the docket are listed on the
Mr. Brett Gantt, Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards, Air Quality Assessment Division, Air Quality Analysis Group (Mail Code: C304-04), Environmental Protection Agency, 109 T.W. Alexander Drive, Research Triangle Park, NC 27711; telephone number: (919) 541-5274; email address:
On December 14, 2012, the EPA revised the NAAQS for Particulate Matter (78 FR 3086). As part of that action, the EPA also made corresponding revisions in appendix N to 40 CFR part 50, which describes the data handling conventions and computations necessary for determining when the NAAQS for PM
The minimum quarterly value data substitution test described in section 4.1(c)(i) allows for a valid annual PM
As currently written, Equation 2 is not appropriate for use in cases where the data completeness requirements of section 4.1(b) of appendix N have not been met, and where the minimum quarterly value data substitution test has been used in lieu of meeting those requirements for quarters without any daily values. Specifically, Equation 2 assumes there are four quarters with data and does not accurately reflect the intended calculation of the annual mean PM
On August 11, 2016, the EPA issued a direct final action (81 FR 53006), along with a parallel proposal (81 FR 53097), to correct Equation 2. We received an adverse comment to the direct final rule suggesting a change in the definition of one of the parameters in the updated equation. Specifically, the commenter suggested that the variable n
This action generalizes Equation 2 to account for cases where a site has quarters without daily values, but passes the minimum quarterly value data substitution test. This technical correction to Equation 2 is currently used by the EPA in the calculation of the annual PM
This action applies to you if you are calculating the annual PM
This action is not a significant regulatory action and was, therefore, not submitted to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for review.
This action does not impose an information collection burden under the PRA. This action clarifies the calculation of the annual PM
I certify that this action will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities under the RFA. This action will not impose any requirements on small entities. This action corrects the calculation of annual mean PM
This action does not contain any unfunded mandate of $100 million or more as described in UMRA, 2 U.S.C. 1531-1538, and does not significantly or uniquely affect small governments. This action imposes no enforceable duty on any state, local or tribal governments, or the private sector.
This action does not have federalism implications. It will not have substantial direct effects on the states, on the relationship between the national government and the states, or on the distribution of power and responsibilities among the various levels of government.
This action does not have tribal implications, as specified in Executive Order 13175. This regulatory action corrects the calculation of annual mean PM
The EPA interprets Executive Order 13045 as applying only to those regulatory actions that concern environmental health or safety risks that the EPA has reason to believe may disproportionately affect children, per the definition of “covered regulatory action” in section 2-202 of the Executive Order. This action is not subject to Executive Order 13045 because it does not concern an environmental health risk or safety risk.
This action is not subject to Executive Order 13211 because it is not a significant regulatory action under Executive Order 12866.
This rulemaking does not involve technical standards.
The EPA believes that this action is not subject to Executive Order 12898 (59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994) because it does not establish an environmental health or safety standard. This regulatory action is a technical correction to a previously promulgated regulatory action and does not have any impact on human health or the environment.
This action is subject to the CRA, and the EPA will submit a rule report to each House of the Congress and to the Comptroller General of the United States. This action is not “major rule” as defined by 5 U.S.C. 804(2).
Air pollution control, Carbon monoxide, Lead, Nitrogen dioxide, Ozone, Particulate matter, Sulfur oxides.
For the reasons stated in the preamble, title 40, chapter I of the Code of Federal Regulations is amended as follows:
42 U.S.C. 7401
(b) * * *
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
Direct final rule.
Alabama has applied to the United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) for final authorization of changes to its hazardous waste program under the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA). EPA has determined that these changes satisfy all requirements needed to qualify for final authorization, and is authorizing the State's changes through this direct final rule. In the “Proposed Rules” section of today's
This final authorization will become effective on May 19, 2017 unless EPA receives adverse written comment by April 19, 2017. If EPA receives such comment, EPA will publish a timely withdrawal of this direct final rule in the
Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID No. EPA-R04-RCRA-2016-0497, by one of the following methods:
•
•
•
•
•
You may view and copy Alabama's applications and associated publicly available materials from 8:00 a.m. to 4:00 p.m. at the following locations: EPA Region 4, Resource Conservation and Restoration Division, Atlanta Federal Center, 61 Forsyth Street SW., Atlanta, Georgia 30303-8960; telephone number: (404) 562-8483; and the Alabama Department of Environmental Management, 1400 Coliseum Boulevard, Montgomery, Alabama 36110-2059; telephone number: (334) 271-7700. Interested persons wanting to examine these documents should make an appointment with the office at least a week in advance.
Audrey Baker, RCRA Programs and Materials Management Section, Materials and Waste Management Branch, Resource Conservation and Restoration Division, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Atlanta Federal Center, 61 Forsyth Street SW., Atlanta, Georgia 30303-8960; telephone number: (404) 562-8483; fax number: (404) 562-9964; email address:
States which have received final authorization from EPA under RCRA section 3006(b), 42 U.S.C. 6926(b), must maintain a hazardous waste program that is equivalent to, consistent with, and no less stringent than the Federal program. As the Federal program changes, States must change their programs and ask EPA to authorize the changes. Changes to State programs may be necessary when Federal or State statutory or regulatory authority is modified or when certain other changes occur. Most commonly, States must change their programs because of changes to EPA's regulations in 40 Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) parts 124, 260 through 268, 270, 273, and 279.
New Federal requirements and prohibitions imposed by Federal regulations that EPA promulgates pursuant to the Hazardous and Solid Waste Amendments of 1984 (HSWA) take effect in authorized States at the same time that they take effect in unauthorized States. Thus, EPA will implement those requirements and prohibitions in Alabama, including the issuance of new permits implementing those requirements, until the State is granted authorization to do so.
On July 20, 2015 and August 15, 2016, Alabama submitted final complete program revision applications seeking authorization of changes to its hazardous waste program that correspond to certain Federal rules promulgated between July 1, 2006 through June 30, 2008, and July 1, 2011 through June 30, 2014 (also known as RCRA Clusters XVII through XVIII, and XXII through XXIII). EPA concludes that Alabama's applications to revise its authorized program meet all of the statutory and regulatory requirements established by RCRA, as set forth in RCRA section 3006(b), 42 U.S.C. 6926(b), and 40 CFR part 271. Therefore, EPA grants Alabama final authorization to operate its hazardous waste program with the changes described in the authorization applications, and as outlined below in Section G of this document.
Alabama has responsibility for permitting treatment, storage, and disposal facilities within its borders (except in Indian Country) and for carrying out the aspects of the RCRA program described in its revised program applications, subject to the limitations of HSWA, as discussed above.
The effect of this decision is that the changes described in Alabama's authorization applications will become part of the authorized State hazardous waste program, and will therefore be federally enforceable. Alabama will continue to have primary enforcement authority and responsibility for its State hazardous waste program. EPA retains its authorities under RCRA sections 3007, 3008, 3013, and 7003, including its authority to:
• Conduct inspections, and require monitoring, tests, analyses, or reports;
• Enforce RCRA requirements, including authorized State program requirements, and suspend or revoke permits; and
• Take enforcement actions regardless of whether the State has taken its own actions.
This action does not impose additional requirements on the regulated community because the regulations for which Alabama is being authorized by today's action are already effective and enforceable requirements under State law, and are not changed by today's action.
Along with this direct final rule, EPA is publishing a separate document in the “Proposed Rules” section of today's
If EPA receives comments that oppose this authorization, EPA will withdraw today's direct final rule by publishing a document in the
If EPA receives comments that oppose only the authorization of a particular change to the State hazardous waste program, EPA will withdraw that part of today's direct final rule, but the authorization of the program changes that the comments do not oppose will become effective on the date specified above. The
Alabama initially received final authorization on December 8, 1987, effective December 22, 1987 (52 FR 46466), to implement a hazardous waste management program. EPA granted authorization for changes to Alabama's program on the following dates: November 29, 1991, effective January 28, 1992 (56 FR 60926); May 13, 1992, effective July 12, 1992 (57 FR 20422); October 21, 1992, effective December 21, 1992 (57 FR 47996); March 17, 1993, effective May 17, 1993 (58 FR 20422); September 24, 1993, effective November 23, 1993 (58 FR 49932); February 1, 1994, effective April 4, 1994 (59 FR 4594); November 14, 1994, effective January 13, 1995 (59 FR 56407); August 14, 1995, effective October 13, 1995 (60 FR 41818); February 14, 1996, effective April 15, 1996 (61 FR 5718); April 25, 1996, effective June 24, 1996 (61 FR 5718); November 21, 1997, effective February 10, 1998 (62 FR 62262); December 20, 2000, effective February 20, 2001 (65 FR 79769); March 15, 2005, effective May 16, 2005 (70 FR 12593); June 2, 2005, effective August 1, 2005 (70 FR 32247); September 13, 2006, effective November 13, 2006 (71 FR 53989); and April 2, 2008, effective June 2, 2008 (73 FR 17924).
On July 20, 2015 and August 15, 2016, Alabama submitted final complete program revision applications seeking authorization of its changes in accordance with 40 CFR 271.21. EPA now makes an immediate final decision, subject to receipt of written comments that oppose this action, that Alabama's hazardous waste program revisions are equivalent to, consistent with, and no less stringent than the Federal program, and therefore satisfy all of the requirements necessary to qualify for final authorization. Therefore, EPA grants Alabama final authorization for the following program changes:
We consider the following State requirements to be more stringent than the Federal requirements: Rules 335-14-2-.01(4)(a)26.(v)(IV) and 335-14-2-.01(4)(b)(18)(v)(IV) (from RCRA Cluster XXIII, Checklist 229) because, in addition to the three types of records required by the federal regulation, the State requires generators to maintain in their onsite records, documentation that verifies that “no free liquids” were present in the container prior to shipment. The Federal requirements found at 40 CFR 261.4(a)(26)(v) and 261.4(b)(18)(v) do not include this record keeping requirement. These requirements are part of Alabama's authorized program and are federally enforceable.
EPA cannot delegate the Federal requirements at 40 CFR 261.39(a)(5), 261.40, and 261.41 contained in the Cathode Ray Tubes Rule set forth in 71 FR 42928 (July 28, 2006). Although Alabama has adopted these requirements at Rules 335-14-2-.05(1)(a)5., 335-14-2-.05(2), and 335-14-2-.05(3), EPA will continue to implement those requirements.
Alabama will issue permits for all the provisions for which it is authorized and will administer the permits it issues. EPA will continue to administer any RCRA hazardous waste permits or portions of permits which EPA issued prior to the effective date of this authorization until they expire or are terminated. EPA will not issue any more permits or new portions of permits for the provisions listed in the Table above after the effective date of this authorization. EPA will continue to implement and issue permits for HSWA requirements for which Alabama is not authorized.
Alabama is not authorized to carry out its hazardous waste program in Indian Country within the State, which includes the Poarch Band of Creek Indians. EPA will continue to implement and administer the RCRA program in these lands.
Codification is the process of placing the State's statutes and regulations that comprise the State's authorized hazardous waste program into the Code of Federal Regulations. EPA does this by referencing the authorized State rules in 40 CFR part 272. EPA is not codifying the authorization of Alabama's changes at this time. However, EPA reserves the amendment of 40 CFR part 272, subpart B, for the authorization of Alabama's program changes at a later date.
The Office of Management and Budget (OMB) has exempted this action from the requirements of Executive Order 12866 (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993), and therefore this action is not subject to review by OMB. This action authorizes State requirements for the purpose of RCRA 3006 and imposes no additional requirements beyond those imposed by State law. Accordingly, I certify that this action will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601
Under RCRA section 3006(b), EPA grants a State's application for authorization as long as the State meets the criteria required by RCRA. It would thus be inconsistent with applicable law for EPA, when it reviews a State authorization application, to require the use of any particular voluntary consensus standard in place of another standard that otherwise satisfies the requirements of RCRA. Thus, the
The Congressional Review Act, 5 U.S.C. 801
Environmental protection, Administrative practice and procedure, Confidential business information, Hazardous waste, Hazardous waste transportation, Indian lands, Intergovernmental relations, Penalties, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.
Health Resources and Services Administration, HHS.
Interim final rule; further delay of effective date with comment.
The Health Resources and Services Administration (HRSA) administers section 340B of the Public Health Service Act (PHSA), which is referred to as the “340B Drug Pricing Program” or the “340B Program.” The January 5, 2017 final rule sets forth the calculation of the ceiling price and application of civil monetary penalties, and applies to all drug manufacturers that are required to make their drugs available to covered entities under the 340B Program. This interim final rule delays the effective date of the final rule published in the
As of March 20, 2017, the effective date of the final rule published in the
You may submit comments, identified by the Regulatory Information Number (RIN) 0906-AA89, by any of the following methods. Please submit your comments in only one of these ways to minimize the receipt of duplicate submissions. The first is the preferred method.
•
•
•
All submitted comments will be available to the public in their entirety. Please do not submit confidential commercial information or personal identifying information that you do not want in the public domain.
CAPT Krista Pedley, Director, OPA, HSB, HRSA, 5600 Fishers Lane, Mail Stop 08W05A, Rockville, MD 20857, or by telephone at 301-594-4353.
In September 2010, HHS published an advanced notice of proposed rulemaking (ANPRM) in the
On January 5, 2017, HHS published a final rule in the
Under Section 553(b) of the Administrative Procedure Act (APA) (5 U.S.C. 551
In order to promote the public interest in fulfilling the “Regulatory Freeze Pending Review” memorandum instruction to agencies to review substantial questions of fact, law, and policy in regulations not currently in effect, HHS feels that it is necessary to delay immediately the effective date of this rule. In addition, the January 20, 2017, Executive Order entitled, “Minimizing the Economic Burden of the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act Pending Repeal,” specifically instructs HHS and all other heads of executive offices to utilize all authority and discretion available to delay the implementation of certain provisions or requirements of the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act.
The provisions of the APA that ordinarily require a notice of proposed rulemaking do not apply here because public health, safety, and welfare could be harmed by allowing the final rule to go into effect without a delay. There are substantive questions raised, and HHS will be further considering questions of fact, law, and policy presented by the rule consistent with the “Regulatory Freeze Pending Review” memorandum. In this unique circumstance, allowing the regulation to become effective while further consideration is ongoing, prior to further proper consideration of all the relevant facts, would exacerbate the burdens conveyed in comments submitted in the prior rulemaking. Requiring manufacturers to make targeted and potentially costly changes to pricing systems and business procedures in order to come into compliance with a rule that is itself subject to further agency consideration and for which there are substantive questions raised would be disruptive. Given the comments, it appears that objections regarding the timing and challenges of compliance with the rule, 82 FR 1211, as well as other objections to the rule, may not have been adequately considered, thereby requiring additional time and public comment before the rule goes into effect. Providing a public comment period before delaying the effective date is impracticable given the impending deadline.
HHS also finds that good cause exists for immediate implementation of this interim final rule and waiver of the Administrative Procedure Act's 30-day delay in the effective date. The 30-day delay is normally intended to give affected parties time to adjust their business practices and make preparations before a final rule takes effect. Because the action being taken delays the effective date to May 22, 2017, at the earliest, a 30-day delay in effect of this action is unnecessary. The effective date delay will permit those subject to the rule extra time to comply with the rule until at least May 22, 2017.
HHS has examined the effects of this interim final rule as required by Executive Order 12866 on Regulatory Planning and Review (September 30, 1993), Executive Order 13563 on Improving Regulation and Regulatory Review (January 8, 2011), the Regulatory Flexibility Act (Pub. L. 96-354, September 19, 1980), the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (Pub. L. 104-4), and Executive Order 13132 on Federalism (August 4, 1999).
Executive Orders 12866 and 13563 direct agencies to assess all costs and benefits of available regulatory alternatives and, if regulation is necessary, to select regulatory approaches that maximize net benefits (including potential economic, environmental, public health and safety effects, distributive impacts, and equity). Executive Order 13563 is supplemental to and reaffirms the principles, structures, and definitions governing regulatory review as established in Executive Order 12866, emphasizing the importance of quantifying both costs and benefits, of reducing costs, of harmonizing rules, and of promoting flexibility. Section 3(f) of Executive Order 12866 defines a “significant regulatory action” as an action that is likely to result in a rule: (1) Having an annual effect on the economy of $100 million or more in any 1 year, or adversely and materially affecting a sector of the economy, productivity, competition, jobs, the environment, public health or safety, or State, local, or Tribal governments or communities (also referred to as “economically significant”); (2) creating a serious inconsistency or otherwise interfering with an action taken or planned by another agency; (3) materially altering the budgetary impacts of entitlement grants, user fees,
HHS does not believe that the proposal to delay the effective date of the January 5, 2017, final rule will have an economic impact of $100 million or more, and is therefore not designated as an “economically significant” interim final rule under section 3(f)(1) of the Executive Order 12866. Therefore, the economic impact of having no rule in place related to the policies addressed in the final rule is believed to be minimal, as the policies would not yet be required or enforceable.
The Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601
For purposes of the RFA, HHS considers all health care providers to be small entities either by meeting the Small Business Administration (SBA) size standard for a small business, or for being a nonprofit organization that is not dominant in its market. The current SBA size standard for health care providers ranges from annual receipts of $7 million to $35.5 million. As of January 1, 2017, over 12,000 covered entities participate in the 340B Program, which represent safety-net health care providers across the country. HHS has determined, and the Secretary certifies, that this interim final rule will not have a significant impact on the operations of a substantial number of small manufacturers; therefore, we are not preparing an analysis of impact for this RFA. HHS estimates that the economic impact on small entities and small manufacturers will be minimal. HHS welcomes comments concerning the impact of this interim final rule on small manufacturers and small health care providers.
Section 202(a) of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 requires that agencies prepare a written statement, which includes an assessment of anticipated costs and benefits, before proposing “any rule that includes any Federal mandate that may result in the expenditure by State, local, and Tribal governments, in the aggregate, or by the private sector, of $100 million or more (adjusted annually for inflation) in any one year.” In 2013, that threshold level was approximately $141 million. HHS does not expect this rule to exceed the threshold.
HHS has reviewed this interim final rule in accordance with Executive Order 13132 regarding federalism, and has determined that it does not have “federalism implications.” This interim final rule would not “have substantial direct effects on the States, or on the relationship between the national government and the States, or on the distribution of power and responsibilities among the various levels of government.” This interim final rule would not adversely affect the following family elements: Family safety, family stability, marital commitment; parental rights in the education, nurture, and supervision of their children; family functioning, disposable income or poverty; or the behavior and personal responsibility of youth, as determined under Section 654(c) of the Treasury and General Government Appropriations Act of 1999.
The Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3507(d)) requires that OMB approve all collections of information by a federal agency from the public before they can be implemented. This interim final rule is projected to have no impact on current reporting and recordkeeping burden for manufacturers under the 340B Program. This interim final rule would result in no new reporting burdens. Comments are welcome on the accuracy of this statement.
Federal Emergency Management Agency, DHS.
Final rule.
Base (1% annual-chance) Flood Elevations (BFEs) and modified BFEs are made final for the communities listed below. The BFEs and modified BFEs are the basis for the floodplain management measures that each community is required either to adopt or to show evidence of being already in effect in order to qualify or remain qualified for participation in the National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP).
The date of issuance of the Flood Insurance Rate Map (FIRM) showing BFEs and modified BFEs for each community. This date may be obtained by contacting the office where the maps are available for inspection as indicated in the table below.
The final BFEs for each community are available for inspection at the office of the Chief Executive Officer of each community. The respective addresses are listed in the table below.
Rick Sacbibit, Chief, Engineering Services Branch, Federal Insurance and Mitigation Administration, FEMA, 400 C Street SW., Washington, DC 20472, (202) 646-7659, or (email)
The Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) makes the final determinations listed below for the modified BFEs for
This final rule is issued in accordance with section 110 of the Flood Disaster Protection Act of 1973, 42 U.S.C. 4104, and 44 CFR part 67. FEMA has developed criteria for floodplain management in floodprone areas in accordance with 44 CFR part 60. Interested lessees and owners of real property are encouraged to review the proof Flood Insurance Study and FIRM available at the address cited below for each community. The BFEs and modified BFEs are made final in the communities listed below. Elevations at selected locations in each community are shown.
Administrative practice and procedure, Flood insurance, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.
Accordingly, 44 CFR part 67 is amended as follows:
42 U.S.C. 4001
Federal Emergency Management Agency, DHS.
Final rule.
Base (1% annual-chance) Flood Elevations (BFEs) and modified BFEs are made final for the communities listed below. The BFEs and modified BFEs are the basis for the floodplain management measures that each community is required either to adopt or to show evidence of being already in effect in order to qualify or remain qualified for participation in the National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP).
The date of issuance of the Flood Insurance Rate Map (FIRM) showing BFEs and modified BFEs for each community. This date may be obtained by contacting the office where the maps are available for inspection as indicated in the table below.
The final BFEs for each community are available for inspection at the office of the Chief Executive Officer of each community. The respective addresses are listed in the table below.
Rick Sacbibit, Chief, Engineering Services Branch, Federal Insurance and Mitigation Administration, FEMA, 400 C Street SW., Washington, DC 20472, (202) 646-7659, or (email)
The Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) makes the final determinations listed below for the modified BFEs for each community listed. These modified elevations have been published in newspapers of local circulation and ninety (90) days have elapsed since that publication. The Deputy Associate Administrator for Insurance and Mitigation has resolved any appeals resulting from this notification.
This final rule is issued in accordance with section 110 of the Flood Disaster Protection Act of 1973, 42 U.S.C. 4104, and 44 CFR part 67. FEMA has developed criteria for floodplain management in floodprone areas in accordance with 44 CFR part 60.
Interested lessees and owners of real property are encouraged to review the proof Flood Insurance Study and FIRM available at the address cited below for each community.
The BFEs and modified BFEs are made final in the communities listed below. Elevations at selected locations in each community are shown.
Administrative practice and procedure, Flood insurance, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.
Accordingly, 44 CFR part 67 is amended as follows:
42 U.S.C. 4001
Federal Communications Commission.
Final rule; correction and technical amendment.
This document corrects errors in the supplementary information and final rules portions of a
Effective March 20, 2017.
Alexander Minard, Wireline Competition Bureau, (202) 418-7400.
This summary contains corrections and technical amendments to the supplementary information portion of a
In final rule FR Doc. 2016-08375, published April 25, 2016 (81 FR 24282), make the following preamble corrections:
1. On page 24286, in the first column, in paragraph 24, twenty first, twenty second, twenty third, twenty fourth, twenty fifth, twenty sixth, twenty seventh, twenty eighth, twenty ninth, thirtieth and thirty first lines, replace “The Commission does not set interim milestones for the deployment of broadband speeds of 25/3 Mbps; the Commission requires carriers receiving model-based support to offer to at least 25/3 Mbps broadband service carriers to 25 percent or 75 percent of the requisite locations by the end of the 10-year term, depending upon the state-level density discussed above” with “The Commission does not set interim milestones for the deployment of broadband speeds of 25/3 Mbps; the Commission requires carriers receiving model-based support to offer at least 25/3 Mbps broadband service to 25 percent, 50 percent or 75 percent of the requisite locations by the end of the 10-year term, depending upon the state-level density discussed above.”
2. On page 24286, in the third column, in paragraph 28, third line, replace “final version A-CAM” with “final version of A-CAM.”
3. On page 24287, in the first column, in paragraph 29, thirteenth line, replace “where the incumbent” with “where an incumbent.”
4. On page 24296, in the second column, in paragraph 93, first and second lines, replace “Within 30 days of the effective date of this Report and Order” with “Within 30 days of the release of a Public Notice announcing that the Commission has obtained the appropriate Paperwork Reduction Act approval.”
5. On page 24300, in the first column, replace the current chart with the corrected chart below.
6. On page 24303, in the second column, in paragraph 142, twelfth and thirteenth lines, replace “specific five-year” with “specific amount of.”
7. On page 24304, in the third column, in paragraph 152, fifteenth line, replace “$647.42” with “$647.87.”
8. On page 24304, in the third column, eighteenth line, replace “$744.53” with “$745.06” and “$62.04” with “$62.09.”
Communications common carriers, Health facilities, Infants and children, Internet, Libraries, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Schools, Telecommunications, Telephone.
Communications common carriers, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Telephone.
Accordingly, 47 CFR parts 54 and 69 are corrected by making the following correcting amendments:
47 U.S.C. 151, 154(i), 155, 201, 205, 214, 219, 220, 254, 303(r), 403, and 1302 unless otherwise noted.
(b) For purposes of this section, universal service support is defined as the sum of the amounts calculated pursuant to §§ 54.1304, 54.1310, 54.305, and 54.901 through 54.904. Line counts for purposes of this section shall be as of the most recent line counts reported pursuant to § 54.903(a)(1).
(c) The Administrator, in order to limit support to $250 for affected carriers, shall reduce safety net additive support, high-cost loop support, safety valve support, and Connect America Fund Broadband Loop Support in proportion to the relative amounts of each support the study area would receive absent such limitation.
(a) * * *
(1) Total eligible annual operating expenses per location shall be limited as follows: Calculate Exp(Y
(b)
(c) * * *
(2)
(e)
(f) * * *
(1) Maximum Average Per Location Construction Project Loop Plant Investment Limitation equals the inflation adjusted equivalent to $10,000 in the Reference Year calculated by multiplying $10,000 times the applicable annual GDP-CPI. This inflation adjusted amount will be normalized across all study areas by multiplying the product above by (the Loop Cap Adjustment Factor times the Construction Limit Factor)
(a) * * *
(2) * * *
(iii) * * *
(B) No rate-of-return carrier shall deploy terrestrial wireline technology to unserved locations to meet this obligation if that would exceed the per location/per project capital investment allowance set forth in § 54.303(f)(1).
(d)
(c) * * *
(1) * * *
(i) An eligible telecommunications carrier that files after the March 1 deadline, but by March 8, will have its support reduced in an amount equivalent to seven days in support;
(a) High-cost universal service support provided pursuant to subparts K and M of this part shall be eliminated in an incumbent rate-of-return local exchange carrier study area where an unsubsidized competitor, or combination of unsubsidized competitors, as defined in § 54.5, offer(s) to 100 percent of the residential and business locations in the study area voice and broadband service at speeds of at least 10 Mbps downstream/1 Mbps upstream, with latency suitable for real-time applications, including Voice over Internet Protocol, and usage capacity that is reasonably comparable to comparable offerings in urban areas, at rates that are reasonably comparable to rates for comparable offerings in urban areas.
(g) * * *
(1) In the first year, 83 percent of the incumbent's disaggregated support for the competitive census blocks will be provided;
(2) In the second year, 66 percent of the incumbent's disaggregated support for the competitive census blocks will be provided;
(3) In the third year, 49 percent of the incumbent's disaggregated support for the competitive census blocks will be provided;
(4) In the fourth year, 32 percent of the incumbent's disaggregated support the competitive census block will be provided;
(5) In the fifth year, 15 percent of the incumbent's disaggregated support the competitive census blocks will be provided;
(c) * * *
(2) The portion of the monthly per-loop amount computed pursuant to § 54.1308(a)(4)(ii) that would be allocated to the Interstate Common Line Revenue Requirement or Consumer Broadband-only Loop Revenue Requirement pursuant to § 69.409 of this chapter.
47 U.S.C. 154, 201, 202, 203, 205, 218, 220, 254, 403.
(b) * * *
(1) To determine the investment in Common Line facilities as if 100 percent were allocated to the interstate jurisdiction, a carrier shall use 100 percent as the interstate allocator in determining investment and the allocation of investment to the common line category under part 36 of this chapter and this part.
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
Proposed rule.
Alabama has applied to the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) for final authorization of changes to its hazardous waste program under the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA). These changes correspond to certain Federal rules promulgated between July 1, 2006 through June 30, 2008, and July 1, 2011 through June, 30, 2014 (also known as RCRA Clusters XVII through XVIII, and XXII through XXIII). With this proposed rule, EPA is proposing to grant final authorization to Alabama for these changes.
Send your written comments by April 19, 2017.
Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID No. EPA-R04-RCRA-2016-0497, by one of the following methods:
•
•
•
•
•
Please see the direct final rule in the “Rules and Regulations” section of today's
Audrey Baker, RCRA Programs and Materials Management Section, Materials and Waste Management Branch, Resource Conservation and Restoration Division, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Atlanta Federal Center, 61 Forsyth Street SW., Atlanta, Georgia 30303-8960; telephone number: (404) 562-8483; fax number: (404) 562-9964; email address:
Along with this proposed rule, EPA is publishing a direct final rule in the “Rules and Regulations” section of today's
Office of the Chief Procurement Officer, Department of Homeland Security (DHS).
Notice of proposed rulemaking; extension of comment period.
DHS is extending the comment periods for the following three notices of proposed rulemaking (proposed rules) published on January 19, 2017: “Safeguarding of Controlled Unclassified Information,” “Information Technology Security Awareness Training,” and “Privacy Training.” DHS is extending the comment period by 30 days to ensure the public has sufficient time to review and provide comment on these proposed rules.
The comment periods for the proposed rules published in the
Submit comments identified by HSAR Case 2015-001, Safeguarding of Controlled Unclassified Information; HSAR Case 2015-002, Information Technology Security Awareness Training; and HSAR Case 2015-003, Privacy Training using any of the following methods:
•
•
•
Comments received generally will be posted without change to
To avoid duplication, please use only one of these three methods. See the “Public Participation and Request for Comments” portion of the
Ms. Candace Lightfoot, Procurement Analyst, DHS, Office of the Chief Procurement Officer, Acquisition Policy and Legislation at (202) 447-0882 or email
We encourage you to participate in this rulemaking by submitting comments and related materials. All comments received will be posted without change to
If you submit a comment, please include the docket number for the applicable rulemaking (DHS-2017-0006, DHS-2017-0007, or DHS-2017-0008), indicate the specific section of each document to which each comment applies, and provide a reason for each suggestion or recommendation. You may submit your comments and material online, by fax or mail, but please use only one of these means. We recommend that you include your name and a mailing address, an email address, or a phone number in the body of your document so that we can contact you if we have questions regarding your submission.
To submit your comment online, go to
To view comments, as well as documents mentioned in this preamble as being available in the docket, go to
On January 19, 2017, DHS published the following three proposed rules: “Safeguarding of Controlled Unclassified Information (HSAR Case 2015-001),” “Information Technology Security Awareness Training (HSAR Case 2015-002),” and “Privacy Training (HSAR Case 2015-003)” (82 FR 6429, 82 FR 6446, and 82 FR 6425 respectively). The three rules propose to amend the HSAR in the following ways: (1) Ensure contractors understand their responsibilities with regard to safeguarding controlled unclassified information (CUI); (2) ensure contractor and subcontractor employees complete information technology (IT) security awareness training before DHS provides them with access to DHS information systems and information resources or contractor-owned and/or operated information systems and information resources where CUI is collected, processed, stored or transmitted on behalf of the agency; (3) ensure that contractor and subcontractor employees sign the DHS Rules of Behavior before DHS provides them with access to DHS information systems, information resources, or contractor-owned and/or operated information systems and information resources where CUI is collected, processed, stored or transmitted on behalf of the agency; and (4) ensure contractor and subcontractor employees complete privacy training before accessing a Government system of records; handling personally identifiable information (PII) and/or sensitive PII information; or designing, developing, maintaining, or operating a system of records on behalf of the Government.
Comments on these proposed rules were originally due by March 20, 2017. However, a number of parties have requested additional time to review the proposed rules and submit comments. Thus, to ensure the public has sufficient time to review the proposed rules and submit comments, DHS is extending the comment periods by 30 days.
The Department of Agriculture has submitted the following information collection requirement(s) to OMB for review and clearance under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, Public Law 104-13. Comments are requested regarding (1) whether the collection of information is necessary for the proper performance of the functions of the agency, including whether the information will have practical utility; (2) the accuracy of the agency's estimate of burden including the validity of the methodology and assumptions used; (3) ways to enhance the quality, utility and clarity of the information to be collected; and (4) ways to minimize the burden of the collection of information on those who are to respond, including through the use of appropriate automated, electronic, mechanical, or other technological collection techniques or other forms of information technology.
Comments regarding this information collection received by April 19, 2017 will be considered. Written comments should be addressed to: Desk Officer for Agriculture, Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, Office of Management and Budget (OMB), New Executive Office Building, 725-17th Street NW., Washington, DC 20503. Commentors are encouraged to submit their comments to OMB via email to:
An agency may not conduct or sponsor a collection of information unless the collection of information displays a currently valid OMB control number and the agency informs potential persons who are to respond to the collection of information that such persons are not required to respond to the collection of information unless it displays a currently valid OMB control number.
The Department of Agriculture has submitted the following information collection requirement(s) to OMB for review and clearance under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, Public Law 104-13. Comments are required regarding (1) whether the collection of information is necessary for the proper performance of the functions of the agency, including whether the information will have practical utility; (2) the accuracy of the agency's estimate of burden including the validity of the methodology and assumptions used; (3) ways to enhance the quality, utility and clarity of the information to be collected; and (4) ways to minimize the burden of the collection of information on those who are to respond, including through the use of appropriate automated, electronic, mechanical, or other technological collection techniques or other forms of information technology.
Comments regarding this information collection received by April 19, 2017 will be considered. Written comments should be addressed to: Desk Officer for Agriculture, Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, Office of Management and Budget (OMB), New Executive Office Building, 725—17th Street NW., Washington, DC 20502. Commenters are encouraged to submit their comments to OMB via email to:
An agency may not conduct or sponsor a collection of information unless the collection of information displays a currently valid OMB control number and the agency informs potential persons who are to respond to the collection of information that such persons are not required to respond to the collection of information unless it displays a currently valid OMB control number.
Enforcement and Compliance, International Trade Administration, Department of Commerce.
The Department of Commerce (the Department) published the
Effective March 20, 2017.
Susan Pulongbarit or Omar Qureshi, AD/CVD Operations, Office V, Enforcement and Compliance, International Trade Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce, 1401 Constitution Avenue NW., Washington, DC 20230; telephone 202-482-4031 or 202-482-5307, respectively.
The Department published the
In accordance with 19 CFR 351.309, we invited parties to comment on our
The merchandise covered by the order includes certain steel nails having a shaft length up to 12 inches. Certain steel nails subject to the order are currently classified under the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States (“HTSUS”) subheadings 7317.00.55, 7317.00.65, 7317.00.75, and 7907.00.6000.
We addressed all issues raised in the case and rebuttal briefs by parties to this review in the I&D Memo. Attached to this notice, in Appendix I, is a list of the issues which parties raised. The I&D Memo is a public document and is on file in the Central Records Unit (“CRU”), Room B8024 of the main Department of Commerce building, as
Based on a review of the record and comments received from interested parties regarding our
In the
Pursuant to 19 CFR 351.213(d)(1), the Secretary will rescind an administrative review, in whole or in part, if a party who requested the review withdraws the request within 90-days of the date of publication of notice of initiation of the requested review. Petitioner withdrew its request for an administrative review on CPI, Chiieh Yung Metal Industrial Corporation, Mingguang Abundant Hardware Products Co., Ltd., and Shandong Oriental Cherry Hardware Group; no other party requested a review of these companies.
Accordingly, we are rescinding this review, in part, with respect to these companies, pursuant to 19 CFR 351.213(d)(1).
The weighted-average dumping margins for the administrative review are as follows:
Pursuant to section 751(a)(2)(A) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (the Act), and 19 CFR 351.212(b), the Department has determined, and U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) shall assess, antidumping duties on all appropriate entries of subject merchandise in accordance with the final results of this review. The Department intends to issue appropriate assessment instructions directly to CBP 15 days after publication of the final results of this administrative review.
Where the respondent reported reliable entered values, we calculated importer- (or customer-) specific
Pursuant to the Department's assessment practice, for entries that were not reported in the U.S. sales databases submitted by companies individually examined during this review, the Department will instruct CBP to liquidate such entries at the PRC-wide entity rate. Additionally, if the Department determines that an exporter had no shipments of the subject merchandise, any suspended entries that entered under that exporter's case number (
The following cash deposit requirements will be effective upon publication of the final results of this administrative review for all shipments of the subject merchandise entered, or withdrawn from warehouse, for consumption on or after the publication date, as provided for by section 751(a)(2)(C) of the Act: (1) For the exporters listed above, the cash deposit rate will be the rate established in the final results of review (except, if the rate is zero or
We intend to disclose the calculations performed regarding these final results within five days of the date of publication of this notice to parties in this proceeding in accordance with 19 CFR 351.224(b).
This notice also serves as a final reminder to importers of their responsibility under 19 CFR 351.402(f) to file a certificate regarding the reimbursement of antidumping duties prior to liquidation of the relevant entries during this POR. Failure to comply with this requirement could result in the Department's presumption that reimbursement of antidumping duties occurred and the subsequent assessment of doubled antidumping duties.
This notice also serves as a reminder to parties subject to administrative protective order (APO) of their responsibility concerning the return or destruction of proprietary information disclosed under APO in accordance with 19 CFR 351.305(a)(3), which continues to govern business proprietary information in this segment of the proceeding. Timely written notification of the return or destruction of APO materials, or conversion to judicial protective order, is hereby requested. Failure to comply with the regulations and terms of an APO is a violation which is subject to sanction.
We are issuing and publishing these final results of administrative review in accordance with sections 751(a)(1) and 777(i) of the Act.
Enforcement and Compliance, International Trade Administration, Department of Commerce.
Based on affirmative final determinations by the Department of Commerce (the Department) and the International Trade Commission (ITC), the Department is issuing a countervailing duty order on Certain Carbon and Alloy Steel Cut-to-Length
Effective March 20, 2017.
Ryan Mullen, AD/CVD Operations, Office V, Enforcement and Compliance, International Trade Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce, 1401 Constitution Avenue NW., Washington, DC 20230; telephone: (202) 482-5260.
In accordance with section 705(d) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (the Act), on January 26, 2017, the Department published its affirmative final determination in the countervailable investigation of CTL plate from the PRC.
The products covered by this order are certain carbon and alloy steel hot-rolled or forged flat plate products not in coils, whether or not painted, varnished, or coated with plastics or other non-metallic substances (cut-to-length plate). Subject merchandise includes plate that is produced by being cut-to-length from coils or from other discrete length plate and plate that is rolled or forged into a discrete length. The products covered include (1) Universal mill plates (
For purposes of the width and thickness requirements referenced above, the following rules apply:
(1) except where otherwise stated where the nominal and actual thickness or width measurements vary, a product from a given subject country is within the scope if application of either the nominal or actual measurement would place it within the scope based on the definitions set forth above; and
(2) where the width and thickness vary for a specific product (
Steel products included in the scope of this order are products in which: (1) Iron predominates, by weight, over each of the other contained elements; and (2) the carbon content is 2 percent or less by weight.
Subject merchandise includes cut-to-length plate that has been further processed in the subject country or a third country, including but not limited to pickling, oiling, levelling, annealing, tempering, temper rolling, skin passing, painting, varnishing, trimming, cutting, punching, beveling, and/or slitting, or any other processing that would not otherwise remove the merchandise from the scope of the order if performed in the country of manufacture of the cut-to-length plate.
All products that meet the written physical description, are within the scope of this order unless specifically excluded or covered by the scope of an existing order. The following products are outside of, and/or specifically excluded from, the scope of this order:
(1) Products clad, plated, or coated with metal, whether or not painted, varnished or coated with plastic or other non-metallic substances;
(2) military grade armor plate certified to one of the following specifications or to a specification that references and incorporates one of the following specifications:
(3) stainless steel plate, containing 10.5 percent or more of chromium by weight and not more than 1.2 percent of carbon by weight;
(4) CTL plate meeting the requirements of ASTM A-829, Grade E 4340 that are over 305 mm in actual thickness;
(5) Alloy forged and rolled CTL plate greater than or equal to 152.4 mm in actual thickness meeting each of the following requirements:
(a) Electric furnace melted, ladle refined & vacuum degassed and having a chemical composition (expressed in weight percentages):
(b) With a Brinell hardness measured in all parts of the product including mid thickness falling within one of the following ranges:
(c) Having cleanliness in accordance with ASTM E45 method A (Thin and Heavy): A not exceeding 1.5, B not exceeding 1.0, C not exceeding 0.5, D not exceeding 1.5; and
(d) Conforming to ASTM A578-S9 ultrasonic testing requirements with acceptance criteria 2 mm flat bottom hole;
(6) Alloy forged and rolled steel CTL plate over 407 mm in actual thickness and meeting the following requirements:
(a) Made from Electric Arc Furnace melted, Ladle refined & vacuum degassed, alloy steel with the following chemical composition (expressed in weight percentages):
(b) Having cleanliness in accordance with ASTM E45 method A (Thin and Heavy): A not exceeding 1.5, B not exceeding 1.5, C not exceeding 1.0, D not exceeding 1.5;
(c) Having the following mechanical properties:
(i) With a Brinell hardness not more than 237 HBW measured in all parts of the product including mid thickness; and having a Yield Strength of 75ksi min and UTS 95ksi or more, Elongation of 18% or more and Reduction of area 35% or more; having charpy V at −75 degrees F in the longitudinal direction equal or greater than 15 ft. lbs (single value) and equal or greater than 20 ft. lbs (average of 3 specimens) and conforming to the requirements of NACE MR01-75; or
(ii) With a Brinell hardness not less than 240 HBW measured in all parts of the product including mid thickness; and having a Yield Strength of 90 ksi min and UTS 110 ksi or more, Elongation of 15% or more and Reduction of area 30% or more; having charpy V at −40 degrees F in the longitudinal direction equal or greater than 21 ft. lbs (single value) and equal or greater than 31 ft. lbs (average of 3 specimens);
(d) Conforming to ASTM A578-S9 ultrasonic testing requirements with acceptance criteria 3.2 mm flat bottom hole; and
(e) Conforming to magnetic particle inspection in accordance with AMS 2301;
(7) Alloy forged and rolled steel CTL plate over 407 mm in actual thickness and meeting the following requirements:
(a) Made from Electric Arc Furnace melted, ladle refined & vacuum degassed, alloy steel with the following chemical composition (expressed in weight percentages):
(b) Having cleanliness in accordance with ASTM E45 method A (Thin and Heavy): A not exceeding 1.0(t) and 0.5(h), B not exceeding 1.5(t) and 1.0(h), C not exceeding 1.0(t) and 0.5(h), and D not exceeding 1.5(t) and 1.0(h);
(c) Having the following mechanical properties: A Brinell hardness not less than 350 HBW measured in all parts of the product including mid thickness; and having a Yield Strength of 145ksi or more and UTS 160ksi or more, Elongation of 15% or more and Reduction of area 35% or more; having charpy V at −40 degrees F in the transverse direction equal or greater than 20 ft. lbs (single value) and equal or greater than 25 ft. lbs (average of 3 specimens);
(d) Conforming to ASTM A578-S9 ultrasonic testing requirements with acceptance criteria 3.2 mm flat bottom hole; and
(e) Conforming to magnetic particle inspection in accordance with AMS 2301.
The products subject to the order are currently classified in the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States (HTSUS) under item numbers: 7208.40.3030, 7208.40.3060, 7208.51.0030, 7208.51.0045, 7208.51.0060, 7208.52.0000, 7211.13.0000, 7211.14.0030, 7211.14.0045, 7225.40.1110, 7225.40.1180, 7225.40.3005, 7225.40.3050, 7226.20.0000, and 7226.91.5000.
The products subject to the order may also enter under the following HTSUS item numbers: 7208.40.6060, 7208.53.0000, 7208.90.0000, 7210.70.3000, 7210.90.9000, 7211.19.1500, 7211.19.2000, 7211.19.4500, 7211.19.6000, 7211.19.7590, 7211.90.0000, 7212.40.1000, 7212.40.5000, 7212.50.0000, 7214.10.0000, 7214.30.0010, 7214.30.0080, 7214.91.0015, 7214.91.0060, 7214.91.0090, 7225.11.0000, 7225.19.0000, 7225.40.5110, 7225.40.5130, 7225.40.5160, 7225.40.7000, 7225.99.0010, 7225.99.0090, 7226.11.1000, 7226.11.9060, 7226.19.1000, 7226.19.9000, 7226.91.0500, 7226.91.1530, 7226.91.1560, 7226.91.2530, 7226.91.2560, 7226.91.7000, 7226.91.8000, and 7226.99.0180.
The HTSUS subheadings above are provided for convenience and customs purposes only. The written description of the scope of the order is dispositive.
In accordance with sections 705(b)(1)(A) and 705(d) of the Act, the ITC has notified the Department of its final determination in this investigation, in which it found that imports of CTL plate from the PRC are materially injuring or threatening material injury to a U.S. industry.
As a result of the ITC's final determinations, in accordance with section 706(a) of the Act, the Department will direct U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) to assess, upon further instruction by the Department, countervailing duties on unliquidated entries of CTL plate from the PRC entered, or withdrawn from warehouse, for consumption on or after September 13, 2016, the date on which the Department published its preliminary countervailing duty determinations in the
In accordance with section 706 of the Act, the Department will instruct CBP to reinstitute the suspension of liquidation of subject merchandise from the PRC, effective on the date of publication of the ITC's notice of final determinations
This notice constitutes the countervailing duty order with respect to CTL plate from the PRC pursuant to section 706(a) of the Act. Interested parties may contact the Department's Central Records Unit, Room B8024 of the main Commerce Building, for copies of an updated list of countervailing duty orders currently in effect.
This order is issued and published in accordance with section 706(a) of the Act and 19 CFR 351.211(b).
Enforcement and Compliance, International Trade Administration, Department of Commerce.
The Department of Commerce is rescinding the administrative review of the countervailing duty order on lightweight thermal paper from the People's Republic of China. The period of review is January 1, 2015, through December 31, 2015.
Effective March 20, 2017.
Aimee Phelan at (202) 482-0697, AD/CVD Operations, Office I, Enforcement and Compliance, International Trade Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce, 1401 Constitution Avenue NW., Washington, DC 20230.
On November 4, 2016, the Department of Commerce (the Department) published a notice of opportunity to request an administrative review of the countervailing duty order on lightweight thermal paper (LWTP) from the People's Republic of China (PRC) for the period of review (POR) of January 1, 2015, through December 31, 2015.
It is the Department's practice to rescind an administrative review of a countervailing duty order, pursuant to 19 CFR 351.213(d)(3), when there are no reviewable entries of subject merchandise during the POR for which liquidation is suspended.
This notice is issued and published pursuant to section 751(a)(l) and 777(i)(1) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended, and 19 CFR 351.213(d)(4).
Enforcement and Compliance, International Trade Administration, Department of Commerce.
Based on affirmative final determinations by the Department of Commerce (the Department) and the International Trade Commission (ITC), the Department is issuing an antidumping duty order on Certain Carbon and Alloy Steel Cut-to-Length Plate (CTL plate) from the People's Republic of China (PRC).
Effective March 20, 2017.
Irene Gorelik, AD/CVD Operations, Office VIII, Enforcement and Compliance, International Trade Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce, 1401 Constitution Avenue
In accordance with section 735(d) and 777(i)(1) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (the Act), and 19 CFR 351.210(c), on January 26, 2017, the Department published its affirmative final determination in the less than fair value (LTFV) investigation of CTL plate from the PRC.
The products covered by this order are certain carbon and alloy steel hot-rolled or forged flat plate products not in coils, whether or not painted, varnished, or coated with plastics or other non-metallic substances (cut-to-length plate). Subject merchandise includes plate that is produced by being cut-to-length from coils or from other discrete length plate and plate that is rolled or forged into a discrete length. The products covered include (1) Universal mill plates (
(1) except where otherwise stated where the nominal and actual thickness or width measurements vary, a product from a given subject country is within the scope if application of either the nominal or actual measurement would place it within the scope based on the definitions set forth above unless the product is already covered by an order existing on that specific country (
(2) where the width and thickness vary for a specific product (
Steel products included in the scope of this order are products in which: (1) Iron predominates, by weight, over each of the other contained elements; and (2) the carbon content is 2 percent or less by weight.
Subject merchandise includes cut-to-length plate that has been further processed in the subject country or a third country, including but not limited to pickling, oiling, levelling, annealing, tempering, temper rolling, skin passing, painting, varnishing, trimming, cutting, punching, beveling, and/or slitting, or any other processing that would not otherwise remove the merchandise from the scope of the order if performed in the country of manufacture of the cut-to-length plate.
All products that meet the written physical description, are within the scope of this order unless specifically excluded or covered by the scope of an existing order. The following products are outside of, and/or specifically excluded from, the scope of this order:
(1) Products clad, plated, or coated with metal, whether or not painted, varnished or coated with plastic or other non-metallic substances;
(2) military grade armor plate certified to one of the following specifications or to a specification that references and incorporates one of the following specifications:
(3) stainless steel plate, containing 10.5 percent or more of chromium by weight and not more than 1.2 percent of carbon by weight;
(4) CTL plate meeting the requirements of ASTM A-829, Grade E 4340 that are over 305 mm in actual thickness;
(5) Alloy forged and rolled CTL plate greater than or equal to 152.4 mm in actual thickness meeting each of the following requirements:
(a) Electric furnace melted, ladle refined & vacuum degassed and having a chemical composition (expressed in weight percentages):
(b) With a Brinell hardness measured in all parts of the product including mid thickness falling within one of the following ranges:
(c) Having cleanliness in accordance with ASTM E45 method A (Thin and Heavy): A not exceeding 1.5, B not exceeding 1.0, C not exceeding 0.5, D not exceeding 1.5; and
(d) Conforming to ASTM A578-S9 ultrasonic testing requirements with acceptance criteria 2 mm flat bottom hole;
(6) Alloy forged and rolled steel CTL plate over 407 mm in actual thickness and meeting the following requirements:
(a) Made from Electric Arc Furnace melted, Ladle refined & vacuum degassed, alloy steel with the following chemical composition (expressed in weight percentages):
(b) Having cleanliness in accordance with ASTM E45 method A (Thin and Heavy): A not exceeding 1.5, B not exceeding 1.5, C not exceeding 1.0, D not exceeding 1.5;
(c) Having the following mechanical properties:
(i) With a Brinell hardness not more than 237 HBW measured in all parts of the product including mid thickness; and having a Yield Strength of 75ksi min and UTS 95ksi or more, Elongation of 18% or more and Reduction of area 35% or more; having charpy V at −75 degrees F in the longitudinal direction equal or greater than 15 ft. lbs (single value) and equal or greater than 20 ft. lbs (average of 3 specimens) and conforming to the requirements of NACE MR01-75; or
(ii) With a Brinell hardness not less than 240 HBW measured in all parts of the product including mid thickness; and having a Yield Strength of 90 ksi min and UTS 110 ksi or more, Elongation of 15% or more and Reduction of area 30% or more; having charpy V at −40 degrees F in the longitudinal direction equal or greater than 21 ft. lbs (single value) and equal or greater than 31 ft. lbs (average of 3 specimens);
(d) Conforming to ASTM A578-S9 ultrasonic testing requirements with acceptance criteria 3.2 mm flat bottom hole; and
(e) Conforming to magnetic particle inspection in accordance with AMS 2301;
(7) Alloy forged and rolled steel CTL plate over 407 mm in actual thickness and meeting the following requirements:
(a) Made from Electric Arc Furnace melted, ladle refined & vacuum degassed, alloy steel with the following chemical composition (expressed in weight percentages):
(b) Having cleanliness in accordance with ASTM E45 method A (Thin and Heavy): A not exceeding 1.0(t) and 0.5(h), B not exceeding 1.5(t) and 1.0(h), C not exceeding 1.0(t) and 0.5(h), and D not exceeding 1.5(t) and 1.0(h);
(c) Having the following mechanical properties: A Brinell hardness not less than 350 HBW measured in all parts of the product including mid thickness; and having a Yield Strength of 145ksi or more and UTS 160ksi or more, Elongation of 15% or more and Reduction of area 35% or more; having charpy V at −40 degrees F in the transverse direction equal or greater than 20 ft. lbs (single value) and equal or greater than 25 ft. lbs (average of 3 specimens);
(d) Conforming to ASTM A578-S9 ultrasonic testing requirements with acceptance criteria 3.2 mm flat bottom hole; and
(e) Conforming to magnetic particle inspection in accordance with AMS 2301.
Excluded from the scope of the antidumping duty order on cut-to-length plate from the People's Republic of China are any products covered by the existing antidumping duty order on certain cut-to-length carbon steel plate from the People's Republic of China.
The products subject to the order are currently classified in the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States (HTSUS) under item numbers: 7208.40.3030, 7208.40.3060, 7208.51.0030, 7208.51.0045, 7208.51.0060, 7208.52.0000, 7211.13.0000, 7211.14.0030, 7211.14.0045, 7225.40.1110, 7225.40.1180, 7225.40.3005, 7225.40.3050, 7226.20.0000, and 7226.91.5000.
The products subject to the order may also enter under the following HTSUS item numbers: 7208.40.6060, 7208.53.0000, 7208.90.0000, 7210.70.3000, 7210.90.9000, 7211.19.1500, 7211.19.2000, 7211.19.4500, 7211.19.6000, 7211.19.7590, 7211.90.0000, 7212.40.1000, 7212.40.5000, 7212.50.0000, 7214.10.0000, 7214.30.0010, 7214.30.0080, 7214.91.0015, 7214.91.0060, 7214.91.0090, 7225.11.0000, 7225.19.0000, 7225.40.5110, 7225.40.5130, 7225.40.5160, 7225.40.7000, 7225.99.0010, 7225.99.0090, 7226.11.1000, 7226.11.9060, 7226.19.1000, 7226.19.9000, 7226.91.0500, 7226.91.1530, 7226.91.1560, 7226.91.2530, 7226.91.2560, 7226.91.7000, 7226.91.8000, and 7226.99.0180.
The HTSUS subheadings above are provided for convenience and customs purposes only. The written description of the scope of the order is dispositive.
In accordance with sections 735(b)(1)(A)(i) and 735(d) of the Act, the ITC has notified the Department of its final determination in this investigation, in which it found that imports of CTL plate from the PRC are materially injuring or threatening material injury to a U.S. industry.
As a result of the ITC's final determination, in accordance with section 736(a)(1) of the Act, the Department will direct U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) to assess, upon further instruction by the Department, antidumping duties equal to the amount by which the normal value of the merchandise exceeds the export price (or constructed export price) of the merchandise, for all relevant entries of CTL plate from the PRC. These antidumping duties will be assessed on unliquidated entries from the PRC entered, or withdrawn from
In accordance with section 735(c)(1)(B) of the Act, we will instruct CBP to continue to suspend liquidation on entries of subject merchandise from the PRC. We will also instruct CBP to require cash deposits equal to the estimated amount by which the normal value exceeds the U.S. price as indicated in the chart below. These instructions suspending liquidation will remain in effect until further notice.
Accordingly, effective on the date of publication of the ITC's final affirmative injury determination, CBP will require, at the same time as importers would normally deposit estimated duties on this subject merchandise, a cash deposit equal to the estimated antidumping duty margin as discussed above.
Section 733(d) of the Act states that instructions issued pursuant to an affirmative preliminary determination may not remain in effect for more than four months except where exporters representing a significant proportion of exports of the subject merchandise request the Department to extend that four-month period to no more than six months. However, the Department did not extend the four-month period in the underlying investigation. In the underlying investigation, the Department published the
Therefore, in accordance with section 733(d) of the Act and our practice, we will instruct CBP to terminate the suspension of liquidation and to liquidate, without regard to antidumping duties, unliquidated entries of CTL plate from the PRC entered, or withdrawn from warehouse, for consumption after March 14, 2017, the date the provisional measures expired, and through the day preceding the date of publication of the ITC's final injury determination in the
The Department determines that the estimated final dumping margin is as follows:
This notice constitutes the antidumping duty order with respect to CTL plate from the PRC, pursuant to section 736(a) of the Act. Interested parties may contact the Department's Central Records Unit, Room B8024 of the main Commerce building, for copies of an updated list of antidumping duty orders currently in effect.
This order is issued and published in accordance with sections 736(a) of the Act and 19 CFR 351.211(b).
National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), Commerce.
Notice; public meeting.
The New England Fishery Management Council (Council) is scheduling a public meeting of its Herring Committee to consider actions affecting New England fisheries in the exclusive economic zone (EEZ). Recommendations from this group will be brought to the full Council for formal consideration and action, if appropriate.
This meeting will be held on Wednesday, April 5, 2017 at 9 a.m.
Thomas A. Nies, Executive Director, New England Fishery Management Council; telephone: (978) 465-0492.
The Committee will discuss alternatives being considered in Amendment 8 to the Atlantic Herring Fishery Management Plan. Measures include alternative Acceptable Biological Catch (ABC) control rules and measures to address potential localized depletion and user conflicts in the herring fishery. The Committee will also review preliminary outcomes from the external peer review of the Management Strategy Evaluation of Atlantic herring ABC control rules held in March 2017. They will also review the proposed action for the herring fishery in the Omnibus Industry Funded Monitoring (IFM) Amendment and make any necessary clarifications or adjustments. The Committee will review preliminary analysis of portside data, including a presentation by NMFS of its evaluation of incorporating portside data into herring catch cap quota monitoring, prepared in response to a previous Council request. Other business will be discussed as necessary.
This meeting is physically accessible to people with disabilities. This meeting will be recorded. Consistent with 16 U.S.C. 1852, a copy of the recording is available upon request. Requests for sign language interpretation or other auxiliary aids should be directed to Thomas A. Nies, Executive Director, at (978) 465-0492, at least 5 days prior to the meeting date.
16 U.S.C. 1801
National Marine Fisheries Service, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, Commerce.
Notice of public meetings.
The Pacific Fishery Management Council (Pacific Council) and its advisory entities will hold public meetings.
The Pacific Council and its advisory entities will meet April 6-11, 2017. The Pacific Council meeting will begin on Friday, April 7, 2017 at 9 a.m. Pacific Daylight Time (PDT), reconvening at 8 a.m. each day through Tuesday, April 11, 2017. All meetings are open to the public, except a closed session will be held from 8 a.m. to 9 a.m., Friday, April 7 to address litigation and personnel matters. The Pacific Council will meet as late as necessary each day to complete its scheduled business.
The meetings of the Pacific Council and its advisory entities will be held at the Doubletree by Hilton Hotel Sacramento, 2001 Point West Way, Sacramento, CA; telephone: (916) 929-8855.
Mr. Chuck Tracy, Executive Director; telephone: (503) 820-2280 or (866) 806-7204 toll-free; or access the Pacific Council Web site,
The April 6-11, 2017 meeting of the Pacific Council will be streamed live on the Internet. The broadcasts begin initially at 9 a.m. PT Friday, April 8, 2017 and continue at 8 a.m. daily through Tuesday, April 11, 2017. Broadcasts end daily at 6 p.m. PT or when business for the day is complete. Only the audio portion and presentations displayed on the screen at the Pacific Council meeting will be broadcast. The audio portion is listen-only; you will be unable to speak to the Pacific Council via the broadcast. To access the meeting online please use the following link:
The following items are on the Pacific Council agenda, but not necessarily in this order. Agenda items noted as “Final Action” refer to actions requiring the Council to transmit a proposed fishery management plan, proposed plan amendment, or proposed regulations to the U.S. Secretary of Commerce, under Sections 304 or 305 of the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act. Additional detail on agenda items, Council action, advisory entity meeting times, and meeting rooms are described in Agenda Item A.4, Proposed Council Meeting Agenda, and will be in the advance April 2017 briefing materials and posted on the Pacific Council Web site at
Advisory body agendas will include discussions of relevant issues that are on the Pacific Council agenda for this meeting, and may also include issues that may be relevant to future Council meetings. Proposed advisory body agendas for this meeting will be available on the Pacific Council Web site
Although non-emergency issues not contained in this agenda may come before the Pacific Council for discussion, those issues may not be the subject of formal Council action during this meeting. Council action will be restricted to those issues specifically listed in this notice and any issues arising after publication of this notice that require emergency action under Section 305(c) of the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act, provided the public has been notified of the Pacific Council's intent to take final action to address the emergency.
These meetings are physically accessible to people with disabilities. Requests for sign language interpretation or other auxiliary aids should be directed to Mr. Kris Kleinschmidt at (503) 820-2280, ext. 411 at least 10 business days prior to the meeting date.
Thursday, March 23 2017, 1:00 p.m.-3:00 p.m.
Hearing Room 420, Bethesda Towers, 4330 East West Highway, Bethesda, Maryland.
Commission Meeting—Open to the Public.
Safety Standard Addressing Blade-Contact Injuries on Table Saws—Notice of Proposed Rulemaking
A live webcast of the Meeting can be viewed at
Todd A. Stevenson, Office of the Secretary, U.S. Consumer Product Safety Commission, 4330 East West Highway, Bethesda, MD 20814, (301) 504-7923.
Department of the Navy, DoD.
Notice.
Pursuant to the provisions of the Federal Advisory Committee Act, notice is hereby given that the following meeting of the Board of Advisors to the President of the Naval War College will be held. This meeting will be open to the public.
The meeting will be held on Thursday, April 6, 2017 from 8:00 a.m. to 4:00 p.m. and on Friday, April 7, 2017 from 8:30 a.m. to 11:00 a.m. Eastern Time Zone.
The meeting will be held at the U.S. Naval War College, 686 Cushing Road, Newport, RI.
Ms. Jaye Panza, Designated Federal Official, 1 University Circle, Code 00G, Monterey, CA 93943-5001, telephone number 831-656-2514.
The purpose of the Board is to advise and assist the President, NWC, in educational and support areas, providing independent advice and recommendations on items such as, but not limited to, organizational management, curricula, methods of instruction, facilities, and other matters of interest. The agenda for Thursday is as follows:
The agenda for Friday is as follows:
Individuals without a DoD Government Common Access Card require an escort at the meeting location. For access, information, or to send written statements for consideration at the committee meeting must contact Dr. Thomas Gibbons, Professor of Professional Military Education, Naval War College, 686 Cushing Road, Newport, RI 02841-1207 or by fax 401-841-7375 by March 31, 2017.
Office of Special Education and Rehabilitative Services (OSERS), Department of Education (ED).
Notice.
In accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, ED is proposing a revision of an existing information collection.
Interested persons are invited to submit comments on or before May 19, 2017.
To access and review all the documents related to the information collection listed in this notice, please use
For specific questions related to collection activities, please contact Bonnie Jones, 202-245-7395.
The Department of Education (ED), in accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (PRA) (44 U.S.C. 3506(c)(2)(A)), provides the general public and Federal agencies with an opportunity to comment on proposed, revised, and continuing collections of information. This helps the Department assess the impact of its information collection requirements and minimize the public's reporting burden. It also helps the public understand the Department's information collection requirements and provide the requested data in the desired format. ED is soliciting comments on the proposed information collection request (ICR) that is described below. The Department of Education is especially interested in public comment addressing the following issues: (1) Is this collection necessary to the proper functions of the Department; (2) will this information be processed and used in a timely manner; (3) is the estimate of burden accurate; (4) how might the Department enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected; and (5) how might the Department minimize the burden of this collection on the respondents, including through the use of information technology. Please note that written comments received in response to this notice will be considered public records.
Department of Education.
Notice of a Modified Matching Program.
This document provides notice of the continuation of a computer matching program between the Department of Education and the Department of Homeland Security, U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services.
We must receive your comments on or before April 19, 2017.
The re-established matching program will be effective on the latest of the following three dates: (A) April 18, 2017; (B) 30 days from the date on which the Department of Education (ED) publishes a Computer Matching Notice in the
The matching program will continue for 18 months after the effective date and may be extended for an additional 12 months thereafter, if the conditions specified in 5 U.S.C. 552a(o)(2)(D) have been met.
Submit your comments through the Federal eRulemaking Portal or via postal mail, commercial delivery, or hand delivery. We will not accept comments submitted by fax or by email or those submitted after the comment period. To ensure that we do not receive duplicate copies, please submit your comments only once. In addition, please include the Docket ID at the top of your comments.
•
•
Ms. Marya Dennis, Management and Program Analyst, U.S. Department of Education, Federal Student Aid, Union Center Plaza, 830 First Street NE., Washington, DC 20002-5345. Telephone: (202) 377-3385.
If you use a telecommunications device for the deaf (TDD) or a text telephone (TTY), call the Federal Relay Service (FRS), toll free, at 1-800-877-8339.
We provide this notice in accordance with Privacy Act of 1974, as amended (5 U.S.C. 552a); OMB Final Guidance Interpreting the Provisions of Public Law 100-503 the Computer Matching and Privacy Protection Act of 1988, 54 FR 25818 (June 19, 1989); and OMB Circular No. A-108, available at:
In accordance with 5 U.S.C. 552a(p), ED will not suspend, terminate, reduce, or make a final denial of any title IV, HEA program assistance to the individual, or take other adverse action against the individual, as a result of information produced by the match, until ED has independently verified the information, or ED's Data Integrity Board determines, in accordance with guidance issued by the Director of the OMB, that: (1) The information is limited to identification and amount of benefits paid by ED under a Federal benefit program; and (2) there is a high degree of confidence that the information provided to ED is accurate. In addition, the individual must first receive a notice from ED containing a statement of its findings and informing the individual of the opportunity to contest those findings by submitting documentation demonstrating a satisfactory immigration status within 30 days of receipt of the notice. After 30 days from the date of the individual's receipt of such notice, ED may take adverse action against an individual as a result of information produced by the match.
You may also access documents of the Department published in the
5 U.S.C. 552a.
Take notice that the Commission received the following exempt wholesale generator filings:
Take notice that the Commission received the following electric rate filings:
The filings are accessible in the Commission's eLibrary system by clicking on the links or querying the docket number.
Any person desiring to intervene or protest in any of the above proceedings must file in accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of the Commission's Regulations (18 CFR 385.211 and 385.214) on or before 5:00 p.m. Eastern time on the specified comment date. Protests may be considered, but intervention is necessary to become a party to the proceeding.
eFiling is encouraged. More detailed information relating to filing requirements, interventions, protests, service, and qualifying facilities filings can be found at:
Take notice that the Commission received the following exempt wholesale generator filings:
Take notice that the Commission received the following electric rate filings:
The filings are accessible in the Commission's eLibrary system by clicking on the links or querying the docket number.
Any person desiring to intervene or protest in any of the above proceedings must file in accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of the Commission's Regulations (18 CFR 385.211 and 385.214) on or before 5:00 p.m. Eastern time on the specified comment date. Protests may be considered, but intervention is necessary to become a party to the proceeding.
eFiling is encouraged. More detailed information relating to filing requirements, interventions, protests, service, and qualifying facilities filings can be found at:
Take notice that the Commission received the following electric corporate filings:
Take notice that the Commission received the following exempt wholesale generator filings:
Take notice that the Commission received the following electric rate filings:
Take notice that the Commission received the following qualifying facility filings:
The filings are accessible in the Commission's eLibrary system by clicking on the links or querying the docket number.
Any person desiring to intervene or protest in any of the above proceedings must file in accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of the Commission's Regulations (18 CFR 385.211 and 385.214) on or before 5:00 p.m. Eastern time on the specified comment date. Protests may be considered, but intervention is necessary to become a party to the proceeding.
eFiling is encouraged. More detailed information relating to filing requirements, interventions, protests, service, and qualifying facilities filings can be found at:
This is a supplemental notice in the above-referenced proceeding of ADG Group Inc.`s application for market-based rate authority, with an accompanying rate tariff, noting that such application includes a request for blanket authorization, under 18 CFR part 34, of future issuances of securities and assumptions of liability.
Any person desiring to intervene or to protest should file with the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street NE., Washington, DC 20426, in accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of the Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedure (18 CFR 385.211 and 385.214). Anyone filing a motion to intervene or protest must serve a copy of that document on the Applicant.
Notice is hereby given that the deadline for filing protests with regard to the applicant's request for blanket authorization, under 18 CFR part 34, of future issuances of securities and assumptions of liability, is March 30, 2017.
The Commission encourages electronic submission of protests and interventions in lieu of paper, using the FERC Online links at
Persons unable to file electronically should submit an original and 5 copies of the intervention or protest to the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street NE., Washington, DC 20426.
The filings in the above-referenced proceeding are accessible in the Commission's eLibrary system by clicking on the appropriate link in the above list. They are also available for electronic review in the Commission's Public Reference Room in Washington, DC. There is an eSubscription link on the Web site that enables subscribers to receive email notification when a document is added to a subscribed docket(s). For assistance with any FERC Online service, please email
Take notice that the Commission has received the following Natural Gas Pipeline Rate and Refund Report filings:
The filings are accessible in the Commission's eLibrary system by clicking on the links or querying the docket number.
Any person desiring to intervene or protest in any of the above proceedings must file in accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of the Commission's Regulations (18 CFR 385.211 and § 385.214) on or before 5:00 p.m. Eastern time on the specified date(s). Protests may be considered, but intervention is necessary to become a party to the proceeding.
eFiling is encouraged. More detailed information relating to filing requirements, interventions, protests, service, and qualifying facilities filings can be found at:
Take notice that the Commission has received the following Natural Gas Pipeline Rate and Refund Report filings:
The filings are accessible in the Commission's eLibrary system by clicking on the links or querying the docket number.
Any person desiring to intervene or protest in any of the above proceedings must file in accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of the Commission's Regulations (18 CFR 385.211 and 385.214) on or before 5:00 p.m. Eastern time on the specified date(s). Protests may be considered, but intervention is necessary to become a party to the proceeding.
eFiling is encouraged. More detailed information relating to filing requirements, interventions, protests, service, and qualifying facilities filings can be found at:
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
Notice of request for public comment.
The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) requests comments on the candidates being considered as expert peer reviewers for the draft modeling report entitled, “Proposed Modeling Approaches for a Health-Based Benchmark for Lead in Drinking Water” (lead modeling report). EPA is seeking comment and information about the expertise and qualifications of the candidates. See section II of the
Comments on the interim list of potential peer review candidates must be received on or before April 19, 2017.
Submit your comments on the interim list of potential peer review candidates to EPA's peer review contractor, ERG, Inc., no later than April 19, 2017 by one of the following methods:
•
•
Please be advised that public comments are subject to release under the Freedom of Information Act.
Questions concerning the interim list of expert peer reviewers should be directed to ERG, Inc., 110 Hartwell Avenue, Lexington, MA 02421; by email
EPA's contractor, ERG, is assembling a panel of scientific experts to evaluate the “Proposed Modeling Approaches for a Health-Based Benchmark for Lead in Drinking Water” report. EPA, through its contractor, is seeking peer reviewers who possess a strong background and demonstrated expertise in one or more of the following areas: (1) Physiologically Based Pharmacokinetic modeling, particularly with regard to lead, (2) environmental lead exposure analyses, particularly with regard to probabilistic modeling. EPA published a request for nominations of peer reviewers in a January 19, 2017,
ERG considered and screened all candidates against the selection criteria, which include the following: (1) Demonstrated expertise through relevant peer reviewed publications; (2) professional accomplishments and recognition by professional societies; (3) demonstrated ability to work constructively and effectively in a committee setting; (4) absence of financial conflicts of interest; (5) no actual conflicts of interest or appearance of lack of impartiality; (6) willingness to commit adequate time for the thorough review of the draft report; and (7) availability to participate in-person in a one-day or two-day peer review meeting in the Washington, DC, metro area, projected to occur in the summer of 2017 (exact date will be published in the
Peer reviewers will be charged with evaluating and preparing written comments on the lead modeling report. ERG will provide reviewers with a summary and compilation of public comments on the report submitted to EPA's docket (ID number EPA-HQ-OW-2016-0686) for consideration. Reviewers will participate in the public meeting expected to be held in the Washington, DC, metro area in the summer of 2017 (exact date to be determined), to discuss the scientific basis supporting these materials. Following the meeting, ERG will provide a report to EPA of the peer reviewer's evaluation of the scientific and technical merit of the lead modeling report and their responses to the charge questions. EPA will make the final expert peer review report available to the public (exact date to be determined). In preparing the final lead modeling report, EPA will consider the expert peer review report as well as the written public comments submitted to the docket.
ERG is considering the following candidates for the peer review panel. Biosketches are available through the docket at
Federal Communications Commission.
Notice and request for comments.
As part of its continuing effort to reduce paperwork burdens, and as required by the Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA) of 1995, the Federal Communications Commission (FCC or the Commission) invites the general public and other Federal agencies to take this opportunity to comment on the following information collection. Comments are requested concerning: 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; the accuracy of the Commission's burden estimate; ways to enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information collected; ways to minimize
The Commission may not conduct or sponsor a collection of information unless it displays a currently valid Office of Management and Budget (OMB) control number. No person shall be subject to any penalty for failing to comply with a collection of information subject to the PRA that does not display a valid OMB control number.
Written comments should be submitted on or before April 19, 2017. If you anticipate that you will be submitting comments, but find it difficult to do so within the period of time allowed by this notice, you should advise the contacts listed below as soon as possible.
Direct all PRA comments to Nicholas A. Fraser, OMB, via email
For additional information or copies of the information collection, contact Cathy Williams at (202) 418-2918. To view a copy of this information collection request (ICR) submitted to OMB: (1) Go to the Web page <
As part of its continuing effort to reduce paperwork burdens, and as required by the Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA) of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501-3520), the Federal Communications Commission (FCC or the Commission) invites the general public and other Federal agencies to take this opportunity to comment on the following information collection. Comments are requested concerning: 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; the accuracy of the Commission's burden estimate; ways to enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information collected; ways to minimize the burden of the collection of information on the respondents, including the use of automated collection techniques or other forms of information technology; and ways to further reduce the information collection burden on small business concerns with fewer than 25 employees.
The Fourth Report and Order modified the information collection requirements contained in § 64.1120(c)(3)(iii) of the Commission's rules to provide for verifications to elicit “confirmation that the person on the call understands that a carrier change, not an upgrade to existing service, bill consolidation, or any other misleading description of the transaction, is being authorized.”
Federal Communications Commission.
Notice and request for comments.
As part of its continuing effort to reduce paperwork burdens, and as required by the Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA), the Federal Communications Commission (FCC or Commission) invites the general public and other Federal agencies to take this opportunity to comment on the following information collections. Comments are requested concerning: 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; the accuracy of the Commission's burden estimate; ways to enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information collected; ways to minimize the burden of the collection of information on the respondents, including the use of automated collection techniques or other forms of information technology; and ways to further reduce the information collection burden on small business concerns with fewer than 25 employees.
The FCC may not conduct or sponsor a collection of information unless it displays a currently valid Office of Management and Budget (OMB) control number. No person shall be subject to any penalty for failing to comply with a collection of information subject to the PRA that does not display a valid OMB control number.
Written comments should be submitted on or before May 19, 2017. If you anticipate that you will be submitting comments, but find it difficult to do so within the period of time allowed by this notice, you should advise the contacts below as soon as possible.
Direct all PRA comments to Cathy Williams, FCC, via email
For additional information about the information collection, contact Cathy Williams at (202) 418-2918.
Contact Cathy Williams at (202) 418-2918.
FCC Form 340 also contains a third party disclosure requirement, pursuant to Section 73.3580. This rule requires a party applying for a new broadcast station, or making a major change to an existing station, to give local public notice of this filing in a newspaper of general circulation in the community in which the station is located. This local public notice must be completed within 30 days of tendering the application. This notice must be published at least twice a week for two consecutive weeks in a three-week period. In addition, a copy of this notice must be placed in the station's public inspection file along with the application, pursuant to Section 73.3527. This recordkeeping information collection requirement is contained in OMB Control No. 3060-0214, which covers Section 73.3527.
Federal Labor Relations Authority.
Notice.
The Federal Labor Relations Authority (FLRA) publishes the names of the persons selected to serve on its
Upon publication.
Written comments about this final rule can be emailed to
Gina Grippando, Counsel for Regulatory and Public Affairs, Federal Labor Relations Authority, Washington, DC 20424, (202) 218-7776.
Section 4314(c) of Title 5, U.S.C. requires each agency to establish, in accordance with regulations prescribed by the Office of Personnel Management, one or more PRBs. The PRB shall review and evaluate the initial appraisal of a senior executive's performance by the supervisor, along with any response by the senior executive, and make recommendations to the final rating authority relative to the performance of the senior executive.
The persons named below have been selected to serve on the FLRA's PRB.
PRB Chairman: James Abbott, Chief Counsel to the Acting Chairman.
PRB Members: Bruce Gipe, Chief Operating Officer, Office of Special Counsel (External Member); Richard Jones, Director, Atlanta Regional Office; Kimberly Moseley, Executive Director, Federal Service Impasses Panel; Peter Sutton, Acting General Counsel; William Tobey, Chief Counsel to Member DuBester.
10:00 a.m., Thursday, March 30, 2017.
The Richard V. Backley Hearing Room, Room 511N, 1331 Pennsylvania Avenue NW., Washington, DC 20004 (enter from F Street entrance).
Open.
The Commission will consider and act upon the following in open session:
Any person attending this meeting who requires special accessibility features and/or auxiliary aids, such as sign language interpreters, must inform the Commission in advance of those needs. Subject to 29 CFR 2706.150(a)(3) and § 2706.160(d).
Emogene Johnson (202) 434-9935/(202) 708-9300 for TDD Relay/1-800-877-8339 for toll free.
1-(866) 867-4769. Passcode: 129-339
77 K Street NE., 10th Floor Board Room, Washington, DC 20002.
Federal Retirement Thrift Investment Board Member Meeting. March 27, 2017, In Person, 8:30 a.m.
Office of Government-wide Policy (OGP), General Services Administration (GSA).
Meeting notice.
Notice of this meeting and these conference calls is being provided according to the requirements of the Federal Advisory Committee Act. This notice provides the agenda and schedule for the June 7, 2017 meeting of the Green Building Advisory Committee (the Committee) and schedule for a series of conference calls, supplemented by Web meetings, for two new task groups of the Committee. The meeting is open to the public and the site is accessible to individuals with disabilities. The conference calls are open for the public to listen in. Interested individuals must register to attend as instructed below under Supplementary Information.
The
The
Mr. Ken Sandler, Designated Federal Officer, Office of Federal High-Performance Green Buildings, OGP, GSA, 1800 F Street NW., Washington, DC 20405, telephone 202-219-1121 (
Contact Ken Sandler at
The Committee has recently proposed two new task groups. The
The conference calls will allow the task groups to coordinate the development of consensus recommendations to the full Committee, which will, in turn, decide whether to proceed with formal advice to GSA based upon these recommendations.
Detailed agendas, background information, and updates for the meeting and conference calls will be posted on GSA's Web site at
Office of Government Ethics (OGE).
Notice of request for public comments; extension of comment period.
On January 3, 2017, OGE published in the
To be assured consideration, comments must be received at the address provided below, by April 20, 2017, though OGE may have some limited ability to review late submissions if workload and other considerations permit.
You may submit comments, in writing, to OGE regarding this notice and request by any of the following methods:
Jennifer A. Matis, Assistant Counsel, Office of Government Ethics, Suite 500, 1201 New York Avenue NW., Washington, DC 20005-3917; Telephone: 202-482-9300; TTY: 800-877-8339; FAX: 202-482-9237.
To be considered, any submission exceeding five (5) pages in length must include a one-page summary of key points and conclusions. Commenters are requested to state briefly the nature of their expertise in trust law. A copy of the original notice of request for public comments, 82 FR 122 (Jan. 3, 2017), is available at:
Food and Drug Administration, HHS.
Notice of public workshop; correction.
The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) is correcting a notice that appeared in the
Monica Kapoor, Center for Biologics Evaluation and Research, Food and Drug Administration, 10903 New Hampshire Ave., Bldg. 71, Rm. 3111C, Silver Spring, MD 20993,
In the
On page 96008, in the second column under the
Food and Drug Administration, HHS.
Notice.
The Food and Drug Administration (FDA or Agency) is announcing an opportunity for public comment on the proposed collection of certain information by the Agency. Under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (the PRA), Federal Agencies are required to publish notice in the
Submit either electronic or written comments on the collection of information by May 19, 2017.
You may submit comments as follows:
Submit electronic comments in the following way:
•
• If you want to submit a comment with confidential information that you do not wish to be made available to the public, submit the comment as a written/paper submission and in the manner detailed (see “Written/Paper Submissions” and “Instructions”).
Submit written/paper submissions as follows:
•
• For written/paper comments submitted to the Division of Dockets Management, FDA will post your comment, as well as any attachments, except for information submitted, marked and identified, as confidential, if submitted as detailed in “Instructions.”
• Confidential Submissions—To submit a comment with confidential information that you do not wish to be made publicly available, submit your comments only as a written/paper submission. You should submit two copies total. One copy will include the information you claim to be confidential with a heading or cover note that states “THIS DOCUMENT CONTAINS CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION.” The Agency will review this copy, including the claimed confidential information, in its consideration of comments. The second copy, which will have the claimed confidential information redacted/blacked out, will be available for public viewing and posted on
FDA PRA Staff, Office of Operations, Food and Drug Administration, Three White Flint North, 10A63, 11601 Landsdown St., North Bethesda, MD 20852,
Under the PRA (44 U.S.C. 3501-3520), Federal Agencies must obtain approval from the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for each collection of information they conduct or sponsor. “Collection of information” is defined in 44 U.S.C. 3502(3) and 5 CFR 1320.3(c) and includes Agency requests or requirements that members of the public submit reports, keep records, or provide information to a third party. Section 3506(c)(2)(A) of the PRA (44 U.S.C. 3506(c)(2)(A)) requires Federal Agencies to provide a 60-day notice in the
With respect to the following collection of information, FDA invites comments on these topics: (1) Whether the proposed collection of information is necessary for the proper performance of FDA's functions, including whether the information will have practical utility; (2) the accuracy of FDA's estimate of the burden of the proposed collection of information, including the validity of the methodology and assumptions used; (3) ways to enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected; and (4) ways to minimize the burden of the collection of information on respondents, including through the use of automated collection techniques, when appropriate, and other forms of information technology.
FDA is requesting approval for the collection of information regarding reports of corrections and removals required under part 806 (21 CFR part 806), which implements section 519(g) of the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (the FD&C Act) (21 U.S.C. 360i(g)), as amended by the Food and Drug Modernization Act of 1997 (FDAMA) (Pub. L. 105-115). A description of the information collection requirements are provided as follows:
Under § 806.10 (21 CFR 806.10), within 10 working days of initiating any action to correct or remove a device to reduce a risk to health posed by the device or to remedy a violation of the FD&C Act caused by the device which may present a risk to health, device manufacturers or importers must submit a written report to FDA of the correction or removal.
Under § 806.20(a), device manufacturers or importers that initiate a correction or removal that is not required to be reported to FDA must keep a record of the correction or removal.
The information collected in the reports of corrections and removals will be used by FDA to identify marketed devices that have serious problems and to ensure that defective devices are removed from the market. This will assure that FDA has current and complete information regarding these corrections and removals to determine whether recall action is adequate. Failure to collect this information would prevent FDA from receiving timely information about devices that may have a serious effect on the health of users of the devices.
Reports of corrections and removals may be submitted to FDA via mail or using FDA's Electronic Submission Gateway (ESG). We estimate that approximately 99 percent of submitters will use the ESG. Our estimate of the reporting and recordkeeping burden is based on Agency records and our experience with this program, as well as similar programs that utilize FDA's ESG.
For respondents for who submit corrections and removals using the electronic process, the operating and maintenance costs associated with this information collection are approximately $30 per year to purchase a digital verification certificate (certificate must be valid for 1 to 3 years). This burden may be minimized if the respondent has already purchased a verification certificate for other electronic submissions to FDA. However, FDA is assuming that all respondents who submit corrections and removals using the electronic process will be establishing a new WebTrader account and purchasing a digital verification certificate. We therefore estimate the total operating and maintenance costs to be $30,660 annually (1,022 respondents × $30).
FDA estimates the burden of this collection of information as follows:
Food and Drug Administration, HHS.
Notice.
The Food and Drug Administration (FDA or we) is announcing an opportunity for public comment on the proposed collection of certain information by the Agency. Under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (the PRA), Federal Agencies are required to publish notice in the
Submit either electronic or written comments on the collection of information by May 19, 2017.
You may submit comments as follows:
Submit electronic comments in the following way:
•
• If you want to submit a comment with confidential information that you do not wish to be made available to the public, submit the comment as a written/paper submission and in the manner detailed (see “Written/Paper Submissions” and “Instructions”).
Submit written/paper submissions as follows:
•
• For written/paper comments submitted to the Division of Dockets Management, FDA will post your comment, as well as any attachments, except for information submitted, marked and identified, as confidential, if submitted as detailed in “Instructions.”
• Confidential Submissions—To submit a comment with confidential information that you do not wish to be made publicly available, submit your comments only as a written/paper submission. You should submit two copies total. One copy will include the information you claim to be confidential with a heading or cover note that states “THIS DOCUMENT CONTAINS CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION.” The Agency will review this copy, including the claimed confidential information, in its consideration of comments. The second copy, which will have the claimed confidential information redacted/blacked out, will be available for public viewing and posted on
FDA PRA Staff, Office of Operations, Food and Drug Administration, Three White Flint North, 10A63, 11601 Landsdown St., North Bethesda, MD 20852,
Under the PRA (44 U.S.C. 3501-3520), Federal Agencies must obtain approval from the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for each collection of information they conduct or sponsor. “Collection of information” is defined in 44 U.S.C. 3502(3) and 5 CFR 1320.3(c) and includes Agency requests or requirements that members of the public submit reports, keep records, or provide information to a third party. Section 3506(c)(2)(A) of the PRA (44 U.S.C. 3506(c)(2)(A)) requires Federal Agencies to provide a 60-day notice in the
With respect to the following collection of information, FDA invites comments on these topics: (1) Whether the proposed collection of information is necessary for the proper performance of FDA's functions, including whether the information will have practical utility; (2) the accuracy of FDA's estimate of the burden of the proposed collection of information, including the validity of the methodology and assumptions used; (3) ways to enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected; and (4) ways to minimize the burden of the collection of information on respondents, including through the use of automated collection techniques,
The Voluntary National Retail Food Regulatory Program Standards (the Program Standards) define nine essential elements of an effective regulatory program for retail food establishments, establish basic quality control criteria for each element, and provide a means of recognition for the State, local, territorial, tribal and Federal regulatory programs that meet the Program Standards. The program elements addressed by the Program Standards are as follows: (1) Regulatory foundation; (2) trained regulatory staff; (3) inspection program based on Hazard Analysis and Critical Control Point (HACCP) principles; (4) uniform inspection program, (5) foodborne illness and food defense preparedness and response; (6) compliance and enforcement; (7) industry and community relations; (8) program support and resources; and (9) program assessment. Each standard includes a list of records needed to document conformance with the standard (referred to in the Program Standards document as “quality records”) and has one or more corresponding forms and worksheets to facilitate the collection of information needed to assess the retail food regulatory program against that standard. The respondents are State, local, territorial, tribal, and potentially other Federal regulatory agencies. Regulatory agencies may use existing available records or may choose to develop and use alternate forms and worksheets that capture the same information.
In the course of their normal activities, State, local, territorial, tribal, and Federal regulatory agencies already collect and keep on file many of the records needed as quality records to document compliance with each of the Program Standards. Although the detail and format in which this information is collected and recorded may vary by jurisdiction, records that are kept as a usual and customary part of normal Agency activities include inspection records, written quality assurance procedures, records of quality assurance checks, staff training certificates and other training records, a log or database of food-related illness or injury complaints, records of investigations resulting from such complaints, an inventory of inspection equipment, records of outside audits, and records of outreach efforts (
In April 2016, the Conference for Food Protection (CFP) recommended that FDA make a change in Program Standard #4—Uniform Inspection Program, more specifically to change Program Standard #4's Program Self-Assessment and Verification Audit Form. Once changes have been incorporated into the 2017 version, it will be available on FDA's Web site.
With this change, in order to achieve conformance to Program Standard #4, jurisdictions must achieve an overall inspection program performance rating for 20 elements as opposed to 10 elements that were previously required. The previous 10 elements had several criteria under one program element. The change to 20 elements allows the Standard to clearly delineate out each criterion individually rather than having several criteria under one program element. This streamlines and clarifies the process in meeting the Standard. As a result, the assessment review of each inspector's work will now be required for three joint inspections as opposed to the previously required two.
State, local, territorial, tribal and Federal regulatory agencies that enroll in the Program Standards and seek listing in the FDA National Registry are required to report to FDA on the completion of the following three management tasks outlined in the Program Standards: (1) Conducting a program self-assessment; (2) conducting a risk factor study of the regulated industry; and (3) obtaining an independent outside audit (verification audit). The results are reported on forms formerly known as Form FDA 3519 and Form FDA 3520. Currently FDA is working to consolidate both Forms FDA 3519 “FDA National Registry Report” and FDA 3520 “Permission to Publish in National Registry” into one form thereby reducing the burden by 50 percent. The new Form FDA 3958 will be provided in the Program Standards document, and will also be provided on FDA's Web site at:
FDA's recordkeeping burden estimate includes time required for a state, local, territorial, tribal, or Federal agency to review the instructions in the Program Standards, compile information from existing sources, and create any records recommended in the Program Standards that are not already kept in the normal course of the agency's usual and customary activities. Sample worksheets are provided to assist in this compilation. In estimating the time needed for the program self-assessment (Program Standards 1 through 8, shown in table 1), FDA considered responses from four State and three local jurisdictions that participated in an FDA Program Standards Pilot study. Table 2 shows the estimated recordkeeping burden for the completion of the baseline data collection, and table 3 shows the estimated recordkeeping burden for the verification audit.
FDA estimates the burden of this collection of information as follows:
FDA bases its estimates of the number of recordkeepers and the hours per record on its experience with the Program Standards over the past 16 years. As of September 30, 2016, 711 jurisdictions were enrolled in the Program Standards. However, based upon the level of ongoing support provided by FDA to enrolled jurisdictions and the number of forms submitted annually, FDA estimates that no more than 500 jurisdictions actively participate in the Program Standards during any given year. There are approximately 3,000 jurisdictions in the United States and its territories that have retail food regulatory programs. Enrollment in the Program Standards is voluntary and, therefore, FDA does not expect all jurisdictions to participate.
FDA bases its estimate of the hours per record on the recordkeeping estimates for the management tasks of self-assessment, risk factor study, and verification audit (tables 1, 2, and 3 of this document) that enrolled jurisdictions must perform a total of 471.45 hours (92.3 + 333 + 46.15 = 471.45). Enrolled jurisdictions must conduct the work described in tables 1, 2, and 3 over a 5-year period. Therefore FDA estimates that, annually, 500 recordkeepers will spend 94.29 hours (471.45 ÷ 5 = 94.29) performing the required recordkeeping for a total of 47,145 hours as shown in table 4.
Previously, FDA required regulatory jurisdictions that participate in the Program Standards to submit two forms annually: Form FDA 3519, “FDA National Registry Report,” and Form FDA 3520, “Permission to Publish in National Registry.” FDA created a new consolidated FDA Form 3958 that has four parts: Part 1 requires the name and address of the jurisdiction; name and contact information for the contact person for this jurisdiction; the jurisdictions Web site address and if the jurisdiction is willing to serve as an auditor for another jurisdiction. Part 2 requires information about enrollment, whether this jurisdiction is a new enrollee and the date of enrollment; indication whether this jurisdiction would like to be removed from the jurisdiction listing; indication of updated findings to the self-assessment or verification audit. Part 3 requires information about self-assessment findings and verification audit findings; dates when self-assessment was completed; which standards have been met as determined by the self-assessment; which standards have been met as verified by a verification audit including the completion dates. Part 4 requires permission to publish information on FDA's Web site by
The reporting burden in table 5 includes only the time necessary to fill out and send the form, as compiling the underlying information (including self-assessment reports, Risk Factor Study data collection, outside audits, and supporting documentation) is accounted for under the recordkeeping estimates in table 4.
FDA estimates the reporting burden for this collection of information as follows:
FDA bases its estimates of the number of respondents and the hours per response on its experience with the Program Standards. As explained previously in this document, FDA estimates that no more than 500 Regulatory jurisdictions will participate in the Program Standards in any given year. FDA estimates a total of 6 minutes annually for each enrolled jurisdiction to complete the form. FDA bases its estimate on the small number of data elements on the form and the ease of availability of the information. FDA estimates that, annually, 500 regulatory jurisdictions will submit one Form FDA 3598 for a total of 500 annual responses. Each submission is estimated to take 0.1 hour (or 6 minutes) per response for a total of 50 hours. In addition, FDA estimates that, annually, 500 regulatory jurisdictions will submit three requests for documentation of successful completion of staff training using the CFP Training Plan and Log for a total of 1,500 annual responses. Each submission is estimated to take 0.1 hour (or 6 minutes) per response for a total of 150 hours. Thus, the total reporting burden for this information collection is 200 hours.
In compliance with Section 3506(c)(2)(A) of the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 concerning opportunity for public comment on proposed collections of information, the Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration (SAMHSA) will publish periodic summaries of proposed projects. To request more information on the proposed projects or to obtain a copy of the information collection plans, call the SAMHSA Reports Clearance Officer on (240) 276-1243.
Comments are invited on: (a) Whether the proposed collections of information are necessary for the proper performance of the functions of the agency, including whether the information shall have practical utility; (b) the accuracy of the agency's estimate of the burden of the proposed collection of information; (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 respondents, including through the use of automated collection techniques or other forms of information technology.
The Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration (SAMHSA) is requesting a revision from the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for approval of the Notification of Intent to Use Schedule III, IV, or V Opioid Drugs for the Maintenance and Detoxification Treatment of Opiate Addiction by a “Qualifying Other Practitioner. The Notification of Intent would allow SAMHSA to determine whether other practitioners are eligible to prescribe certain approved narcotic treatment medications for the maintenance or detoxification treatment of opioid addiction.
This Notification of Intent is a result of the Comprehensive Addiction and Recovery Act (Pub. L. 114-198), which was signed into law on July 22, 2016. The law establishes criteria for nurse practitioners (NPs) and physician assistants (PAs) to qualify for a waiver to prescribe covered medications. To be eligible for a waiver, the NP or PA must: Be licensed under State law to prescribe schedule III, IV, or V medications for the treatment of pain; fulfill qualification requirements in the law for training and experience; and fulfill qualification requirements in the law for appropriate supervision by a qualifying physician. SAMHSA has the responsibility to receive, review, approve, or deny waiver requests.
Practitioners who meet the statutory requirements will be eligible to prescribe only those opioid treatment medications that are controlled in Schedules III, IV, or V, under the
Below are the following changes:
The Statute Section 823(g)(2)(B)(i) refers to both physicians and mid-level providers as “qualifying practitioners.” Therefore in order to avoid confusion and redundancy, the revised NOI refers to “other qualifying practitioners,” simply as “practitioners”.
Language was added allowing practitioners who have treated 30 patients for at least one year to increase their patient limit to 100. This second notification to treat 100 patients was omitted in the original NOI form.
The previous NOI required that the practitioner to write in the name of training provider(s)' name(s). The revised NOI allows practitioners to select training providers from a list.
The following table is the estimated hour burden:
Send comments to Summer King, SAMHSA Reports Clearance Officer, 5600 Fishers Lane, Room 15E57-B, Rockville, Maryland 20857,
U.S. Customs and Border Protection, Department of Homeland Security.
Notice of accreditation and approval of Camin Cargo Control, Inc., as a commercial gauger and laboratory.
Notice is hereby given, pursuant to CBP regulations, that Camin Cargo Control, Inc., has been approved to gauge and accredited to test petroleum and certain petroleum products for customs purposes for the next three years as of May 26, 2016.
The accreditation and approval of Camin Cargo Control, Inc., as commercial gauger and laboratory became effective on May 26, 2016. The next triennial inspection date will be scheduled for May 2019.
Approved Gauger and Accredited Laboratories Manager, Laboratories and Scientific Services Directorate, U.S. Customs and Border Protection, 1300 Pennsylvania Avenue NW., Suite 1500N, Washington, DC 20229, tel. 202-344-1060.
Notice is hereby given pursuant to 19 CFR 151.12 and 19 CFR 151.13, that Camin Cargo Control, Inc., 31 Fulton St. Unit A, New Haven, CT 06513, has been approved to gauge and accredited to test petroleum and certain petroleum products for customs purposes, in accordance with the provisions of 19 CFR 151.12 and 19 CFR 151.13. Camin Cargo Control, Inc., is approved for the following gauging procedures for petroleum and certain petroleum products set forth by the American Petroleum Institute (API):
Camin Cargo Control, Inc., is accredited for the following laboratory analysis procedures and methods for petroleum and certain petroleum products set forth by the U.S. Customs and Border Protection Laboratory Methods (CBPL) and American Society for Testing and Materials (ASTM):
Anyone wishing to employ this entity to conduct laboratory analyses and gauger services should request and receive written assurances from the entity that it is accredited or approved by the U.S. Customs and Border Protection to conduct the specific test or gauger service requested. Alternatively, inquiries regarding the specific test or gauger service this entity is accredited or approved to perform may be directed to the U.S. Customs and Border Protection by calling (202) 344-1060. The inquiry may also be sent to
Federal Emergency Management Agency, DHS.
Notice.
This notice amends the notice of a major disaster declaration for the State of Kansas (FEMA-4287-DR), dated October 20, 2016, and related determinations.
Effective Date: February 22, 2017.
Dean Webster, Office of Response and Recovery, Federal Emergency Management Agency, 500 C Street SW., Washington, DC 20472, (202) 646-2833.
The Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) hereby gives notice that pursuant to the authority vested in the Administrator, under Executive Order 12148, as amended, Michael L. Parker, of FEMA is appointed to act as the Federal Coordinating Officer for this disaster.
This action terminates the appointment of Kathy D. Fields as Federal Coordinating Officer for this disaster.
The following Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance Numbers (CFDA) are to be used for reporting and drawing funds: 97.030, Community Disaster Loans; 97.031, Cora Brown Fund; 97.032, Crisis Counseling; 97.033, Disaster Legal Services; 97.034, Disaster Unemployment Assistance (DUA); 97.046, Fire Management Assistance Grant; 97.048, Disaster Housing Assistance to Individuals and Households In Presidentially Declared Disaster Areas; 97.049, Presidentially Declared Disaster Assistance—Disaster Housing Operations for Individuals and Households; 97.050, Presidentially Declared Disaster Assistance to Individuals and Households—Other Needs; 97.036, Disaster Grants—Public Assistance (Presidentially Declared Disasters); 97.039, Hazard Mitigation Grant.
Federal Emergency Management Agency, DHS.
Notice.
This notice lists communities where the addition or modification of Base Flood Elevations (BFEs), base flood depths, Special Flood Hazard Area (SFHA) boundaries or zone designations, or the regulatory floodway (hereinafter referred to as flood hazard determinations), as shown on the Flood Insurance Rate Maps (FIRMs), and where applicable, in the supporting Flood Insurance Study (FIS) reports, prepared by the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) for each community, is appropriate because of new scientific or technical data. The FIRM, and where applicable, portions of the FIS report, have been revised to reflect these flood hazard determinations through issuance of a Letter of Map Revision (LOMR), in accordance with Title 44, part 65 of the Code of Federal Regulations. The LOMR will be used by insurance agents and others to calculate appropriate flood insurance premium rates for new buildings and the contents of those buildings. For rating purposes, the currently effective community number is shown in the table below and must be used for all new policies and renewals.
These flood hazard determinations will become effective on the dates listed in the table below and revise the FIRM panels and FIS report
From the date of the second publication of notification of these changes in a newspaper of local circulation, any person has 90 days in which to request through the community that the Deputy Associate Administrator for Insurance and Mitigation reconsider the changes. The flood hazard determination information may be changed during the 90-day period.
The affected communities are listed in the table below. Revised flood hazard information for each community is available for inspection at both the online location and the respective community map repository address listed in the table below. Additionally, the current effective FIRM and FIS report for each community are accessible online through the FEMA Map Service Center at
Submit comments and/or appeals to the Chief Executive Officer of the community as listed in the table below.
Rick Sacbibit, Chief, Engineering Services Branch, Federal Insurance and Mitigation Administration, FEMA, 400 C Street SW., Washington, DC 20472, (202) 646-7659, or (email)
The specific flood hazard determinations are not described for each community in this notice. However, the online location and local community map repository address where the flood hazard determination information is available for inspection is provided.
Any request for reconsideration of flood hazard determinations must be submitted to the Chief Executive Officer of the community as listed in the table below.
The modifications are made pursuant to section 201 of the Flood Disaster Protection Act of 1973, 42 U.S.C. 4105, and are in accordance with the National Flood Insurance Act of 1968, 42 U.S.C. 4001
The FIRM and FIS report are the basis of the floodplain management measures that the community is required either to adopt or to show evidence of having in effect in order to qualify or remain qualified for participation in the National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP).
These flood hazard determinations, together with the floodplain management criteria required by 44 CFR 60.3, are the minimum that are required. They should not be construed to mean that the community must change any existing ordinances that are more stringent in their floodplain management requirements. The community may at any time enact stricter requirements of its own or pursuant to policies established by other Federal, State, or regional entities. The flood hazard determinations are in accordance with 44 CFR 65.4.
The affected communities are listed in the following table. Flood hazard determination information for each community is available for inspection at both the online location and the respective community map repository address listed in the table below. Additionally, the current effective FIRM and FIS report for each community are accessible online through the FEMA Map Service Center at
Federal Emergency Management Agency, DHS.
Final notice.
Flood hazard determinations, which may include additions or modifications of Base Flood Elevations (BFEs), base flood depths, Special Flood Hazard Area (SFHA) boundaries or zone designations, or regulatory floodways on the Flood Insurance Rate Maps (FIRMs) and where applicable, in the supporting Flood Insurance Study (FIS) reports have been made final for the communities listed in the table below.
The FIRM and FIS report are the basis of the floodplain management measures that a community is required either to adopt or to show evidence of having in effect in order to qualify or remain qualified for participation in the Federal Emergency Management Agency's (FEMA's) National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP). In addition, the FIRM and FIS report are used by insurance agents and others to calculate appropriate flood insurance premium rates for buildings and the contents of those buildings.
The effective date of May 16, 2017 which has been established for the FIRM and, where applicable, the supporting FIS report showing the new or modified flood hazard information for each community.
The FIRM, and if applicable, the FIS report containing the final flood hazard information for each community is available for inspection at the respective Community Map Repository address listed in the tables below and will be available online through the FEMA Map Service Center at
Rick Sacbibit, Chief, Engineering Services Branch, Federal Insurance and Mitigation Administration, FEMA, 400 C Street SW., Washington, DC 20472, (202) 646-7659, or (email)
The Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) makes the final determinations listed below for the new or modified flood hazard information for each community listed. Notification of these changes has been published in newspapers of local circulation and 90 days have elapsed since that publication. The Deputy Associate Administrator for Insurance and Mitigation has resolved any appeals resulting from this notification.
This final notice is issued in accordance with section 110 of the Flood Disaster Protection Act of 1973, 42 U.S.C. 4104, and 44 CFR part 67. FEMA has developed criteria for floodplain management in floodprone areas in accordance with 44 CFR part 60.
Interested lessees and owners of real property are encouraged to review the new or revised FIRM and FIS report available at the address cited below for each community or online through the FEMA Map Service Center at
The flood hazard determinations are made final in the watersheds and/or communities listed in the table below.
I. Watershed-based studies:
II. Non-watershed-based studies:
Fish and Wildlife Service, Interior
Notice of receipt of permit application; request for comments.
We, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, have received a request from California Flats Solar, LLC, for an incidental take permit under the Endangered Species Act of 1973, as amended. The permit would authorize take of the federally endangered San Joaquin kit fox and the threatened California red-legged frog, California tiger salamander, and vernal pool fairy shrimp, incidental to otherwise lawful activities associated with the California Flats Solar Project Operations and Maintenance Activities Habitat Conservation Plan. We invite public comment.
Written comments should be received on or before April 19, 2017.
You may download a copy of the draft habitat conservation plan and draft low-effect screening form and environmental action statement on the internet at
Christopher Diel, Fish and Wildlife Biologist, at the above address or by calling (805) 644-1766.
We, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (Service), have received a request from California Flats Solar, LLC (applicant), for an incidental take permit under the Endangered Species Act of 1973, as amended (Act). The applicant has agreed to follow all of the conditions in the habitat conservation plan for the project. The permit would authorize take of the federally endangered San Joaquin kit fox (
The San Joaquin kit fox was listed by the Service as endangered on January 24, 1997. The California red-legged frog, California tiger salamander, and vernal pool fairy shrimp were listed by the Service as threatened on May 23, 1996, August 4, 2004, and September 19, 1994, respectively. Section 9 of the Act (16 U.S.C. 1531
The applicants have applied for a permit for incidental take of the San Joaquin kit fox, California red-legged frog, California tiger salamander, and vernal pool fairy shrimp. The potential taking would occur by activities associated with the operations and maintenance of the California Flats Solar Project in suitable habitat for the covered species. Incidental take coverage for construction of the California Flats Solar Project was exempted under previous consultation with the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers under section 7 of the Act.
The Service has made a preliminary determination that issuance of the permit is neither a major Federal action that will significantly affect the quality of the human environment within the meaning of section 102(2)(C) of the National Environmental Policy Act (42 U.S.C. 4321
If you wish to comment on the permit applications, plans, and associated documents, you may submit comments by any one of the methods in
Before including your address, phone number, email address, or other personal identifying information in your comment, you should be aware that your entire comment, including your personal identifying information, may be made publicly available at any time. While you can ask us in your comment to withhold your personal identifying information from public view, we cannot guarantee that we will be able to do so.
We provide this notice under section 10 of the Act (16 U.S.C. 1531
Office of the Secretary, Interior.
Notice of meeting.
Notice is hereby given of a meeting of the Invasive Species Advisory Committee (ISAC). The purpose of the ISAC is to provide advice to the National Invasive Species Council (NISC) on a broad array of issues related to preventing the introduction of invasive species and providing for their control and minimizing the economic, ecological, and human health impacts that invasive species cause.
The meeting will take place from 1:30 p.m. to 3:00 p.m. on Monday, March 29, 2017 (times are Eastern Daylight Time).
The meeting will be held via teleconference. The toll-free conference phone number and access code can be obtained by calling (202) 208-4122, or visiting the NISC Secretariat's Web site at
Ms. Kelsey Brantley, Operations and ISAC Coordinator, National Invasive Species Council Secretariat, 1849 C Street, MS 3530, NW., Washington, DC 20240; telephone (202) 208-4122; fax (202) 208-4118; email
The ISAC is established by the Secretary of the Interior, as authorized by Executive Order 13751, and is regulated by the Federal Advisory Committee Act (5 U.S.C. Appendix 2). The purpose of the ISAC is to provide advice to the NISC on a broad array of issues related to preventing the introduction of invasive species and providing for their control and minimizing the economic, ecological, and human health impacts that invasive species cause. The NISC is co-chaired by the Secretary of the Interior, the Secretary of Agriculture, and the Secretary of Commerce. The NISC provides national leadership regarding invasive species issues.
The purpose of a meeting is to convene the full ISAC to discuss and consider adoption of white papers generated by ISAC task teams on: (1) Federal-State Coordination, and (2) Federal-Tribal Coordination.
The meeting is open to the public. Members of the public are welcome to participate by accessing the teleconference line. Up to 15 minutes will be set aside for public comment. Persons wishing to make a comment are asked to provide a written request with a description of the general subject to Ms. Brantley at the above address no later than March 24, 2017. Any member of the public may submit written information and/or comments to Ms. Brantley for distribution at the ISAC meeting.
U.S. International Trade Commission.
Notice.
Notice is hereby given that the U.S. International Trade Commission has determined not to review an initial determination (“ID”) (Order No. 8) of the presiding administrative law judge (“ALJ”), granting a motion to terminate the above-captioned investigation in its entirety based upon a settlement agreement between complainant Qualcomm Incorporated (“Qualcomm”) of San Diego, California and respondents Zhuhai Meizu Technology Co., Ltd. and Zhuhai Meizu Telecom Equipment Co., Ltd. (collectively, “Meizu”), both of Zhuhai, Guangdong, China; and withdrawal of the complaint as to the remaining respondents.
Cathy Chen, Esq., Office of the General Counsel, U.S. International Trade Commission, 500 E Street SW., Washington, DC 20436, telephone (202) 205-2392. Copies of non-confidential documents filed in connection with this investigation are or will be available for inspection during official business hours (8:45 a.m. to 5:15 p.m.) in the Office of the Secretary, U.S. International Trade Commission, 500 E Street SW., Washington, DC 20436, telephone (202) 205-2000. General information concerning the Commission may also be obtained by accessing its Internet server at
The Commission instituted this investigation on November 18, 2016, based on a complaint filed on behalf of Qualcomm. 81 FR 81807 (Nov. 18, 2016). The complaint alleges violations of section 337 of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended, 19 U.S.C. 1337, by reason of infringement of certain claims of the
On January 27, 2017, Qualcomm, Meizu, and Overseas filed an unopposed motion to terminate the investigation as to Meizu under Commission Rule 210.21(a)(2), 19 CFR 210.21(a)(2), based on a Settlement Agreement, and to terminate the investigation as to the remaining respondents under Commission Rule 210.21(a)(1), 19 CFR 210.21(a)(1), based on a withdrawal of the complaint. Order No. 8 at 1.
On February 13, 2017, the ALJ issued the subject ID granting the motion and terminating the investigation in its entirety.
No petitions for review were filed. The Commission has determined not to review the ID.
The authority for the Commission's determination is contained in section 337 of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended, 19 U.S.C. 1337, and in part 210 of the Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedure, 19 CFR part 210.
By order of the Commission.
U.S. International Trade Commission.
Notice.
Notice is hereby given that the presiding administrative law judge has issued a recommended determination on remedy and bonding in the above-captioned investigation. The Commission is soliciting comments on public interest issues raised by the recommended relief, specifically a limited exclusion order against certain automated teller machines, ATM modules, components thereof, and products containing the same imported by respondents Diebold, Incorporated and Diebold Self-Service Systems both of North Canton, Ohio (collectively, “Diebold”). The ALJ also recommended issuance of cease and desist orders directed to Diebold. This notice is soliciting public interest comments from the public only. Parties are to file public interest submissions pursuant to 19 CFR 210.50(a)(4).
Panyin A. Hughes, Office of the General Counsel, U.S. International Trade Commission, 500 E Street SW., Washington, DC 20436, telephone (202) 205-3042. The public version of the complaint can be accessed on the Commission's electronic docket (EDIS) at
Section 337 of the Tariff Act of 1930 provides that if the Commission finds a violation it shall exclude the articles concerned from the United States:
19 U.S.C. 1337(d)(1). A similar provision applies to cease and desist orders. 19 U.S.C. 1337(f)(1).
The Commission is interested in further development of the record on the public interest in this investigation. Accordingly, members of the public are invited to file submissions of no more than five pages, inclusive of attachments, concerning the public interest in light of the administrative law judge's recommended determination on remedy and bonding issued in this investigation on March 13, 2017. Comments should address whether issuance of a limited exclusion order in this investigation would affect the public health and welfare in the United States, competitive conditions in the United States economy, the production of like or directly competitive articles in the United States, or United States consumers. In particular, the Commission is interested in comments that:
(i) Explain how the articles potentially subject to the recommended orders are used in the United States;
(ii) identify any public health, safety, or welfare concerns in the United States relating to the recommended orders;
(iii) identify like or directly competitive articles that complainant, its licensees, or third parties make in the United States which could replace the subject articles if they were to be excluded;
(iv) indicate whether complainant, complainant's licensees, and/or third party suppliers have the capacity to replace the volume of articles potentially subject to the recommended exclusion order and/or a cease and desist order within a commercially reasonable time; and
(v) explain how the limited exclusion order would impact consumers in the United States.
Written submissions must be filed no later than by close of business on April 20, 2017. Persons filing written submissions must file the original document electronically on or before the deadlines stated above and submit eight true paper copies to the Office of the Secretary by noon the next day pursuant to section 210.4(f) of the Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedure (19 CFR 210.4(f)). Submissions should refer to the investigation number (Inv. No. 337-TA-989) in a prominent place on the cover page, the first page, or both. (
Any person desiring to submit a document to the Commission in confidence must request confidential treatment. All such requests should be directed to the Secretary to the Commission and must include a full statement of the reasons why the Commission should grant such treatment.
This action is taken under the authority of section 337 of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (19 U.S.C. 1337), and of sections 201.10 and 210.50 of the Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedure (19 CFR 201.10, 210.50).
By order of the Commission.
United States International Trade Commission
March 23, 2017 at 9:30 a.m.
Room 101, 500 E Street SW., Washington, DC 20436, Telephone: (202) 205-2000.
Open to the public.
1.
2. Minutes.
3. Ratification List.
4. Vote in Inv. No. 731-TA-1313 (Final) (1,1,1,2-Tetrafluoroethane (R-134a) from China). The Commission is currently scheduled to complete and file its determination and views of the Commission by April 14, 2017.
5.
In accordance with Commission policy, subject matter listed above, not disposed of at the scheduled meeting, may be carried over to the agenda of the following meeting.
By order of the Commission.
On March 13, 2017, the Department of Justice lodged a proposed consent decree with the United States District Court for the District of Massachusetts in the lawsuit entitled
The United States filed this lawsuit under the Clean Air Act. The United States' complaint seeks injunctive relief and civil penalties for violations of the regulations that govern construction of new sources of air pollution. The complaint alleges that Clean Rentals, Inc. failed to implement pollution controls and apply for the requisite permit when it built its New Bedford, MA industrial laundry facility. The consent decree requires Clean Rentals, Inc. to perform injunctive relief and pay a $200,000 civil penalty.
The publication of this notice opens a period for public comment on the consent decree. Comments should be addressed to the Assistant Attorney General, Environment and Natural Resources Division, and should refer to
During the public comment period, the consent decree may be examined and downloaded at this Justice Department Web site:
Please enclose a check or money order for $6.25 (25 cents per page reproduction cost) payable to the United States Treasury.
Bureau of Justice Statistics, U.S. Department of Justice.
Notice.
The Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS), a component of the Office of Justice Programs (OJP) in the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ), is seeking comments on revisions to the confidentiality pledge it provides to its respondents. These revisions are required by the passage and implementation of provisions of the federal Cybersecurity Enhancement Act of 2015, which requires the Secretary of the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) to provide Federal civilian agencies' information technology systems with cybersecurity protection for their Internet traffic. More details on this announcement are presented in the
Comments are encouraged and will be accepted for 60 days until May 19, 2017.
Questions about this notice should be addressed to the Bureau of Justice Statistics, Office of Justice Programs, U.S. Department of Justice, ATTN: Devon Adams, 810 7th Street NW., Washington, DC 20531 (email:
Allina Lee by telephone at 202-305-0765 (this is not a toll-free number); by email at
Federal statistics provide key information that the Nation uses to measure its performance and make informed choices about budgets, employment, health, investments, taxes, and a host of other significant topics. Most federal surveys are completed on a voluntary basis. Respondents, ranging from businesses to households to institutions, may choose whether or not to provide the requested information. Many of the most valuable federal statistics come from surveys that ask for highly sensitive information such as proprietary business data from companies or particularly personal information or practices from individuals. BJS protects all personally identifiable information collected under its authority under the confidentiality provisions of 42 U.S.C. 3789g. Strong and trusted confidentiality and exclusively statistical use pledges under Title 42 U.S.C. 3789g and similar statutes are effective and necessary in honoring the trust that businesses, individuals, and institutions, by their responses, place in statistical agencies.
Under statistical confidentiality protection statutes, federal statistical agencies make statutory pledges that the information respondents provide will be seen only by statistical agency personnel or their agents and will be used only for statistical purposes. These statutes protect such statistical information from administrative, law enforcement, taxation, regulatory, or any other non-statistical use and immunize the information submitted to statistical agencies from legal process. Moreover, many of these statutes carry monetary fines and/or criminal penalties for conviction of a knowing and willful unauthorized disclosure of covered information. Any person violating the confidentiality provisions of 42 U.S.C. 3789g may be punished by a fine of up to $10,000, in addition to any other penalties imposed by law.
As part of the Consolidated Appropriations Act for Fiscal Year 2016 (Pub. L. 114-113) signed on December 17, 2015, the Congress included the Federal Cybersecurity Enhancement Act of 2015 (codified in relevant part at 6 U.S.C. 151). This act, among other provisions, permits and requires the Secretary of Homeland Security to provide federal civilian agencies' information technology systems with cybersecurity protection for their Internet traffic. The technology currently used to provide this protection against cyber malware is known as Einstein 3A. Einstein 3A electronically searches internet traffic in and out of federal civilian agencies in real time for malware signatures.
When such a signature is found, the internet packets that contain the malware signature are shunted aside for further inspection by DHS personnel. Because it is possible that such packets entering or leaving a statistical agency's information technology system may contain a small portion of confidential statistical data, statistical agencies can no longer promise their respondents that their responses will be seen only by statistical agency personnel or their agents. However, federal statistical agencies can promise, in accordance with provisions of the Federal Cybersecurity Enhancement Act of 2015, that such monitoring can be used only to protect information and information systems from cybersecurity risks, thereby, in effect, providing stronger protection to the integrity of the respondents' submissions.
Consequently, with the passage of the Federal Cybersecurity Enhancement Act of 2015, the federal statistical community has an opportunity to welcome the further protection of its confidential data offered by DHS' Einstein 3A cybersecurity protection program. The DHS cybersecurity program's objective is to protect federal civilian information systems from malicious malware attacks. The federal statistical system's objective is to endeavor to ensure that the DHS Secretary performs those essential duties in a manner that honors the statistical agencies' statutory promises to the public to protect their confidential data. DHS and the federal statistical system have been successfully engaged in finding a way to balance both objectives and achieve these mutually reinforcing objectives.
However, pledges of confidentiality made pursuant to 42 U.S.C. 3789g and similar statutes assure respondents that their data will be seen only by statistical agency personnel or their agents. Because it is possible that DHS personnel could see some portion of those confidential data in the course of examining the suspicious Internet packets identified by Einstein 3A sensors, statistical agencies are revising their confidentiality pledges to reflect this process change. Therefore, BJS is providing this notice to alert the public to these confidentiality pledge revisions in an efficient and coordinated fashion.
The following is the revised statistical confidentiality pledge for applicable BJS data collections, with the new line added to address the new cybersecurity monitoring activities bolded for reference only:
The following listing shows the current BJS Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA) OMB numbers and information collection titles whose confidentiality pledges will change to reflect the statutory implementation of DHS' Einstein 3A monitoring for cybersecurity protection purposes.
BJS has also added information about the Cybersecurity Enhancement Act and Einstein 3A to the BJS Data Protection Guidelines to provide more details to interested respondents about the new cybersecurity monitoring requirements. The following text has been added to Section V. Information System Security and Privacy Requirements:
The Census Bureau collects data on behalf of BJS for BJS's National Crime Victimization Survey (NCVS) and its supplements. These collections are protected under Title 13 U.S.C. 9. The Census Bureau issued a
The following listing includes the BJS information collections that are administered by the Census Bureau whose confidentiality pledge will be revised.
The 60-day FRN submitted by the Census Bureau can be accessed at
Comments are invited on the efficacy of BJS's revised confidentiality pledge above. Comments submitted in response to this notice will become a matter of public record. If additional information is required contact: Melody Braswell, Department Clearance Officer, United States Department of Justice, Justice Management Division, Policy and Planning Staff, Two Constitution Square, 145 N Street NE., 3E.405A, Washington, DC 20530.
National Aeronautics and Space Administration.
Notice of meeting.
In accordance with the Federal Advisory Committee Act, as amended, the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) announces a meeting of the Science Committee of the NASA Advisory Council (NAC). This Committee reports to the NAC. The meeting will be held for the purpose of soliciting, from the scientific community and other persons, scientific and technical information relevant to program planning.
Wednesday, April 12, 2017, 9:30 a.m.-5:00 p.m.; and Thursday, April 13, 2017, 8:30 a.m.-1:00 p.m., Local Time.
NASA Headquarters, MIC-5A (Room 5H41-A), 300 E Street SW., Washington, DC 20546.
Ms. KarShelia Henderson, Science Mission Directorate, NASA Headquarters, Washington, DC 20546, (202) 358-2355, fax (202) 358-2779, or
The meeting will be open to the public up to the capacity of the room. This meeting will also be available telephonically and by WebEx. You must use a touch-tone phone to participate in this meeting. Any interested person may dial the toll free number 1-888-592-9603 or toll number 1-312-470-7407, passcode 5588797, on both days, to participate in this meeting by telephone. The WebEx link is
Attendees will be requested to sign a register and to comply with NASA Headquarters security requirements, including the presentation of a valid picture ID to Security before access to NASA Headquarters. Due to the Real ID Act, Public Law 109-13, any attendees with driver's licenses issued from non-compliant states/territories must present a second form of ID. [Federal employee badge; passport; active military identification card; enhanced driver's license; U.S. Coast Guard Merchant Mariner card; Native American tribal document; school identification accompanied by an item from LIST C (documents that establish employment authorization) from the “List of the Acceptable Documents” on Form I-9]. Non-compliant states/territories are: Maine, Minnesota, Missouri, Montana, and Washington. Foreign nationals attending this meeting will be required to provide a copy of their passport and visa in addition to providing the following information no less than 10 days prior to the meeting: Full name; gender; date/place of birth; citizenship; passport information (number, country, telephone); visa information (number, type, expiration date); employer/affiliation information (name of institution, address, country, telephone); title/position of attendee. To expedite admittance, attendees that are U.S. citizens and Permanent Residents (green card holders) are requested to provide full name and citizenship status 3 working days in advance. Information should be sent to Ms. KarSheila Henderson, via email at
Postal Regulatory Commission.
Notice.
The Commission is noticing recent Postal Service filing for the Commission's consideration concerning a negotiated service agreement. This notice informs the public of the filing, invites public comment, and takes other administrative steps.
Submit comments electronically via the Commission's Filing Online system at
David A. Trissell, General Counsel, at 202-789-6820.
The Commission gives notice that the Postal Service filed request(s) for the Commission to consider matters related to negotiated service agreement(s). The request(s) may propose the addition or removal of a negotiated service agreement from the market dominant or the competitive product list, or the modification of an existing product currently appearing on the market dominant or the competitive product list.
Section II identifies the docket number(s) associated with each Postal Service request, the title of each Postal Service request, the request's acceptance date, and the authority cited by the Postal Service for each request. For each request, the Commission appoints an officer of the Commission to represent the interests of the general public in the proceeding, pursuant to 39 U.S.C. 505 (Public Representative). Section II also establishes comment deadline(s) pertaining to each request.
The public portions of the Postal Service's request(s) can be accessed via the Commission's Web site (
The Commission invites comments on whether the Postal Service's request(s) in the captioned docket(s) are consistent with the policies of title 39. For request(s) that the Postal Service states concern market dominant product(s), applicable statutory and regulatory requirements include 39 U.S.C. 3622, 39 U.S.C. 3642, 39 CFR part 3010, and 39 CFR part 3020, subpart B. For request(s) that the Postal Service states concern competitive product(s), applicable statutory and regulatory requirements include 39 U.S.C. 3632, 39 U.S.C. 3633, 39 U.S.C. 3642, 39 CFR part 3015, and 39 CFR part 3020, subpart B. Comment deadline(s) for each request appear in section II.
1.
This notice will be published in the
Postal Regulatory Commission.
Notice.
The Commission is noticing recent Postal Service filings for the Commission's consideration concerning negotiated service agreements. This notice informs the public of the filing, invites public comment, and takes other administrative steps.
Submit comments electronically via the Commission's Filing Online system at
David A. Trissell, General Counsel, at (202) 789-6820.
The Commission gives notice that the Postal Service filed request(s) for the
Section II identifies the docket number(s) associated with each Postal Service request, the title of each Postal Service request, the request's acceptance date, and the authority cited by the Postal Service for each request. For each request, the Commission appoints an officer of the Commission to represent the interests of the general public in the proceeding, pursuant to 39 U.S.C. 505 (Public Representative). Section II also establishes comment deadline(s) pertaining to each request.
The public portions of the Postal Service's request(s) can be accessed via the Commission's Web site (
The Commission invites comments on whether the Postal Service's request(s) in the captioned docket(s) are consistent with the policies of title 39. For request(s) that the Postal Service states concern market dominant product(s), applicable statutory and regulatory requirements include 39 U.S.C. 3622, 39 U.S.C. 3642, 39 CFR part 3010, and 39 CFR part 3020, subpart B. For request(s) that the Postal Service states concern competitive product(s), applicable statutory and regulatory requirements include 39 U.S.C. 3632, 39 U.S.C. 3633, 39 U.S.C. 3642, 39 CFR part 3015, and 39 CFR part 3020, subpart B. Comment deadline(s) for each request appear in section II.
1.
2.
3.
This notice will be published in the
Pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (“Act”),
The Exchange proposes to amend the Exchange's Pricing Schedule at Section II, entitled “Multiply Listed Options Fees,”
The text of the proposed rule change is available on the Exchange's Web site at
In its filing with the Commission, the Exchange 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. The Exchange has prepared summaries, set forth in sections A, B, and C below, of the most significant aspects of such statements.
The Exchange proposes to amend pricing related to NDX and MNX by adopting Options Transaction Charges for NDX and MNX and also eliminating the Marketing Fee for NDX and MNX.
Today, the Exchange assesses transactions in NDX and MNX the following Options Transaction Charges for non-Penny Pilot Options: A $0.75 per contract for electronic Professional
The Exchange proposes to indicate that the Options Transaction charges for non-Penny Pilot Options will not apply to NDX and MNX transactions and instead adopt new pricing for NDX and MNX. The Exchange proposes to adopt the following Options Transaction Charges for NDX and MNX. Customers will continue to not be assessed an Options Transaction Charge for NDX and MNX. Professionals will be assessed the same $0.75 per contract electronic Options Transaction Charge and an increased floor Options Transaction Charge of $0.75 per contract
The Exchange is also proposing to note that a Marketing Fee
The Exchange believes that its proposal is consistent with Section 6(b) of the Act,
The Commission and the courts have repeatedly expressed their preference for competition over regulatory intervention in determining prices, products, and services in the securities markets. In Regulation NMS, while adopting a series of steps to improve the current market model, the Commission highlighted the importance of market forces in determining prices and SRO revenues and, also, recognized that current regulation of the market system “has been remarkably successful in promoting market competition in its broader forms that are most important to investors and listed companies.”
Likewise, in
Further, “[n]o one disputes that competition for order flow is `fierce.' . . . As the SEC explained, `[i]n the U.S. national market system, buyers and sellers of securities, and the broker-
The Exchange's proposal to increase the floor Options Transaction Charges for Professionals, Firms and Broker-Dealers from $0.25 to $0.75 per contract for NDX and MNX is reasonable because the Exchange is assessing the same transaction fee whether the transaction occurred electronically or on the Exchange's trading floor for these market participants. The Exchange's increase for this proprietary product is competitive when compared with similar proprietary products.
With respect to Specialists and Market Makers, the electronic Options Transaction Charge for NDX and MNX will be $0.75 per contract, similar to other Non-Customer market participants. The Exchange believes that it is reasonable to assess Specialists and Market Markers the same electronic Options Transactions Charge in NDX and MNX as other market participants, except Customers. The Exchange's increase for this proprietary product is competitive when compared with similar proprietary products.
The Exchange's proposal to increase the floor Options Transaction Charges for Professionals, Firms and Broker-Dealers from $0.25 to $0.75 per contract for NDX and MNX is equitable and not unfairly discriminatory because the Exchange will uniformly assess a $0.75 per contract Options Transaction Charges for all market participants, except for Customers, Specialists and Market Makers transacting on the floor, regardless of whether the transaction is submitted electronically or on the floor. The Exchange believes that assessing Customers no transaction fee for NDX and MNX is equitable and not unfairly discriminatory because Customer orders bring valuable liquidity to the market, which liquidity benefits other market participants. Customer liquidity benefits all market participants by providing more trading opportunities, which attracts Specialists and Market Makers. An increase in the activity of these market participants in turn facilitates tighter spreads, which may cause an additional corresponding increase in order flow from other market participants.
With respect to Specialists and Market Makers, the electronic Options Transaction Charge for NDX and MNX will be $0.75 per contract, similar to other market participants. While this fee is increasing from $0.25 to $0.75 per contract, the Exchange, as proposed herein, will no longer assess a Marketing Fee for transactions in NDX and MNX, thereby effectively lowering the rate. For example, today, a Specialist or Market Maker transacting an electronic order in NDX or MNX will be assessed a $0.25 per contract Options Transaction Charge in non-Penny Pilot Options, a $0.25 per contract Options Surcharge and a $0.70 per contract Marketing Fee for a total charge of $1.20. With this proposal, a Specialist or Market Maker transacting an electronic order for NDX or MNX will be assessed a $0.75 per contract Options Transaction Charge and a $0.25 per contract Options Surcharge for a total charge of $1.00. No Marketing Fee would be assessed. While all Non-Customer market participants would be assessed an electronic Options Transaction Charge of $0.75 per contract for NDX or MNX, a Specialist or Market Maker will be assessed a lower total transaction charge as explained above, compared to today.
The Exchange believes that assessing Specialist and Market Makers a lower floor Options Transaction Charge of $0.35 per contract for options overlying NDX and MNX and a higher electronic Options Transaction Charge of $0.75 per contract is equitable and not unfairly discriminatory. Unlike other market participants, Specialists and Market Makers have obligations to the market and regulatory requirements, which normally do not apply to other market participants.
The Exchange notes that the proposed rule changes are reasonable, equitable and not unfairly discriminatory as NDX and MNX transition to exclusively listed products. Similar to other proprietary products, the Exchange seeks to recoup the operational costs
The Exchange's proposal to eliminate the Marketing Fee for NDX and MNX is reasonable because in light of the transition of NDX and MNX to exclusively listed products and new pricing, the Exchange is increasing the Specialist and Marker Maker electronic Options Transaction Charges for options overlying NDX and MNX. By removing the Marketing Fee, Specialists and Market Makers will avoid an increase in costs.
The Exchange's proposal to eliminate the Marketing Fee for NDX and MNX is equitable and not unfairly discriminatory because in light of the transition of NDX and MNX to exclusively listed products and new pricing, the elimination of this fee will cause Specialists and Market Makers to continue to be assessed a lower total charge for the transaction as compared to other market participants.
The Exchange does not believe that the proposed rule change will impose any burden on competition not necessary or appropriate in furtherance of the purposes of the Act. In terms of inter-market competition, the Exchange notes that it operates in a highly competitive market in which market participants can readily favor competing venues if they deem fee levels at a particular venue to be excessive, or rebate opportunities available at other venues to be more favorable. In such an environment, the Exchange must continually adjust its fees to remain competitive with other exchanges and with alternative trading systems that have been exempted from compliance with the statutory standards applicable to exchanges. Because competitors are free to modify their own fees in response, and because market participants may readily adjust their order routing practices, the Exchange believes that the degree to which fee changes in this market may impose any burden on competition is extremely limited. In sum, if the changes proposed herein are unattractive to market participants, it is likely that the Exchange will lose market share as a result. Accordingly, the Exchange does not believe that the proposed change will impair the ability of members or competing order execution venues to maintain their competitive standing in the financial markets or will impose any inter-market burden on competition for the reasons stated above.
The Exchange's proposal to increase the floor Options Transaction Charges for Professionals, Firms and Broker-Dealers from $0.25 to $0.75 per contract for NDX and MNX does not impose an undue burden on intra-market competition because the Exchange will uniformly assess a $0.75 per contract Options Transaction Charges for all market participants, except for Customers and Specialists and Markets transacting on the floor, regardless of whether the transaction is submitted electronically or on the floor. The Exchange believes that assessing Customers no transaction fee for NDX and MNX does not impose an undue burden on intra-market competition because Customer orders bring valuable liquidity to the market, which liquidity benefits other market participants. Customer liquidity benefits all market participants by providing more trading opportunities, which attract Specialists and Market Makers. An increase in the activity of these market participants in turn facilitates tighter spreads, which may cause an additional corresponding increase in order flow from other market participants. It is also important to note that despite the fee increases with respect to NDX, members may continue to separately execute options overlying PowerShares QQQ Trust (“QQQ”).
With respect to Specialists and Market Makers, increasing the electronic Options Transaction Charge for NDX and MNX from $0.25 to $0.75 per contract, the Exchange, as proposed herein, does not impose an undue burden on intra-market competition as the Exchange will no longer assess a Marketing Fee for on NDX and MNX, thereby effectively lowering the rate. The Exchange believes that assessing Specialists and Market Makers a lower floor Options Transaction Charge of $0.35 per contract for NDX and MNX and a higher electronic Options Transaction Charge of $0.75 per contract does not impose an undue burden on intra-market competition. Unlike other market participants, Specialists and Market Makers have obligations to the market and regulatory requirements, which normally do not apply to other market participants.
The Exchange's proposal to eliminate the Marketing Fee for NDX and MNX does not impose an undue burden on intra-market competition because the elimination of this fee will cause Specialists and Market Makers to continue to be assessed a lower total charge for the transaction as compared to other market participants.
No written comments were either solicited or received.
The foregoing rule change has become effective pursuant to Section 19(b)(3)(A)(ii) of the Act.
At any time within 60 days of the filing of the proposed rule change, the
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:
• Use the Commission's Internet comment form (
• Send an email to
• Send paper comments in triplicate to Secretary, Securities and Exchange Commission, 100 F Street NE., Washington, DC 20549-1090.
For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets, pursuant to delegated authority.
Pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (“Act”),
The Exchange proposes to amend the addresses for Phlx and its shareholder, Nasdaq, Inc.
The text of the proposed rule change is available on the Exchange's Web site at
In its filing with the Commission, the Exchange 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. The Exchange has prepared summaries, set forth in sections A, B, and C below, of the most significant aspects of such statements.
Phlx is planning to relocate from its current location at 1900 Market Street in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania to a new location at FMC Tower, 2929 Walnut Street in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania. The relocation is currently scheduled to occur in April 2017.
The purpose of this rule change is to amend the Second Amended Limited Liability Company Agreement of NASDAQ PHLX LLC as well as Rule 60, entitled “Sanctions for Breach of Regulations” to amend the addresses referenced therein for Phlx. In addition, the Second Amended Limited Liability Company Agreement lists the address of Phlx's shareholder, Nasdaq, Inc. The Exchange proposes to amend that address as well. The description for each change is below.
As noted above, Phlx will relocate in April 2017 to a new address at FMC Tower, 2929 Walnut Street in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania. The Second Amended Limited Liability Company Agreement and Rule 60 currently contain references to Phlx's current address at 1900 Market Street. The Exchange proposes to amend the Phlx address as of April 1, 2017 to the new address at FMC Tower, 2929 Walnut Street in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania.
Nasdaq, Inc., the sole shareholder of Phlx, is currently listed in the Second Amended Limited Liability Company Agreement with an address of 1900 Market Street, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania. At this time the Exchange proposes to list the address of its shareholder at One Liberty Plaza, New York, NY 10006. This address is the headquarters of Nasdaq, Inc.
The Exchange proposes that the Phlx address rule change will become operative on April 1, 2017.
The Exchange believes that its proposal is consistent with Section 6(b) of the Act,
The Exchange does not believe that the proposed rule change will impose any burden on competition not necessary or appropriate in furtherance of the purposes of the Act. The proposed rule changes will accurately reflect the addresses of Phlx and its shareholder and will not impose an undue burden on competition.
No written comments were either solicited or received.
Because the foregoing proposed rule change does not: (i) Significantly affect the protection of investors or the public interest; (ii) impose any significant burden on competition; and (iii) become operative for 30 days from the date on which it was filed, or such shorter time as the Commission may designate, it has become effective pursuant to Section 19(b)(3)(A)(iii) of the Act
A proposed rule change filed pursuant to Rule 19b-4(f)(6) under the Act
At any time within 60 days of the filing of the proposed rule change, the Commission summarily may temporarily suspend such rule change if it appears to the Commission that such action is: (i) Necessary or appropriate in the public interest; (ii) for the protection of investors; or (iii) otherwise in furtherance of the purposes of the Act. If the Commission takes such action, the Commission shall institute proceedings to determine whether the proposed rule should be approved or disapproved.
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:
• Use the Commission's Internet comment form (
• Send an email to
• Send paper comments in triplicate to Secretary, Securities and Exchange Commission, 100 F Street NE., Washington, DC 20549-1090.
For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets, pursuant to delegated authority.
On January 18, 2017, NASDAQ PHLX LLC (“Phlx” or “Exchange”) filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (“Commission”), pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (“Act”)
Section 19(b)(2) of the Act
The Commission is extending the 45-day time period for Commission action on the proposed rule change. The Commission finds that it is appropriate to designate a longer period within which to take action on the proposed rule change so that it has sufficient time to consider and take action on the Exchange's proposed rule change.
Accordingly, pursuant to Section 19(b)(2) of the Act
For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets, pursuant to delegated authority.
On February 2, 2017, Fixed Income Clearing Corporation (“FICC”) filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (“Commission”) proposed rule change SR-FICC-2017-001 (“Proposed Rule Change”) pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (“Act”),
Section 19(b)(2) of the Act
In order to provide the Commission with sufficient time to consider the Proposed Rule Change, the Commission finds that it is appropriate to designate a longer period within which to take action on the Proposed Rule Change. Accordingly, the Commission, pursuant to Section 19(b)(2) of the Act,
For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets, pursuant to delegated authority.
Securities and Exchange Commission.
Notice of meeting.
The Securities and Exchange Commission Equity Market Structure Advisory Committee is providing notice that it will hold a public meeting on Wednesday, April 5, 2017, in Multi-Purpose Room LL-006 at the Commission's headquarters, 100 F Street NE., Washington, DC. The meeting will begin at 9:30 a.m. (EDT) and will be open to the public. The public portions of the meeting will be webcast on the Commission's Web site at
The public meeting will be held on Wednesday, April 5, 2017. Written statements should be received on or before March 29, 2017.
The meeting will be held at the Commission's headquarters, 100 F Street NE., Washington, DC. Written statements may be submitted by any of the following methods:
• Use the Commission's Internet submission form (
• Send an email message to
• Send paper statements in triplicate to Brent J. Fields, Federal Advisory Committee Management Officer, Securities and Exchange Commission, 100 F Street NE., Washington, DC 20549-1090.
Statements also will be available for Web site viewing and printing in the Commission's Public Reference Room, 100 F Street NE., Room 1580, Washington, DC 20549, on official business days between the hours of 10:00 a.m. and 3:00 p.m. All statements received will be posted without change; we do not edit personal identifying information from submissions. You should submit only information that you wish to make available publicly.
Arisa Tinaves Kettig, Senior Special Counsel, at (202) 551-5676, Division of Trading and Markets, Securities and Exchange Commission, 100 F Street NE., Washington, DC 20549-7010.
In accordance with Section 10(a) of the Federal Advisory Committee Act, 5 U.S.C.-App. 1, and the regulations thereunder, Heather Seidel, Designated Federal Officer of the Committee, has ordered publication of this notice.
Pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (“Act”),
The Exchange proposes to list and trade under Nasdaq Rule 5745 (Exchange-Traded Managed Fund Shares (“NextShares”)) the common shares (“Shares”) of the exchange-traded managed fund described herein (the “Fund”).
The text of the proposed rule change is available on the Exchange's Web site at
In its filing with the Commission, the Exchange 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. The Exchange has prepared summaries, set forth in sections A, B, and C below, of the most significant aspects of such statements.
The Exchange proposes to list and trade the Shares of the Fund under Nasdaq Rule 5745, which governs the listing and trading of exchange-traded managed fund shares, as defined in Nasdaq Rule 5745(c)(1), on the Exchange.
Hartford Funds NextShares
Hartford Funds Management Company, LLC (the “Adviser”) will be the adviser to the Fund and Wellington Management Company LLP will the sub-adviser to the Fund (the “Sub-Adviser”). Each of the Adviser and the Sub-Adviser is a registered broker-dealer or affiliated with a broker-dealer, and each of the Adviser and the Sub-Adviser has implemented a fire wall with respect to its affiliated broker-dealer regarding access to information concerning the composition and/or
ALPS Distributors, Inc. (“ALPS”) will be the principal underwriter and distributor of the Fund's Shares. Hartford Funds Management Company, LLC will act as the administrator and accounting agent to the Fund; State Street Bank and Trust Company will act as sub-administrator, sub-accounting agent, transfer agent and custodian to the Fund.
The Fund will be actively managed and will pursue the principal investment strategy described below.
The investment objective of the Fund is long-term capital appreciation. The Fund seeks to achieve its objective by investing all of its assets in shares of the Global Impact Master Portfolio (the “Master Portfolio;” references to the “Fund” include, where applicable, the Master Portfolio), which has the same investment objective and strategy as the Fund. The Fund invests in equity securities of issuers located throughout the world, including non-dollar securities and securities of emerging market issuers. The Fund seeks to invest in companies that focus their operations in areas that the Sub-Adviser believes are likely to address major social and environmental challenges. The Fund may invest in companies of any market capitalization, including small capitalization securities.
Shares will be issued and redeemed on a daily basis at the Fund's next-determined net asset value (“NAV”)
The creation and redemption process for the Fund may be effected “in kind,” in cash, or in a combination of securities and cash. Creation “in kind” means that an Authorized Participant—usually a brokerage house or large institutional investor—purchases the Creation Unit with a basket of securities equal in value to the aggregate NAV of the Shares in the Creation Unit. When an Authorized Participant redeems a Creation Unit in kind, it receives a basket of securities equal in value to the aggregate NAV of the Shares in the Creation Unit.
As defined in Nasdaq Rule 5745(c)(3), the Composition File is the specified portfolio of securities and/or cash that the Fund will accept as a deposit in issuing a Creation Unit of Shares, and the specified portfolio of securities and/or cash that the Fund will deliver in a redemption of a Creation Unit of Shares. The Composition File will be disseminated through the NSCC once each business day before the open of trading in Shares on such day and also will be made available to the public each day on a free Web site.
All persons purchasing or redeeming Creation Units are expected to incur a transaction fee to cover the estimated cost to the Fund of processing the transaction, including the costs of clearance and settlement charged to it by NSCC or DTC, and the estimated trading costs (
Because Shares will be listed and traded on the Exchange, Shares will be available for purchase and sale on an intraday basis. Shares will be purchased and sold in the secondary market at prices directly linked to the Fund's next-determined NAV using a new trading protocol called “NAV-Based Trading.”
Bid and offer prices for Shares will be quoted throughout the day relative to NAV. The premium or discount to NAV at which Share prices are quoted and transactions are executed will vary depending on market factors, including the balance of supply and demand for Shares among investors, transaction fees and other costs in connection with creating and redeeming Creation Units of Shares, the cost and availability of borrowing Shares, competition among market makers, the Share inventory positions and inventory strategies of market makers, the profitability requirements and business objectives of market makers, and the volume of Share trading. Reflecting such market factors, prices for Shares in the secondary market may be above, at or below NAV. Funds with higher transaction fees may trade at wider premiums or discounts to NAV than Funds with lower transaction fees, reflecting the added costs to market makers of managing their Share inventory positions through purchases and redemptions of Creation Units.
Because making markets in Shares will be simple to manage and low risk, competition among market makers seeking to earn reliable, low-risk profits should enable the Shares to routinely trade at tight bid-ask spreads and narrow premiums/discounts to NAV. As noted below, the Fund will maintain a public Web site that will be updated on a daily basis to show current and historical trading spreads and premiums/discounts of Shares trading in the secondary market.
To avoid potential investor confusion, Nasdaq will work with member firms and providers of market data services to seek to ensure that representations of intraday bids, offers and execution prices of Shares that are made available to the investing public follow the “NAV−$0.01/NAV + $0.01” (or similar) display format. All Shares listed on the Exchange will have a unique identifier associated with their ticker symbols, which would indicate that the Shares are traded using NAV-Based Trading. Nasdaq makes available to member firms and market data services certain proprietary data feeds that are designed to supplement the market information disseminated through the consolidated tape (“Consolidated Tape”). Specifically, the Exchange will use the NASDAQ Basic and NASDAQ Last Sale data feeds to disseminate intraday price and quote data for Shares in real time in the “NAV−0.01/NAV + $0.01” (or similar) display format. Member firms could use the NASDAQ Basic and NASDAQ Last Sale data feeds to source intraday Share prices for presentation to the investing public in the “NAV−$0.01/NAV + $0.01” (or similar) display format. Alternatively, member firms could source intraday Share prices in proxy price format from the Consolidated Tape and other Nasdaq data feeds (
Prior to the commencement of market trading in Shares, the Fund will be required to establish and maintain a public Web site through which its current prospectus may be downloaded.
The Composition File will be disseminated through the NSCC before the open of trading in Shares on each business day and also will be made available to the public each day on a free Web site as noted above. Consistent with the disclosure requirements that apply to traditional open-end investment companies, a complete list of current Fund portfolio positions will be made available at least once each calendar quarter, with a reporting lag of not more than 60 days. The Fund may provide more frequent disclosures of portfolio positions at its discretion.
Reports of Share transactions will be disseminated to the market and delivered to the member firms participating in the trade contemporaneous with execution. Once the Fund's daily NAV has been calculated and disseminated, Nasdaq will price each Share trade entered into during the day at the Fund's NAV plus/minus the trade's executed premium/discount. Using the final trade price, each executed Share trade will then be disseminated to member firms and market data services via an FTP file to be created for exchange-traded managed funds and confirmed to the member firms participating in the trade to supplement the previously provided information to include final pricing.
Information regarding NAV-based trading prices, best bids and offers for Shares, and volume of Shares traded will be continuously available on a real-time basis throughout each trading day on brokers' computer screens and other electronic services.
Shares will conform to the initial and continued listing criteria as set forth under Nasdaq Rule 5745. A minimum of 50,000 Shares and no less than two Creation Units of the Fund will be outstanding at the commencement of trading on the Exchange. The Exchange will obtain a representation from the issuer of the Shares that the NAV per Share will be calculated daily (on each day the New York Stock Exchange is open for trading) and provided to Nasdaq via the Mutual Fund Quotation Service (”MFQS”) by the fund accounting agent. As soon as the NAV is entered into MFQS, Nasdaq will disseminate the value to market participants and market data vendors via the Mutual Fund Dissemination Service (“MFDS”) so all firms will receive the data element at the same time. The Reporting Authority
For each series of Shares, an estimated value of an individual Share, defined in Nasdaq Rule 5745(c)(2) as the “Intraday Indicative Value,” will be calculated and disseminated at intervals of not more than 15 minutes throughout the Regular Market Session
The IIV will be based on current information regarding the value of the securities and other assets held by the Fund.
Neither the Adviser nor the Su-Adviser [sic] is a registered broker-dealer, although each is affiliated with a broker-dealer. Each of the Adviser and the Sub-Adviser has implemented a fire wall with respect to its broker-dealer affiliate regarding access to information concerning the composition and/or changes to the Fund's portfolio. In the future event that (a) the Adviser or the Sub-Adviser registers as a broker-dealer or becomes newly affiliated with a broker-dealer, or (b) any new adviser or a sub-adviser to the Fund is a registered broker-dealer or becomes affiliated with a broker-dealer, it will implement a fire wall with respect to its relevant personnel and/or such broker-dealer affiliate, if applicable, regarding access to information concerning the composition and/or changes to the Fund's portfolio and will be subject to procedures designed to prevent the use and dissemination of material non-public information regarding such portfolio.
The Exchange may consider all relevant factors in exercising its discretion to halt or suspend trading in Shares. Nasdaq will halt trading in Shares under the conditions specified in Nasdaq Rules 4120 and in Nasdaq Rule 5745(d)(2)(C). Additionally, Nasdaq may cease trading Shares if other unusual conditions or circumstances exist which, in the opinion of Nasdaq, make further dealings on Nasdaq detrimental to the maintenance of a fair and orderly market. To manage the risk of a non-regulatory Share trading halt, Nasdaq has in place back-up processes and procedures to ensure orderly trading. Because, in NAV-Based Trading, all trade execution prices are linked to end-of-day NAV, buyers and sellers of Shares should be less exposed to risk of loss due to intraday trading halts than buyers and sellers of conventional exchange-traded funds (“ETFs”) and other exchange-traded securities.
Every order to trade Shares of the Funds [sic] is subject to the proxy price protection threshold of plus/minus $1.00, which determines the lower and upper threshold for the life of the order and whereby the order will be cancelled at any point if it exceeds $101.00 or falls below $99.00, the established thresholds.
Nasdaq deems Shares to be equity securities, thus rendering trading in Shares to be subject to Nasdaq's existing rules governing the trading of equity securities. Nasdaq will allow trading in Shares from 9:30 a.m. until 4:00 p.m. Eastern Time.
The Exchange represents that trading in Shares will be subject to the existing trading surveillances, administered by both Nasdaq and the Financial Industry Regulatory Authority, Inc. (“FINRA”) on behalf of the Exchange, which are designed to detect violations of Exchange rules and applicable federal securities laws.
The surveillances referred to above generally focus on detecting securities trading outside their normal patterns, which could be indicative of manipulative or other violative activity. When such situations are detected, surveillance analysis follows and investigations are opened, where appropriate, to review the behavior of all relevant parties for all relevant trading violations.
FINRA, on behalf of the Exchange, will communicate as needed with other markets and other entities that are members of the Intermarket Surveillance Group (“ISG”)
In addition, the Exchange also has a general policy prohibiting the distribution of material non-public information by its employees.
Prior to the commencement of trading in the Fund, the Exchange will inform its members in an Information Circular of the special characteristics and risks associated with trading the Shares. Specifically, the Information Circular will discuss the following: (1) The procedures for purchases and redemptions of Shares in Creation Units (and noting that Shares are not individually redeemable); (2) Nasdaq Rule 2111A, which imposes suitability obligations on Nasdaq members with respect to recommending transactions in Shares to customers; (3) how information regarding the IIV and Composition File is disseminated; (4) the requirement that members deliver a prospectus to investors purchasing Shares prior to or concurrently with the confirmation of a transaction; and (5) information regarding NAV-Based Trading protocols.
As noted above, all orders to buy or sell Shares that are not executed on the day the order is submitted will be automatically cancelled as of the close of trading on such day. The Information Circular will discuss the effect of this characteristic on existing order types. The Information Circular also will identify the specific Nasdaq data feeds from which intraday Share prices in proxy price format may be obtained.
In addition, the Information Circular will advise members, prior to the commencement of trading, of the prospectus delivery requirements applicable to the Fund. Members purchasing Shares from the Fund for resale to investors will deliver a summary prospectus to such investors. The Information Circular will also
The Information Circular also will reference that the Fund is subject to various fees and expenses described in the Registration Statement. The Information Circular will also disclose the trading hours of the Shares and the applicable NAV calculation time for the Shares. The Information Circular will disclose that information about the Shares will be publicly available on the Fund's Web site.
Information regarding Fund trading protocols will be disseminated to Nasdaq members in accordance with current processes for newly listed products. Nasdaq intends to provide its members with a detailed explanation of NAV-Based Trading through a Trading Alert issued prior to the commencement of trading in Shares on the Exchange.
All statements and representations made in this filing regarding (a) the description of the portfolio, (b) limitations on portfolio holdings or reference assets, or (c) the applicability of Exchange rules and surveillance procedures shall constitute continued listing requirements for listing the Shares on the Exchange. In addition, the issuer has represented to the Exchange that it will advise the Exchange of any failure by the Fund to comply with the continued listing requirements, and, pursuant to its obligations under Section 19(g)(1) of the Act, the Exchange will monitor for compliance with the continued listing requirements. If the Fund is not in compliance with the applicable listing requirements, the Exchange will commence delisting procedures under the Nasdaq 5800 Series.
Nasdaq believes that the proposal is consistent with Section 6(b) of the Act
The Exchange believes that the proposed rule change is designed to prevent fraudulent and manipulative acts and practices in that the Shares would be listed and traded on the Exchange pursuant to the initial and continued listing criteria in Nasdaq Rule 5745. The Exchange believes that its surveillance procedures are adequate to properly monitor the trading of Shares on Nasdaq and to deter and detect violations of Exchange rules and the applicable federal securities laws. Each of the Adviser and the Sub-Adviser is a registered broker-dealer or affiliated with a broker-dealer, and each of the Adviser and the Sub-Adviser has implemented a fire wall with respect to its affiliated broker-dealer regarding access to information concerning the composition and/or changes to the Fund's portfolio. The Exchange may obtain information via ISG from other exchanges that are members of ISG or with which the Exchange has entered into a comprehensive surveillance sharing agreement, to the extent necessary.
The proposed rule change is designed to promote just and equitable principles of trade and to protect investors and the public interest. The Exchange will obtain a representation from each issuer of Shares that the NAV per Share will be calculated on each business day that the New York Stock Exchange is open for trading and that the NAV will be made available to all market participants at the same time. In addition, a large amount of information would be publicly available regarding the Fund and the Shares, thereby promoting market transparency.
Prior to the commencement of market trading in Shares, the Fund will be required to establish and maintain a public Web site through which its current prospectus may be downloaded. The Web site will display additional Fund information updated on a daily basis, including the prior business day's NAV, and the following trading information for such business day expressed as premiums/discounts to NAV: (a) Intraday high, low, average and closing prices of Shares in Exchange trading; (b) the Closing Bid/Ask Midpoint; and (c) the Closing Bid/Ask Spread. The Web site will also contain charts showing the frequency distribution and range of values of trading prices, Closing Bid/Ask Midpoints and Closing Bid/Ask Spreads over time.
The Composition File will be disseminated through the NSCC before the open of trading in Shares on each business day and also will be made available to the public each day on a free Web site. The Exchange will obtain a representation from the issuer of the Shares that the IIV will be calculated and disseminated on an intraday basis at intervals of not more than 15 minutes during trading on the Exchange and provided to Nasdaq for dissemination via GIDS. A complete list of current portfolio positions for the Fund will be made available at least once each calendar quarter, with a reporting lag of not more than 60 days. The Fund may provide more frequent disclosures of portfolio positions at its discretion.
Transactions in Shares will be reported to the Consolidated Tape at the time of execution in proxy price format and will be disseminated to member firms and market data services through Nasdaq's trading service and market data interfaces, as defined above. Once the Fund's daily NAV has been calculated and the final price of its intraday Share trades has been determined, Nasdaq will deliver a confirmation with final pricing to the transacting parties. At the end of the day, Nasdaq will also post a newly created FTP file with the final transaction data for the trading and market data services. The Exchange expects that information regarding NAV-based trading prices and volumes of Shares traded will be continuously available on a real-time basis throughout each trading day on brokers' computer screens and other electronic services. Because Shares will trade at prices based on the next-determined NAV, investors will be able to buy and sell individual Shares at a known premium or discount to NAV that they can limit by transacting using limit orders at the time of order entry. Trading in Shares will be subject to Nasdaq Rules 5745(d)(2)(B) and (C), which provide for the suspension of trading or trading halts under certain circumstances, including if, in the view of the Exchange, trading in Shares becomes inadvisable.
The proposed rule change is designed to perfect the mechanism of a free and open market and, in general, to protect investors and the public interest in that it will facilitate the listing and trading of the Fund, which seeks to provide investors with access to an actively managed investment strategy in a structure that offers the cost and tax efficiencies and shareholder protections of ETFs, while removing the requirement for daily portfolio holdings disclosure to ensure a tight relationship between market trading prices and NAV.
For the above reasons, Nasdaq believes the proposed rule change is consistent with the requirements of Section 6(b)(5) of the Act.
The Exchange 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. In fact, the Exchange believes that the introduction of the Fund would promote competition by making available to investors an actively managed investment strategy in a structure that offers the cost and tax efficiencies and shareholder protections of ETFs, while removing the requirement for daily portfolio holdings disclosure to ensure a tight relationship between market trading prices and NAV. Moreover, the Exchange believes that the proposed method of Share trading would provide investors with transparency of trading costs, and the ability to control trading costs using limit orders, that is not available for conventionally traded ETFs.
These developments could significantly enhance competition to the benefit of the markets and investors.
No written comments were either solicited or received.
Within 45 days of the date of publication of this notice in the
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:
• Use the Commission's Internet comment form (
• Send an email to
• Send paper comments in triplicate to Secretary, Securities and Exchange Commission, 100 F Street NE., Washington, DC 20549-1090.
For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets, pursuant to delegated authority.
Pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (“Exchange Act”),
The proposed rule change consists of amendments to FICC's Government Securities Division (“GSD”) Rulebook (the “GSD Rules”)
In its filing with the Commission, the clearing agency included statements
FICC is proposing to amend the GSD Rules to include CCLF, which would be a rules-based committed liquidity facility designed to help ensure that FICC maintains sufficient liquid financial resources to meet its cash settlement obligations in the event of a default of the Affiliated Family to which FICC has the largest exposure in extreme but plausible market conditions, as required by Rule 17Ad-22(b)(3)
FICC occupies an important role in the securities settlement system by interposing itself as a central counterparty between Netting Members that are counterparties to transactions cleared by GSD (“GSD Transactions”), thereby reducing the risk faced by Netting Members.
CCLF would only be invoked if FICC declared a “CCLF Event,” that is, if FICC has ceased to act for a Netting Member in accordance to GSD Rule 22A
Following a default, FICC would first obtain liquidity through other available liquid resources, as described above. If and only if, FICC determines that these sources of liquidity are not able to generate sufficient cash to pay the non-defaulting Netting Members, FICC would declare a CCLF Event by issuing an Important Notice informing all Netting Members of FICC's need to make such a declaration and enter into CCLF Transactions, as necessary.
During a CCLF Event, FICC would meet its liquidity need by initiating CCLF Transactions with non-defaulting Netting Members. Each CCLF Transaction would be governed by the terms of the September 1996 Securities Industry and Financial Markets Association Master Repurchase Agreement,
Each Netting Member would be obligated to enter into CCLF Transactions up to a capped dollar amount. FICC would first identify the non-defaulting Netting Members that are obligated to deliver securities destined for the defaulting Netting Member (“Direct Affected Members”) and FICC's cash payment obligation to such Direct Affected Member that FICC would need to finance through CCLF to cover the defaulting Netting Member's failure to deliver cash (the “Financing Amount”). FICC would notify each Direct Affected Member of its Financing Amount and whether such Direct Affected Member should deliver to FICC or suppress any securities that were destined for the defaulting Netting Member. FICC would then initiate CCLF Transactions with each Direct Affected Member for its purchase of the securities (the “Financed Securities”) that were destined for the defaulting Netting Member.
If any Direct Affected Member's Financing Amount exceeds its Individual Total Amount (the “Remaining Financing Amount”), FICC would advise (A) each other Direct Affected Member whose Financing Amount is less than its Individual Total Amount, and (B) each Netting Member that has not otherwise entered into CCLF Transactions with FICC (the
The order in which FICC would enter into CCLF Transactions for the Remaining Financing Amount would be based upon the Affected Members that have the most funding available within their Individual Total Amounts. No Affected Member would be obligated to enter into CCLF Transactions greater than its Individual Total Amount.
During a CCLF Event, FICC would engage its investment advisor subject to the approval of its Board and seek to minimize liquidation losses on the Financed Securities through hedging, strategic dispositions, or other investment transactions as determined by FICC under relevant market conditions. Once FICC completes the liquidation of the underlying securities by selling them to a new buyer, FICC would instruct the Affected Member to close the repo trade and deliver the Financed Securities to FICC to complete settlement on the contractual settlement date of the liquidating trade. FICC would endeavor to unwind the CCLF Transactions based on the order that it enters into the Liquidating Trades. Each CCLF Transaction would remain open until the earlier of (x) such time that FICC has liquidated the Affected Member's Financed Securities, (y) such time that FICC has obtained liquidity through its available liquid resources or (z) 30 or 60 calendar days after entry into the CCLF Transaction for U.S. government bonds and mortgage-backed securities, respectively.
The original GSD Transactions, which FICC is obligated to settle, are independent from the CCLF Transactions. The proposed rule change would clarify that, under the original GSD Transaction, FICC's obligation to pay cash to a Direct Affected Member, and the Direct Affected Member's obligation to deliver securities, would be deemed satisfied by entry into CCLF Transactions, and that such settlement would be final.
As noted above, FICC would only enter into CCLF Transactions with a Netting Member in an amount that is up to such Netting Member's maximum funding obligation. This amount would be based on each Netting Member's observed peak historical liquidity need. Initially, FICC would calculate the Netting Member's peak historical liquidity need based on a six-month look-back period.
FICC's liquidity need during a CCLF Event would be determined by the cash settlement obligations presented by the default of a Netting Member and an Affiliated Family. FICC would include an additional amount (
Listed below are the steps that FICC would take to size and allocate each Netting Member's CCLF requirement.
FICC's historical liquidity need for the six-month look-back period would be an amount equal to the dollar amount of the largest sum of an Affiliated Family's obligation to receive GSD eligible securities plus the net dollar amount of its Funds-Only Settlement Amount
The Historical Cover 1 Liquidity Requirement would be based on the largest Affiliated Family's activity during a six-month look-back period. However, FICC is cognizant that the Historical Cover 1 Liquidity Requirement would not account for changes in a Netting Member's current trading behavior, which may result in a liquidity need that is greater than the Historical Cover 1 Liquidity Requirement. As a result, FICC proposes to add an additional amount to the Historical Cover 1 Liquidity Requirement as a buffer (the “Liquidity Buffer”) to arrive at FICC's anticipated total liquidity need for GSD during a CCLF Event.
Under the proposed rule change, the Liquidity Buffer would be 20% to 30% of the Historical Cover 1 Liquidity Requirement, subject to a minimum amount of $15 billion. FICC believes that 20% to 30% of the Historical Cover 1 Liquidity Requirement is appropriate based on its analysis of the calculated coefficient of variation
FICC would have the discretion to adjust the Liquidity Buffer based on its analysis of the stability of the Historical Cover 1 Liquidity Requirement over the look-back periods of 3-, 6-, 12-, and 24-months. Should FICC observe changes in the stability of the Historical Cover 1 Liquidity Requirements, FICC would have the discretion to increase the six-month look-back period to help ensure that the calculation of its liquidity need appropriately accounts for variability in the Historical Cover 1 Liquidity Requirement. This would help FICC to ensure that its liquidity resources are sufficient under a wide range of potential market scenarios that may lead to a change in Netting Member behavior. FICC would also analyze the trading behavior of Netting Members that present larger liquidity needs than the majority of the Netting Members (as described below).
FICC's anticipated total liquidity need during a CCLF Event (
After FICC determines the Aggregate Total Amount, which initially would be set to the Historical Cover 1 Liquidity Requirement plus the greater of 20% of the Historical Cover 1 Liquidity Requirement or $15 billion. FICC would allocate the Aggregate Total Amount among Netting Members in order to arrive at each Netting Member's Individual Total Amount. FICC would take a two-tiered approach in its allocation of the Aggregate Total Amount. First, FICC would determine the portion of the Aggregate Total Amount that should be allocated among all Netting Members (“Aggregate Regular Amount”). Then, FICC would allocate the remainder of the Aggregate Total Amount (the “Aggregate Supplemental Amount”) among Netting Members that incur liquidity needs above the Aggregate Regular Amount within the six-month look-back period. FICC believes that this two-tiered approach reflects FICC's consideration of fairness, transparency and the burdens of the funding obligations on each Netting Member's management of its own liquidity.
Under the proposed rule change, FICC would set the Aggregate Regular Amount at $15 billion. FICC believes that this amount is appropriate because FICC observed that from 2015 to 2016, the average Netting Member's liquidity need was approximately $7 billion, with a majority of Netting Members' liquidity needs not exceeding an amount of $15 billion.
Under the proposal, the Aggregate Regular Amount would be allocated among all Netting Members, but Netting Members with larger Receive Obligations would be required to contribute a larger amount. FICC believes that this approach is appropriate because a defaulting Netting Member's Receive Obligations are the primary cash settlement obligations that FICC would have to satisfy as a result of the default of a Netting Member or an Affiliated Family. However, FICC also believes that some portion of the Aggregate Regular Amount should be allocated based on Netting Members' aggregate Deliver Obligations since FICC guarantees both sides of a GSD Transaction and all Netting Members benefit from FICC's risk mitigation. As a result, FICC is proposing to allocate the Aggregate Regular Amount based on a scaling factor. Given that the Aggregate Regular Amount is sized at $15 billion and covers approximately 80% of Netting Members' observed liquidity needs, FICC proposes to set the scaling factor in the range of 65%-85% to the value of Netting Members' Receive Obligations and set the scaling factor in the range of 15%-35% to the value of Netting Members' Deliver Obligations.
Initially, FICC would assign a 20% weighting percentage to a Netting Member's aggregate Deliver Obligations (the “Deliver Scaling Factor”) and the remaining percentage difference, 80% in this case, to a Netting Member's aggregate Receive Obligations (“Receive Scaling Factor”). FICC would have the discretion to adjust these scaling factors based on a quarterly analysis that would, in part, assess Netting Members' observed liquidity needs that are at or below $15 billion. This assessment would ensure that the Aggregate Regular Amount would be appropriately allocated across all Netting Members.
FICC would calculate a Netting Member's portion of the Aggregate Regular Amount (its “Individual Regular Amount”) by adding (a) and (b) below.
(a) FICC would (x) divide the absolute value of a Netting Member's peak Receive Obligations by the absolute value of the sum of all Netting Members' peak Receive Obligations, then (y) multiply such resulting value by the Aggregate Regular Amount, then (z) multiply the resulting value by the Receive Scaling Factor (which would initially be 80%).
(b) FICC would (x) divide the absolute value of a Netting Member's peak Deliver Obligations by the absolute value of the sum of all Netting Members' peak Deliver Obligations, then (y) multiply such resulting value by the Aggregate Regular Amount, then (z) multiply the resulting value by the Deliver Scaling Factor (which would initially be 20%).
The remainder of the Aggregate Total Amount (
FICC would allocate the Aggregate Supplemental Amount across liquidity tiers (“Liquidity Tiers”). The allocation to each Liquidity Tier would be based on how many times (
FICC would set the Liquidity Tiers in $5 billion increments. FICC believes that this increment would appropriately distinguish Netting Members that present the highest liquidity needs on a frequent basis and allocate more of the Individual Supplemental Amount to Netting Members in the top Liquidity Tiers. Increments set to an amount greater than $5 billion would provide FICC with less ability to allocate the Aggregate Supplemental Amount to Netting Members with the highest liquidity needs.
FICC would have the discretion to reduce any one or all of the Liquidity Tiers to $2.5 billion if FICC determines that the majority of the Netting Members' liquidity needs in such Liquidity Tiers are above or below the midpoint of the Liquidity Tier.
Once the Liquidity Tiers are set, FICC would first allocate the Aggregate Supplemental Amount to each Liquidity Tier in proportion to the total number of observations across all Liquidity Tiers. Next, FICC would allocate the Individual Supplemental Amount to each Netting Member in accordance with each Netting Member's liquidity needs within each Liquidity Tier. This allocation would be based on such Netting Member's number of observations within each Liquidity Tier in proportion to the aggregate of all
FICC would sum each Netting Member's Individual Regular Amount and its Individual Supplemental Amount (if any) to arrive at such Netting Member's Individual Total Amount.
Table 1 includes the actual values FICC would set for each step described above, as of January 1, 2017.
The example in Table 2 reflects the allocation of the CCLF size for a hypothetical Netting Member. This example is based on a six-month look-back period of July 1, 2016 through December 31, 2016.
As described above, the Aggregate Total Amount and each Netting Member's Individual Total Amount (
• Peak daily liquidity need for the largest Affiliated Family;
• the Liquidity Buffer;
• the Aggregate Regular Amount;
• the Aggregate Supplemental Amount;
• the Deliver Scaling Factor and the Receive Scaling Factor used to allocate the Aggregate Regular Amount;
• the increments for the Liquidity Tiers; and
• the length of the look-back period and the reset period for the Aggregate Total Amount.
In the event that any changes to the above-referenced parameters result in an increase in a Netting Member's Individual Total Amount, such increase would be effective as of the next reset.
Additionally, on a daily basis, FICC would examine the Aggregate Total Amount to ensure that such amount is sufficient to satisfy FICC's liquidity needs. If FICC determines that the Aggregate Total Amount is insufficient to satisfy its liquidity needs, FICC may modify the length of the look-back or reset periods or otherwise increase the Aggregate Total Amount.
Any increase in the Aggregate Total Amount resulting from the Liquidity Product Risk Unit's quarterly assessments or FICC's daily monitoring would be subject to the approvals, as set forth in Table 3 below.
If FICC increases a Netting Member's Individual Total Amount as a result of its daily monitoring, such increase will not be effective until ten (10) Business Days after FICC provides an Important Notice regarding the increase.
If FICC determines that its liquidity needs may be satisfied with a lower Aggregate Total Amount, a reduction in the Aggregate Total Amount would be reflected at the conclusion of the reset period.
The CCLF proposal would become operative 12 months after the later date of the Commission's approval of this proposed rule change or its no objection of the Advance Notice Filing. During this 12-month period, FICC would periodically provide each Netting Member with estimated Individual Total Amounts. The delayed implementation and the estimated Individual Total Amounts are designed to give Netting Members the opportunity to assess the impact that the CCLF proposal would have on their business profile.
Prior to the effective date, FICC would add a legend to the GSD Rules to state that the specified changes to the GSD Rules are approved but not yet operative and to provide the date such approved changes would become operative. The legend would also include the file numbers of the approved proposed rule change and Advance Notice Filing and would state that once operative, the legend would automatically be removed from the GSD Rules.
As of the implementation date and annually thereafter, FICC would require that each Netting Member attest that its Individual Total Amount has been incorporated into its liquidity plans.
In addition to the above, on a quarterly basis, FICC's Counterparty Credit Risk Management group would conduct due diligence to assess each Netting Member's ability to meet its Individual Total Amount. This due diligence would include a review of all information that the Netting Member has provided FICC in connection with its ongoing reporting obligations pursuant to the GSD Rules and a review of other publicly available information. Additionally, FICC would test its operational procedures for invoking a CCLF Event. Pursuant to GSD Rule 3 Section 6, Netting Members would be required to participate in such tests. If a Netting Member fails to participate in such testing when required by FICC, FICC may take disciplinary measures as set forth in GSD Rule 3 Section 7.
FICC understands that each Netting Member must be able to evaluate the risks of its membership and plan for its funding obligations. Additionally, FICC believes that it is critical that each Netting Member understands the risks that its activity presents to FICC, and that each Netting Member should be prepared to monitor its activity and alter its behavior in order to minimize the liquidity risk that it presents to FICC. Accordingly, on each Business Day, FICC would make a liquidity funding report available to each Netting Member that would include the following:
1. The Netting Member's Individual Total Amount, Individual Regular Amount and, if applicable, its Individual Supplemental Amount;
2. FICC's Aggregate Total Amount, Aggregate Regular Amount and Aggregate Supplemental Amount; and
3. FICC's regulatory liquidity requirements as of the prior Business Day.
The liquidity funding report would be provided for informational purposes only. Pursuant to the proposed rule change, upon a CCLF Event, each Netting Member would be required to enter into CCLF Transactions having an aggregate purchase price up to its Individual Total Amount as calculated by FICC.
In order to help effectuate the proposed changes, FICC proposes to add the following defined terms to the GSD Rule 1: Affected Member; Aggregate Regular Amount; Aggregate Supplemental Amount; Aggregate Total Amount; CCLF Event; CCLF MRA; CCLF MRA Termination Date; CCLF Transaction; Deliver Scaling Factor; Direct Affected Member; Financed Securities; Financing Amount; Historical Cover 1 Liquidity Requirement; Indirect Affected Member; Individual Regular Amount; Individual Supplemental Amount; Individual Total Amount; Liquidating Trade; Liquidity Buffer; Liquidity Need; Liquidity Percentage; Liquidity Tier; Look-Back Period; Observation; Receive Scaling Factor; Relative Inter-Tier Frequency; Relative Intra-Tier Frequency; Relevant Securities; Remaining Financing Amount; Required Attestation; and SIFMA MRA.
FICC is proposing to amend Rule 22A to include a new section in this Rule. This new section would be entitled “Section 2a.” Proposed Section 2a would incorporate the CCLF MRA into the GSD Rules subject to the amendments proposed therein. In addition, the proposed section would include (1) the notification process that would occur once FICC invokes a CCLF Event; (2) the CCLF Transactions that FICC would enter into once it invokes a CCLF Event; (3) disclosure of each relevant CCLF sizing component that FICC would assess; (4) the calculation that FICC would use to determine each Netting Member's Individual Regular Amount and Individual Supplemental Amount, if applicable; and (5) a description of the officers' certificate that each Netting Member would be required to provide certifying that, among other things, its Individual Total Amount has been incorporated into its liquidity plans.
Section 17A(b)(3)(F) of the Exchange Act requires, in part, that the rules of a clearing agency be designed to assure the safeguarding of securities and funds which are in the custody or control of the clearing agency or for which it is responsible.
FICC believes that the CCLF proposal would enable FICC to access additional liquidity in the event that its other liquidity resources are insufficient upon the default of a Netting Member, which would help ensure that FICC has sufficient funds to meet its cash settlement obligations to its non-defaulting Netting Members. As a result, FICC believes that the proposal has been designed to assure the safeguarding of securities and funds in FICC's custody or control, consistent with Section 17A(b)(3)(F) of the Exchange Act.
Rule 17Ad-22(b)(3) under the Exchange Act requires a registered clearing agency that performs central counterparty services to establish, implement, maintain and enforce written policies and procedures reasonably designed to maintain sufficient financial resources to withstand, at a minimum, a default by the participant family to which it has the largest exposure in extreme but plausible market conditions.
Rule 17Ad-22(d)(9) under the Exchange Act requires a registered clearing agency that performs central counterparty services to establish, implement, maintain and enforce written policies and procedures to provide market participants with sufficient information for them to identify and evaluate the risks and costs associated with using its services.
Rule 17Ad-22(e)(7) under the Exchange Act, which was recently adopted by the Commission, will require FICC to establish, implement, maintain and enforce written policies and procedures reasonably designed to effectively measure, monitor, and manage liquidity risk that arises in or is borne by FICC, including measuring, monitoring, and managing its settlement and funding flows on an ongoing and timely basis, and its use of intraday liquidity.
Rule 17Ad-22(e)(7)(i) will require FICC to maintain sufficient liquid resources to effect same-day settlement of payment obligations in the event of a default of the participant family that would generate the largest aggregate payment obligation for the covered clearing agency in extreme but plausible market conditions.
Rule 17Ad-22(e)(7)(ii) will require FICC to hold qualifying liquid resources sufficient to satisfy payment obligations owed to clearing members.
Rule 17Ad-22(e)(7)(iv) under the Exchange Act will require FICC to undertake due diligence that confirms that it has a reasonable basis to believe each of its liquidity providers has: (a) Sufficient information to understand and manage the liquidity provider's liquidity risks; and (b) the capacity to perform as required under its commitments to provide liquidity.
Additionally, Rule 17Ad-22(e)(7)(v) under the Exchange Act will require FICC to maintain and test with each liquidity provider, to the extent practicable, FICC's procedures and operational capacity for accessing its relevant liquid resources.
FICC believes that the proposed rule change could have an impact upon competition because each Netting Member's Individual Total Amount would place a committed funding obligation on Netting Members and this obligation would increase the cost of participating in GSD. The proposed rule change could impose a larger burden on competition on Netting Members that are subject to an Individual Supplemental Amount because such Members would bear higher funding obligations than Netting Members who are not subject to an Individual Supplemental Amount.
FICC believes that the burden on competition that is created by the proposed rule change is necessary to comply with the requirements of the Exchange Act and rules thereunder. As noted above, FICC believes that the proposal would assure that FICC safeguards securities and funds in its custody or control by providing FICC with additional liquidity to meet its cash settlement obligations. Moreover, the proposal would support FICC's compliance with Rule 17Ad-22(b)(3)
FICC believes that the burden on competition created by the Individual Total Amount and Individual Supplemental Amount would be appropriate in furtherance of the Exchange Act. While the proposal may result in FICC requiring each Netting Member to contribute different amounts to CCLF, those contributions would be calculated in proportion to the liquidity needs that each Netting Member presents to FICC over a given six-month look-back period. Moreover, the Individual Supplemental Amount would only be applied to Netting Members that place the largest liquidity needs on FICC, and these needs are a direct result of such Members' trading behavior during the six-month look-back period. As a result, the proposal would ensure that all Netting Members fairly and equitably contribute to FICC's liquid financial resources based on the liquidity need they present to FICC.
FICC has received feedback that the proposed rule change seeks to address a risk that is not reasonable given the
While FICC believes that historical market behavior allows market participants to observe trends in the repo market, FICC also believes that the adoption of CCLF would better position FICC to protect itself and its Netting Members should the repurchase financing market materially contract in the future. Additionally, the proposed rule change would adhere to Rule 17Ad-22(e)(7)(i) which requires FICC to maintain sufficient liquid resources to effect same-day settlement of payment obligations in the event of a default of the participant family that would generate the largest aggregate payment obligation for the covered clearing agency in extreme but plausible market conditions.
FICC has also received feedback that the proposed rule change would create concentration risk by forcing smaller Netting Members to clear through large financial institutions or exit the business. Commenters have explained that the funding obligation under the CCLF proposal may significantly impact their available capital or operating profiles. As a result, the CCLF proposal may force certain Netting Members to (1) clear through other financial institutions or (2) terminate their membership with FICC and engage in bilateral arrangements.
FICC values each Netting Member and does not wish to force any Netting Member to clear through larger Netting Members or exit the business as a result of this proposed rule change. However, FICC believes that all Netting Members should endeavor to maintain suitable capital to meet FICC's enhanced participation requirements so that such Members do not have to clear through larger financial institutions or exit the business. Because each Netting Member is in the best position to monitor and manage the liquidity risks presented by its own activity, FICC believes that Netting Members should endeavor to manage their own liquidity. In an effort to enable each Netting Member to prepare for its liquidity funding obligation, FICC would provide a liquidity funding report to each Netting Member on a daily basis. This report would enable each Netting Member to prepare for its maximum funding obligations and alter its trading behavior should it desire to minimize the liquidity risk that it presents to FICC.
FICC is cognizant that Netting Members would need to incorporate their respective funding obligation into their internal liquidity plans and evaluate the appropriate course of action for their firm based on the economic impact that such Netting Members believe the funding obligation imposes. Given the added liquidity cost, as noted in the feedback, FICC would implement the proposed rule change 12 months after the later date of the Commission's approval of this filing or its no objection of the Advance Notice Filing. During this 12-month period, FICC would periodically provide Netting Members with estimates of their Individual Total Amounts. The deferred implementation and the estimate Individual Total Amounts are designed to give Netting Members the opportunity to assess the impact of their Individual Total Amount on their business profile and make any changes that such Netting Members deem necessary to lower their respective allocation.
As noted above, FICC understands that Netting Members must be able to plan for their funding obligations. At the same time, FICC also believes that it is critical that Netting Members understand the risks that their own activity presents to FICC, and be prepared to monitor their own activity and alter their behavior in order to minimize the liquidity risk they present to FICC.
Within 45 days of the date of publication of this notice in the
(A) By order approve or disapprove such proposed rule change, or
(B) institute proceedings to determine whether the proposed rule change should be disapproved.
The proposal shall not take effect until all regulatory actions required with respect to the proposal are completed.
Interested persons are invited to submit written data, views and arguments concerning the foregoing, including whether the proposed rule change is consistent with the Exchange Act. Comments may be submitted by any of the following methods:
• Use the Commission's Internet comment form (
• Send an email to
• Send paper comments in triplicate to Secretary, Securities and Exchange Commission, 100 F Street NE., Washington, DC 20549.
For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets, pursuant to delegated authority.
Pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (the “Act”),
The Exchange filed a proposal to amend the fee schedule applicable to Members
The text of the proposed rule change is available at the Exchange's Web site at
In its filing with the Commission, the Exchange 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. The Exchange has prepared summaries, set forth in Sections A, B, and C below, of the most significant parts of such statements.
The Exchange proposes to amend its fee schedule applicable to its equities trading platform (“BZX Equities”) to: (i) Modify the criteria required to meet the Market Depth Tier; (ii) add a new Cross-Asset Add Volume Tier 2 under footnote 1; and (iii) delete the alternate criteria to meet Tiers 1 through 6 under footnote 1.
The Exchange proposes to modify the required criteria for Market Depth Tier under footnote 1 of the fee schedule. The Exchange currently offers enhanced rebates ranging from $0.0025 to $0.0032 per share under eight Add Volume Tiers set forth in footnote 1 of the fee schedule. Under the Market Depth Tier, qualifying Members earn a rebate per share of $0.0032 on displayed orders that add liquidity and yield fee codes B, V, or Y.
The Exchange proposes to offer an additional Cross-Asset Add Volume Tier under footnote 1 of the fee schedule. Included amongst the volume tiers offered by the Exchange under footnote 1 is a Cross-Asset Add Volume Tier which requires participation on the Exchange's equity options platform (“BZX Options”). Under the Exchange's current Cross-Asset Add Volume Tier, a Member's order that yield fee codes B, V, or Y may receive an enhanced rebate of $0.0028 per share where that Member has an: (i) ADAV
The Exchange proposes to delete the alternate criteria to meet Tiers 1-6 under footnote 1 of the fee schedule. The Exchange currently offers enhanced rebates ranging from $0.0025 to $0.0032 per share under Tiers 1 through 6 in footnote 1 of the fee schedule for Members that have an ADAV as a percentage of TCV greater than or equal to a certain percentage
• Under Tier 1, a Member may receive a rebate of $0.0025 per share where they have an: (i) ADAV as a percentage of TCV greater than or equal to 0.10%; or (ii) ADV as a percentage of TCV greater than or equal to 0.25%. As amended, the second alternate criteria will be removed and Members would no longer qualify for the tier where they have an ADV as a percentage of TCV greater than or equal to 0.25%.
• Under Tier 2, a Member may receive a rebate of $0.0028 per share where they have an: (i) ADAV as a percentage of TCV greater than or equal to 0.20%; or (ii) ADV as a percentage of TCV greater than or equal to 0.50%. As amended, the second alternate criteria will be removed and Members would no longer qualify for the tier where they have an ADV as a percentage of TCV greater than or equal to 0.50%.
• Under Tier 3, a Member may receive a rebate of $0.0029 per share where they have an: (i) ADAV as a percentage of TCV greater than or equal to 0.30%; or (ii) ADV as a percentage of TCV greater than or equal to 0.75%. As amended, the second alternate criteria will be removed and Members would no longer qualify for the tier where they have an ADV as a percentage of TCV greater than or equal to 0.75%.
• Under Tier 4, a Member may receive a rebate of $0.0030 per share where they have an: (i) ADAV as a percentage of TCV greater than or equal to 0.50%; or (ii) ADV as a percentage of TCV greater than or equal to 1.00%. As amended, the second alternate criteria will be removed and Members would no longer qualify for the tier where they have an ADV as a percentage of TCV greater than or equal to 1.00%.
• Under Tier 5, a Member may receive a rebate of $0.0031 per share where they have an: (i) ADAV as a percentage of TCV greater than or equal to 1.00%; or (ii) ADV as a percentage of TCV greater than or equal to 1.40%. As amended, the second alternate criteria will be removed and Members would no longer qualify for the tier where they have an ADV as a percentage of TCV greater than or equal to 1.40%.
• Under Tier 6, a Member may receive a rebate of $0.0032 per share where they have an: (i) ADAV as a percentage of TCV greater than or equal to 1.25%; or (ii) ADV as a percentage of TCV greater than or equal to 1.75%. As amended, the second alternate criteria will be removed and Members would no longer qualify for the tier where they have an ADV as a percentage of TCV greater than or equal to 1.75%.
The Exchange proposes to implement these amendments to its fee schedule immediately.
The Exchange believes that the proposed rule change is consistent with the objectives of Section 6 of the Act,
Volume-based rebates such as that proposed herein have been widely adopted by exchanges, including the Exchange, and are equitable because they are open to all Members on an equal basis and provide additional benefits or discounts that are reasonably related to: (i) The value to an exchange's market quality; (ii) associated higher levels of market activity, such as higher levels of liquidity provisions and/or growth patterns; and (iii) introduction of higher volumes of orders into the price and volume discovery processes.
The modification proposed herein is also intended to incentivize additional Members to send orders to the Exchange in an effort to qualify for the enhanced rebate made available by the tiers, contribute to the growth of the Exchange, or will allow the Exchange to earn additional revenue that can be used to offset the addition of new pricing incentives. The Exchange believes decreasing the first prong of the tier's criteria by 0.30%, while increasing the second prong of the criteria by 0.02%, ensures the difficulty of achieving the tier remains the same, while adjusting to reflect current market dynamics. The second prong of the criteria is a subset of the first prong. Due to market trend of decreased volatility in 2017, this tier has become more difficult to achieve. By decreasing the overall ADV required by the first prong while slightly increasing the ADV required in certain non-displayed orders by the second prong, the effect of the tier, to incentivize orders which add depth to the order book, remains in place, while adjusting for current market volatility. The result is that the difficulty of achieving the tier remains relatively similar. The Exchange does not proposed to modify the rebate offered in this tier as the difficulty is relatively unchanged. The Exchange as well as competitors of the Exchange and do not represent a significant departure from the Exchange's general pricing structure.
The Exchange believes that the proposed Cross-Asset Add Volume Tier 2 is a reasonable, equitable, and not unfairly discriminatory allocation of fees and rebates because it will provide Members with an additional incentive to reach certain thresholds on both BZX Equities and BZX Options. The increased liquidity from this proposal also benefits all investors by deepening the BZX Equities and BZX Options liquidity pools, offering additional flexibility for all investors to enjoy cost savings, supporting the quality of price discovery, promoting market transparency and improving investor protection. Such pricing programs thereby reward a Member's growth
The Exchange believes that the proposed deletions of the alternate criteria for Tiers 1 through 6 under footnote 1 are reasonable, equitable, and not unfairly discriminatory allocation of fees and rebates. The alternate criteria available under these tier has not affected Members' behavior in the manner originally conceived by the Exchange as most all Members that qualify for Tier 1 through 6 do so by meeting the tier's first criteria, which the Exchange does not proposes to modify of delete. Therefore, the alternate criteria the Exchange proposes to delete for each tier would have a minimal impact on Member's ability to qualify for a particular tier. The Exchange also believes that the proposed elimination of the alternate criteria for Tiers 1 through 6 would be non-discriminatory in that it currently applies equally to all Members and, upon elimination, would no longer be available to any Members. Further, their elimination will allow the Exchange to explore other pricing mechanisms in which it may enhance market quality for all Members.
The Exchange does not believe that the proposed rule change will impose any burden on competition not necessary or appropriate in furtherance of the purposes of the Act. The Exchange does not believe that any of the proposed change to the Exchange's tiered pricing structure burden competition, but instead, that it enhances competition as it is intended to increase the competitiveness of BZX by modifying pricing incentives in order to attract order flow and incentivize participants to increase their participation on the Exchange. The Exchange notes that it operates in a highly competitive market in which market participants can readily direct order flow to competing venues if they deem fee structures to be unreasonable or excessive. The proposed changes are generally intended to enhance the rebates for liquidity added to the Exchange, which is intended to draw additional liquidity to the Exchange. The Exchange does not believe the proposed amendments would burden intramarket competition as they would be available to all Members uniformly.
The Exchange has not solicited, and does not intend to solicit, comments on this proposed rule change. The Exchange has not received any unsolicited written comments from Members or other interested parties.
The foregoing rule change has become effective pursuant to Section 19(b)(3)(A) of the Act
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:
• Use the Commission's Internet comment form (
• Send an email to
• Send paper comments in triplicate to Secretary, Securities and Exchange Commission, 100 F Street NE., Washington, DC 20549-1090.
For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets, pursuant to delegated authority.
Pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (“Act”),
The Exchange proposes to amend Supplementary Material .03 to Rule 713 to change the allocation entitlement for Preferred PMMs.
The text of the proposed rule change is available on the Exchange's Web site at
In its filing with the Commission, the Exchange 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. The Exchange has prepared summaries, set forth in sections A, B, and C below, of the most significant aspects of such statements.
Supplementary Material .03 to Rule 713 allows an Electronic Access Member (“EAM”) to designate a “Preferred Market Maker” on orders it enters into the System (“Preferenced Orders”). A Preferred Market Maker may be the Primary Market Maker (“PMM”) appointed to the options class or any Competitive Market Maker (“CMM”) appointed to the options class.
Currently, a Preferred Market Maker that is quoting at the national best bid of offer (“NBBO”) at the time the Preferenced Order is received,
The Exchange now proposes to amend the participation rights of Preferred PMMs such that the PMM appointed in an option class will receive participation rights that are consistent with the higher allocation entitlement given to PMM equivalents on the MIAX Options Exchange (“MIAX”). In particular, the Exchange proposes to amend Supplementary Material .03(c) to Rule 713 to provide that, the Preferred Market Maker has participation rights equal to the greater of: (i) The proportion of the total size at the best price represented by the size of its quote, (ii) sixty percent (60%) of the contracts to be allocated if there is only one (1) other Professional Order or market maker quotation at the best price and forty percent (40%) if there are two (2) or more other Professional Orders and/or market maker quotes at the best price, or
Pursuant to Supplementary Material .01(c) to Rule 713 the Exchange evaluates on a quarterly basis what percentage of the volume executed on the Exchange is comprised of orders for five (5) contracts or fewer executed by PMMs. The Exchange represents that this review will extend to the small order entitlement for Preferred PMMs. Thus, consistent with Supplementary Material .01(c) to Rule 713, the Exchange will reduce the size of the orders included in the small order entitlement if such percentage is over forty percent (40%).
The proposed rule change will be implemented on the Exchange's new INET trading system, which launched on February 27, 2017,
The Exchange believes that the proposed rule change is consistent with the requirements of the Act and the rules and regulations thereunder that are applicable to a national securities exchange, and, in particular, with the requirements of Section 6(b) of the Act.
The Exchange believes that the proposed rule change is consistent with the protection of investors and the public interest as it will allow EAMs to send Preferenced Orders to the PMM appointed in an options class without inadvertently disadvantaging the PMM compared to if the order was not preferenced. The regular allocation entitlements for PMMs, including the small order entitlement, are designed to balance the obligations that the PMM has to the market with corresponding benefits. The Exchange believes that it is appropriate to provide the small order entitlement also when the PMM is designated as a Preferred Market Maker as the obligations that the PMM has to the market are not diminished when it receives a Preferenced Order. MIAX similarly provides the small order entitlement to the PMM regardless of whether the order is submitted as a Preferenced Order.
In accordance with Section 6(b)(8) of the Act,
No written comments were either solicited or received.
Because the foregoing proposed rule change does not: (i) Significantly affect the protection of investors or the public interest; (ii) impose any significant burden on competition; and (iii) become operative for 30 days from the date on which it was filed, or such shorter time as the Commission may designate, it has become effective pursuant to Section 19(b)(3)(A)(iii) of the Act
A proposed rule change filed pursuant to Rule 19b-4(f)(6) under the Act
At any time within 60 days of the filing of the proposed rule change, the Commission summarily may temporarily suspend such rule change if it appears to the Commission that such action is: (i) Necessary or appropriate in the public interest; (ii) for the protection of investors; or (iii) otherwise in furtherance of the purposes of the Act. If the Commission takes such action, the Commission shall institute proceedings
Interested persons are invited to submit written data, views, and arguments concerning the foregoing, including whether the proposed rule change, as modified by Amendment No. 1, is consistent with the Act. Comments may be submitted by any of the following methods:
• Use the Commission's Internet comment form (
• Send an email to
• Send paper comments in triplicate to Secretary, Securities and Exchange Commission, 100 F Street NE., Washington, DC 20549-1090.
For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets, pursuant to delegated authority.
Notice is hereby given that, pursuant to the provisions of the Government in the Sunshine Act, Public Law 94-409, the Securities and Exchange Commission will hold an Open Meeting on Wednesday, March 22, 2017, at 10:00 a.m., in the Auditorium, Room L-002.
The subject matter of the Open Meeting will be:
• The Commission will consider whether to adopt an amendment to Rule 15c6-1 under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 to shorten the standard settlement cycle for most broker-dealer transactions from three business days after the trade date to two business days after the trade date.
At times, changes in Commission priorities require alterations in the scheduling of meeting items.
For further information and to ascertain what, if any, matters have been added, deleted, or postponed, please contact Brent J. Fields in the Office of the Secretary at (202) 551-5400.
U.S. Small Business Administration.
Amendment 3.
This is an amendment of the Presidential declaration of a major disaster for Public Assistance Only for the State of GEORGIA (FEMA-4297-DR), dated 02/07/2017.
Submit completed loan applications to: U.S. Small Business Administration, Processing and Disbursement Center, 14925 Kingsport Road, Fort Worth, TX 76155.
A. Escobar, Office of Disaster Assistance, U.S. Small Business Administration, 409 3rd Street SW., Suite 6050, Washington, DC 20416.
The notice of the President's major disaster declaration for Private Non-Profit organizations in the State of Georgia, dated 02/07/2017, is hereby amended to include the following areas as adversely affected by the disaster.
All other information in the original declaration remains unchanged.
U.S. Small Business Administration.
Amendment 1.
This is an amendment of the Presidential declaration of a major disaster for Public Assistance Only for the State of South Dakota (FEMA-4298-DR), dated 02/01/2017.
Submit completed loan applications to: U.S. Small Business Administration, Processing and Disbursement Center, 14925 Kingsport Road, Fort Worth, TX 76155.
A. Escobar, Office of Disaster Assistance, U.S. Small Business Administration, 409 3rd Street SW., Suite 6050, Washington, DC 20416.
The notice of the President's major disaster declaration for Private Non-Profit
All other information in the original declaration remains unchanged.
This notice announces a meeting of the Department of State's International Telecommunication Advisory Committee (ITAC) to review recent activities of the Department of State in international meetings on international communications and information policy and prepare for similar activities in the next quarter. The ITAC will meet on April 27, 2017 at 2:00 p.m. EST at ITIC, 1101 K St NW #610, Washington, DC 20005 to discuss the preparatory process for multilateral meetings, the results of recent events, and preparations for upcoming meetings at the International Telecommunication Union and the Inter-American Telecommunications Commission of the Organization of American States. The meeting will focus on the following topics:
PP-18 will take place in Dubai, United Arab Emirate, from—October 29 to November 17, 2018. The Plenipotentiary Conference, which takes place every four years, is the highest policy-making body of the Union. PP-18 will determine the overall policy direction of the ITU; adopt the strategic and financial plans for the next four years; elect the 48 members of Council, 12 members of the Radio Regulations Board, and five Elected Officials; and consider and adopt, if appropriate, modifications to the ITU Constitution and Convention. The Department seeks advice from stakeholders and interested parties to inform its upcoming preparations for PP-18, to include but not limited to input on the following questions:
1. Maintaining the stability of the Constitution and Convention and the mandate of ITU, the Strategic and Financial Plans, Internet-related issues, and elections are typical U.S. priorities for a plenipotentiary conference. Should these remain U.S. priorities? What other U.S. priorities should be considered?
2. Should the United States propose to initiate a process of ITU reform at PP-18? If so, what areas for reform should be prioritized?
3. What are the major areas of concern for PP-18 and how should the United States address them?
Comments in Microsoft Word or Adobe PDF may also be submitted electronically to
Attendance at this meeting is open to the public as seating capacity allows. The public will have an opportunity to provide comments at this meeting at the invitation of the chair. Further details on this ITAC meeting will be announced on the Department of State's email list,
Department of State.
Notice of renewal of an advisory committee charter.
Keith Miller, Senior Advisor to the Acting Director, Office of Overseas Schools and Acting Executive Secretary of the Council, at (202) 261-8201.
(a) To advise the Department of State regarding matters of policy and funding for the overseas schools.
(b) To help the overseas schools become showcases for excellence in education.
(c) To help make service abroad more attractive to American citizens who have school-age children, both in the business community and in Government.
(d) To identify methods to mitigate risks to American private sector interests worldwide.
The Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) gives notice under the Federal
The purpose of the Committee is to provide the Secretary of Veterans Affairs with an on-going assessment of the effectiveness of the policies, organizational structures, and services of VA in assisting Veterans at-risk and experiencing homelessness. The Committee shall assemble and review information related to the needs of homeless Veterans and provide advice on the most appropriate means of providing assistance to that subset of the Veteran population. The Committee will make recommendations to the Secretary regarding such activities.
The agenda will include briefings from officials at VA and other agencies regarding services for homeless Veterans. The Committee will also receive a briefing on the annual report that was developed after the last meeting of the Advisory Committee on Homeless Veterans and will then discuss topics for its upcoming annual report and recommendations to the Secretary of Veterans Affairs.
No time will be allocated at this meeting for receiving oral presentations from the public. Interested parties should provide written comments on issues affecting Veterans at-risk and experiencing homelessness for review by the Committee to Anthony Love, Designated Federal Officer, VHA Homeless Programs Office (10NC1), Department of Veterans Affairs, 90 K Street Northeast, Washington, DC, or via email at
Members of the public who wish to attend in-person should contact both Charles Selby and Timothy Underwood of the VHA Homeless Program Office by April 25, 2017, at
U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs.
Notice of intent to enter into an Enhanced-Use Lease (EUL).
The Secretary of VA intends to enter into an EUL for the purpose of utilizing Building 209, located on the grounds of the VA Greater Los Angeles Healthcare System—West Los Angeles Campus, Los Angeles, California, and consisting of 55 housing units of permanent supportive housing for Veterans. The EUL lessee, Veterans Housing Partnership, LLC, will finance, design, manage, operate, and maintain, permanent supportive housing for eligible homeless Veterans, or Veterans at risk of homelessness, and their families. Additionally, the Developer/Lessee will be required to provide supportive services that guide Veteran residents towards long-term independence and self-sufficiency.
Edward L. Bradley III, Office of Asset Enterprise Management (044), Department of Veterans Affairs, 810 Vermont Avenue NW., Washington, DC 20420, (202) 461-7778.
Title 38 U.S.C. 8161,
The Secretary of Veterans Affairs approved this document and authorized the undersigned to sign and submit the document to the Office of the Federal Register for publication electronically as an official document of the Department of Veterans Affairs. David J. Shulkin, M.D., Secretary of Veterans Affairs, approved this document on March 15, 2017, for publication.
| Category | Regulatory Information | |
| Collection | Federal Register | |
| sudoc Class | AE 2.7: GS 4.107: AE 2.106: | |
| Publisher | Office of the Federal Register, National Archives and Records Administration |