| Page Range | 52115-52304 | |
| FR Document |
| Page and Subject | |
|---|---|
| 83 FR 52232 - United States-Mexico-Canada Agreement: Likely Impact on the U.S. Economy and on Specific Industry Sectors; Institution of Investigation and Scheduling of Hearing | |
| 83 FR 52218 - Sunshine Act Meeting Notice | |
| 83 FR 52242 - Sunshine Act Meetings | |
| 83 FR 52220 - Sunshine Act Meetings | |
| 83 FR 52150 - Filing of Schedules by Rights Owners and Contact Information by Transmitting Entities Relating to Pre-1972 Sound Recordings | |
| 83 FR 52176 - Noncommercial Use of Pre-1972 Sound Recordings That Are Not Being Commercially Exploited | |
| 83 FR 52301 - Proposed Extension of Information Collection Request Submitted for Public Comment; Section 6708 Failure To Maintain List of Advisees With Respect to Reportable Transactions | |
| 83 FR 52302 - Advisory Committee to the Internal Revenue Service; Meeting | |
| 83 FR 52298 - Agreement on Social Security Between the United States and the Federative Republic of Brazil; Entry Into Force | |
| 83 FR 52212 - New England Fishery Management Council; Public Meeting | |
| 83 FR 52210 - Pacific Fishery Management Council; Public Meetings | |
| 83 FR 52204 - Certain Circular Welded Carbon Steel Pipes and Tubes From Taiwan: Final Results of Antidumping Duty Administrative Review and Final Determination of No Shipments; 2016-2017 | |
| 83 FR 52169 - Atlantic Highly Migratory Species; Atlantic Bluefin Tuna Fisheries | |
| 83 FR 52303 - Notice of Open Public Event | |
| 83 FR 52209 - New England Fishery Management Council; Public Meeting | |
| 83 FR 52301 - Hazardous Materials: Emergency Waiver No. 8 | |
| 83 FR 52231 - Notice of Public Meeting for the Southeast Oregon Resource Advisory Council | |
| 83 FR 52190 - Proposed Information Collection; Comment Request; Generic Clearance for Census Bureau Field Tests and Evaluations | |
| 83 FR 52242 - Market Dominant Price Adjustment | |
| 83 FR 52226 - Performance Review Board Members | |
| 83 FR 52220 - Notice of Approval and Opportunity for Public Comment and Public Hearing for Public Water System Supervision Program Revision for New Jersey | |
| 83 FR 52208 - Fisheries of the Caribbean, Gulf of Mexico, and South Atlantic; Exempted Fishing Permits | |
| 83 FR 52207 - Atlantic Coastal Fisheries Cooperative Management Act Provisions; General Provisions for Domestic Fisheries; Application for Exempted Fishing Permits | |
| 83 FR 52205 - Xanthan Gum From the People's Republic of China: Notice of Court Decision Not in Harmony With Amended Final Determination in Less Than Fair Value Investigation; Notice of Amended Final Determination Pursuant to Court Decision; Notice of Revocation of Antidumping Duty Order in Part; and Discontinuation of Fourth and Fifth Antidumping Duty Administrative Reviews in Part | |
| 83 FR 52192 - Refillable Stainless Steel Kegs From the People's Republic of China: Initiation of Countervailing Duty Investigation | |
| 83 FR 52195 - Refillable Stainless Steel Kegs From the People's Republic of China, the Federal Republic of Germany, and Mexico: Initiation of Less-Than-Fair-Value Investigations | |
| 83 FR 52217 - Agency Information Collection Extension | |
| 83 FR 52216 - Senior Executive Service Performance Review Board | |
| 83 FR 52216 - Agency Information Collection Extension | |
| 83 FR 52154 - Mail Preparation Changes | |
| 83 FR 52213 - Energy Conservation Program: Decision and Order Granting a Waiver to Big Ass Solutions From the Department of Energy Ceiling Fan Test Procedure | |
| 83 FR 52233 - Meeting of the CJIS Advisory Policy Board | |
| 83 FR 52233 - Notice Pursuant to the National Cooperative Research and Production Act of 1993-Cable Television Laboratories, Inc. | |
| 83 FR 52228 - Approval of the Strawn Group, as a Commercial Gauger | |
| 83 FR 52227 - Accreditation and Approval of Intertek USA Inc. (Yorktown, VA) as a Commercial Gauger and Laboratory | |
| 83 FR 52299 - BNSF Railway Company-Lease Exemption-Union Pacific Railroad Company | |
| 83 FR 52235 - Designation of 10 Areas as High Intensity Drug Trafficking Areas | |
| 83 FR 52221 - Submission for OMB Review; Comment Request | |
| 83 FR 52228 - Agency Information Collection Activities; Revision of a Currently Approved Collection: Report of Medical Examination and Vaccination Record | |
| 83 FR 52229 - Agency Information Collection Activities; Extension, Without Change, of a Currently Approved Collection: Application for Significant Public Benefit Entrepreneur Parole and Instructions for Biographic Information for Entrepreneur Parole Dependents | |
| 83 FR 52178 - Periodic Reporting | |
| 83 FR 52188 - Notice of Public Meeting of the Nevada State Advisory Committee | |
| 83 FR 52201 - Freshwater Crawfish Tail Meat From the People's Republic of China: Preliminary Results of Antidumping Duty Administrative Review and New Shipper Reviews, and Rescission of Review in Part; 2016-2017 | |
| 83 FR 52206 - Large Power Transformers From the Republic of Korea: Continuation of Antidumping Duty Order | |
| 83 FR 52212 - Submission for OMB Review; Comment Request | |
| 83 FR 52115 - Federal Home Loan Bank Community Support Program-Administrative Amendments | |
| 83 FR 52230 - Agency Information Collection Activities; Claim for Relocation Payments-Residential, DI-381 and Claim for Relocation Payments-Nonresidential, DI-382 | |
| 83 FR 52188 - Submission for OMB Review; Comment Request | |
| 83 FR 52148 - Drawbridge Operation Regulation; Dutch Kills, Queens, NY | |
| 83 FR 52298 - 60-Day Notice of Proposed Information Collection: Brokering Prior Approval (License) | |
| 83 FR 52226 - Agency Information Collection Activities: Submission for Office of Management and Budget (OMB) Review; Comment Request | |
| 83 FR 52213 - Agency Information Collection Activities; Submission to the Office of Management and Budget for Review and Approval; Comment Request; Common Core of Data (CCD) School-Level Finance Survey (SLFS) 2018-2020 | |
| 83 FR 52302 - Proposed Collection; Comment Request for Revenue Procedure | |
| 83 FR 52189 - Proposed Information Collection; Comment Request; The American Community Survey | |
| 83 FR 52220 - Proposed Information Collection Activity | |
| 83 FR 52235 - National Environmental Policy Act Implementing Procedures | |
| 83 FR 52222 - Developing Targeted Therapies in Low-Frequency Molecular Subsets of a Disease; Guidance for Industry; Availability | |
| 83 FR 52225 - Hematologic Malignancies: Regulatory Considerations for Use of Minimal Residual Disease in Development of Drug and Biological Products for Treatment; Draft Guidance for Industry; Availability | |
| 83 FR 52223 - Rare Diseases: Early Drug Development and the Role of Pre-Investigational New Drug Application Meetings; Draft Guidance for Industry; Availability | |
| 83 FR 52234 - Agency Information Collection Activities; Submission for OMB Review; Comment Request; Youth CareerConnect Grant Program Participant Tracking System | |
| 83 FR 52272 - Self-Regulatory Organizations; MIAX PEARL, LLC; Notice of Withdrawal of a Proposed Rule Change To Amend the Fee Schedule Regarding Connectivity Fees for Members and Non-Members | |
| 83 FR 52287 - Self-Regulatory Organizations; NYSE American LLC; Notice of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of Amendments to Rules Regarding Qualification, Registration and Continuing Education Applicable to Member Organizations, Equity Trading Permit Holders, and American Trading Permit Holders | |
| 83 FR 52264 - Self-Regulatory Organizations; Miami International Securities Exchange LLC; Notice of Withdrawal of a Proposed Rule Change To Amend the Fee Schedule Regarding Connectivity Fees for Members and Non-Members | |
| 83 FR 52272 - Self-Regulatory Organizations; NYSE Arca, Inc.; Notice of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of Amendments to Rules Regarding Qualification, Registration and Continuing Education Applicable to Equity Trading Permit Holders, Options Trading Permit Holders or OTP Firms | |
| 83 FR 52253 - Self-Regulatory Organizations; Cboe C2 Exchange, Inc.; Notice of Filing of a Proposed Rule Change To Amend C2's Rulebook To Allow the Post Only Order Instruction on Complex Orders That Route to Its Electronic Book | |
| 83 FR 52266 - Self-Regulatory Organizations; NYSE Arca, Inc.; Notice of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of Proposed Rule Change Relating To Listing and Trading of Shares of the iShares iBond Dec 2026 Term Muni Bond ETF Under Commentary .02 to NYSE Arca Rule 5.2-E(j)(3) | |
| 83 FR 52255 - Self-Regulatory Organizations; Cboe BZX Exchange, Inc.; Notice of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of a Proposed Rule Change To List and Trade Shares of the JPMorgan Municipal ETF and JPMorgan Ultra-Short Municipal ETF of the J.P. Morgan Exchange-Traded Fund Trust Under Rule 14.11(i), Managed Fund Shares | |
| 83 FR 52264 - Self-Regulatory Organizations; Cboe EDGX Exchange, Inc.; Notice of Filing of a Proposed Rule Change To Amend the Exchange's Rulebook To Allow the Post Only Order Instruction on Complex Orders That Route to Its Electronic Book for Trading Options | |
| 83 FR 52285 - Self-Regulatory Organizations; Cboe Exchange, Inc.; Notice of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of a Proposed Rule Change To Amend Its Fees Schedule | |
| 83 FR 52283 - Self-Regulatory Organizations; BOX Exchange LLC; Notice of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of a Proposed Rule Change To Amend the Fee Schedule on the BOX Options Market LLC (“BOX”) Facility To Adopt a New Rebate for Certain Manual Transactions Initiated From the Trading Floor | |
| 83 FR 52300 - Hazardous Materials: Emergency Waiver No. 7 | |
| 83 FR 52304 - Agency Information Collection Activity Under OMB Review: Claim for Disability Insurance Benefits, Government Life Insurance | |
| 83 FR 52303 - Agency Information Collection Activity Under OMB Review: Survey of Veteran Enrollees' Health and Use of Health Care | |
| 83 FR 52191 - Export Trade Certificate of Review | |
| 83 FR 52148 - Outdated Regulations-Teacher Quality Enhancement Grants Program and Preparing Tomorrow's Teachers to Use Technology (PT3) Program | |
| 83 FR 52243 - Program for Allocation of Regulatory Responsibilities Pursuant to Rule 17d-2; Notice of Filing and Order Approving and Declaring Effective an Amendment to the Plan for the Allocation of Regulatory Responsibilities Among Cboe BZX Exchange, Inc., Cboe BYX Exchange, Inc., Chicago Stock Exchange, Inc., Cboe EDGA Exchange, Inc., Cboe EDGX Exchange, Inc., Financial Industry Regulatory Authority, Inc., Nasdaq BX, Inc., Nasdaq PHLX LLC, The Nasdaq Stock Market LLC, NYSE National, Inc., New York Stock Exchange LLC, NYSE American LLC, NYSE Arca, Inc., and Investors Exchange LLC Relating to the Surveillance, Investigation, and Enforcement of Insider Trading Rules | |
| 83 FR 52179 - Significant New Use Rules on Certain Chemical Substances | |
| 83 FR 52157 - Air Quality Designations for the 2015 Ozone National Ambient Air Quality Standards; Corrections | |
| 83 FR 52173 - Airworthiness Directives; The Boeing Company Airplanes | |
| 83 FR 52171 - Airworthiness Directives; The Boeing Company Airplanes | |
| 83 FR 52120 - Airworthiness Directives; Bombardier, Inc., Airplanes | |
| 83 FR 52147 - Amendment of Class E Airspace for Lancaster, PA; and Williamsport, PA | |
| 83 FR 52163 - Water Quality Standards; Withdrawal of Certain Federal Water Quality Criteria Applicable to California: Lead, Chlorodibromomethane, and Dichlorobromomethane | |
| 83 FR 52140 - Airworthiness Directives; Bombardier, Inc., Airplanes | |
| 83 FR 52143 - Airworthiness Directives; ATR-GIE Avions de Transport Régional Airplanes | |
| 83 FR 52131 - Airworthiness Directives; The Boeing Company Airplanes | |
| 83 FR 52126 - Airworthiness Directives; Airbus SAS Airplanes | |
| 83 FR 52118 - Airworthiness Directives; Bombardier, Inc., Airplanes | |
| 83 FR 52123 - Airworthiness Directives; ATR-GIE Avions de Transport Régional Airplanes | |
| 83 FR 52137 - Airworthiness Directives; Bombardier, Inc., Airplanes | |
| 83 FR 52135 - Airworthiness Directives; The Boeing Company Airplanes |
Census Bureau
International Trade Administration
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
Energy Information Administration
Federal Energy Regulatory Commission
Children and Families Administration
Food and Drug Administration
Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration
Coast Guard
U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services
U.S. Customs and Border Protection
Land Management Bureau
Antitrust Division
Federal Bureau of Investigation
Copyright Office, Library of Congress
National Endowment for the Humanities
Federal Aviation Administration
Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration
Internal Revenue 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.
Federal Housing Finance Agency.
Final rule.
The Federal Housing Finance Agency (FHFA) is issuing a final rule amending its community support regulation to require that FHFA establish relevant dates for FHFA's biennial community support review by written notice to the Federal Home Loan Banks (Banks). The amendments do not affect the substantive requirements of the regulation and do not change the criteria for determining member compliance with the community support standards and eligibility for access to long-term Bank advances.
This final rule will take effect on November 15, 2018.
Ted Wartell, Manager, Office of Housing and Community Investment, 202-649-3157,
Section 10(g) of the Federal Home Loan Bank Act (Bank Act) requires FHFA to adopt regulations establishing standards of community investment or service for members of Banks to maintain access to long-term Bank advances. 12 U.S.C. 1430(g). Section 10(g) states that such regulations “shall take into account factors such as a member's performance under the Community Reinvestment Act of 1977 (CRA) and the member's record of lending to first-time homebuyers.”
FHFA's current community support regulation implements section 10(g). 12 CFR part 1290. The regulation details the CRA and first-time homebuyer standards that have been established pursuant to section 10(g). Each Bank member, except as provided in the regulation, must meet these standards in order to maintain access to long-term Bank advances.
Under the current community support regulation, each Bank member subject to community support review must submit to FHFA a completed Community Support Statement once every two years. The regulation establishes December 31 of each odd-numbered year as the submission deadline. FHFA provides instructions to the Banks each review cycle with detailed requirements for submissions, including the start date for the submission period. 12 CFR 1290.2(b)(1). For the 2017 review cycle, the instructions indicated that FHFA would begin accepting submissions on April 1, 2017.
The regulation also establishes two notice obligations for the Banks. Each Bank is required to provide notice to each of its members subject to community support review of the member's obligation to submit a Community Support Statement. Each Bank is also required to provide notice to its Advisory Council and other interested parties of the opportunity to submit comments on the activities of Bank members subject to community support review. The Banks are required to provide these notices by March 31 of each odd-numbered year.
Under the current community support regulation, each Bank member subject to community support review must submit its completed Community Support Statement by December 31 of the applicable review year. 12 CFR 1290.2(b)(1). Many members submit their Community Support Statements close to the end of the calendar year. In the 2017 review, for example, 2,584 of the 6,690 Community Support Statements submitted by December 31 were submitted on or after November 1. This influx of submissions comes when both the Banks and FHFA face holiday-related staffing shortages and multiple end-of-year obligations, including those related to community support review. For example, the Banks must provide requested technical assistance to members in completing the Community Support Statements. 12 CFR 1290.2(a). FHFA must review each submitted Community Support Statement and notify the Bank of its determination, and the Bank must then promptly notify each member of FHFA's determination. 12 CFR 1290.4.
FHFA expects that many Bank members subject to community support review are likely to continue to submit their Community Support Statements near the submission deadline. Moving the submission deadline away from the year-end holidays will reduce the burden on FHFA and the Banks. However, the most appropriate deadline for future review cycles may change based on FHFA's experience and based on feedback from the Banks and Bank members. Codifying a specific date in the regulation would unnecessarily limit FHFA's flexibility. Therefore, the final rule replaces the December 31 Community Support Statement submission deadline with a requirement that FHFA establish the submission deadline for each biennial community support review by written notice to the Banks. The final rule does not change
The current regulation establishes March 31 of each odd-numbered year as the date by which each Bank must provide written notice to each of its members subject to community support review of the member's obligation to submit a Community Support Statement by the submission deadline. 12 CFR 1290.2(a). Because this date establishes the beginning of the biennial review cycle, retaining it in the regulation would limit FHFA's ability to provide an appropriate amount of time for members to submit their Community Support Statements. Therefore, the final rule replaces the March 31 date with a requirement that FHFA establish, via written notice to the Banks, the date by which each Bank must provide written notice to each of its members subject to community support review of the member's obligation to submit a Community Support Statement by the submission deadline.
The current regulation also establishes March 31 of each odd-numbered year as the date by which each Bank must provide notice to its Advisory Council and other interested parties of the opportunity to submit comments on the activities of Bank members subject to community support review. 12 CFR 1290.2(c)(1). This date need not coincide with the deadline for the Banks to notify their members. However, these two dates currently coincide, and FHFA would like to retain the ability to continue this practice in future review cycles. Therefore, the final rule replaces this date with a requirement that the deadline for notice to Advisory Councils and other interested parties also be established by FHFA via written notice to the Banks.
The current regulation does not provide a date by which FHFA will begin accepting Community Support Statements for a particular biennial review cycle. For the 2017 community support review, FHFA began accepting Community Support Statements on April 1, 2017. While members that are on probation or restriction may submit a Community Support Statement at any time to demonstrate compliance with the requirements of the regulation, most members will submit only one Community Support Statement in each biennial review cycle. Proper administration of the community support review process requires the establishment of a starting point for each biennial review. Otherwise, submission at the discretion of the submitting members would effectively dictate the review schedule. Therefore, FHFA will continue to establish a date by which it will begin accepting Community Support Statements for review for each review cycle. The final rule requires that members submit their Community Support Statements in accordance with the submission dates designated by FHFA in the written notice to the Banks establishing the submission and notice deadlines.
While the final rule provides substantial flexibility for FHFA to establish appropriate deadlines for each step in the community support review process, FHFA recognizes that the Banks and Bank members will need adequate advance notice to allow them to prepare to meet their respective obligations under the regulation. To ensure that the Banks and members continue to have adequate time to prepare for the submission period, the final rule requires that FHFA notify the Banks of the applicable dates for the review period at least 90 days before the deadline for the Banks to notify their members.
For the 2019 biennial community support review, FHFA will issue the written notice establishing the applicable deadlines concurrently with or shortly after publication of this final rule in the
The final rule makes certain clarifying revisions to the community support regulation and removes outdated text.
The current regulation provides that the Banks must provide a blank Community Support Statement form to each member, and that FHFA will maintain a blank copy of the form on its website. 12 CFR 1290.2(a). Starting with the 2017 review cycle, FHFA has established an online process for submission of the Community Support Statements. Members are strongly encouraged to use the online submission system for submitting their Community Support Statements, although FHFA will accept hard copy submissions from members experiencing technical difficulties in submitting via the online process. The final rule amends the regulation to remove the outdated requirement to provide blank forms to each member, and to require instead that Banks provide a copy of the blank form upon request. In addition, FHFA maintains an informational version of the form on its website, but it is overlaid with explanatory text and therefore not a blank version of the form which any member could complete and submit. The blank form referenced in the regulation is transmitted directly by FHFA to the Banks. The final rule amends the regulation to align with this practice.
The final rule removes an outdated transition provision in § 1290.2 that clarified the community support review obligations for the 2014-2015 review cycle of members who had already been selected for community support review during that review cycle. 12 CFR 1290.2(b)(2). The final rule also updates a cross-reference in § 1290.5 to reflect the revised paragraph numbering in § 1290.2.
The final rule removes all references to specific dates in paragraph (a) and provides that the applicable deadline will be established pursuant to new paragraph (f). The final rule removes the reference to FHFA's website, providing instead that the referenced blank Community Support Statement form will be provided by FHFA to the Banks. The final rule also removes the requirement that each Bank provide a
The final rule removes all references to specific dates in paragraph (b)(1) and provides that the applicable deadline will be established pursuant to new paragraph (f). The final rule removes paragraph (b)(2) and redesignates paragraph (b)(1) as paragraph (b).
The final rule removes all references to specific dates in paragraph (c)(1) and provides that the applicable deadline will be established pursuant to new paragraph (f).
The final rule adds new paragraph (f), which provides that FHFA will designate applicable dates for each biennial community support review via written notice to the Banks. Paragraph (f) provides that this notice will designate the dates referenced in paragraphs (a), (b) and (c)(1), and will be issued at least 90 days before the date by which each Bank must notify members of their community support review obligations under paragraph (a).
Section 553(b)(A) of the Administrative Procedures Act provides that when a regulation involves matters of agency organization, procedure, or practice, the agency may publish the regulation in final form without prior public notice and comment. 5 U.S.C. 553(b)(A). This final rule involves matters of agency procedure and practice. The final rule does not make any change to the substantive standards for compliance with the community support regulation. The changes in the final rule are limited to administrative changes in the process that FHFA uses to evaluate members. As a result, the final rule is exempt from the public notice and comment provisions of section 553.
Section 1313(f) of the Safety and Soundness Act requires the FHFA Director, when promulgating regulations “of general applicability and future effect” relating to the Banks, to consider the differences between the Banks and the Enterprises as they may relate to the Banks' cooperative ownership structure, mission of providing liquidity to members, affordable housing and community development mission, capital structure, and joint and several liability. In preparing this final rule, the Director considered the differences between the Banks and the Enterprises as they relate to these factors. The rule would apply only to the Banks. There is no direct Enterprise-specific analog to the Banks' community support requirements. Under the existing community support regulation, it is possible that a Bank member's access to long-term advances may be restricted as a result of a failure to meet the community support standards. While such restrictions may affect an individual member's access through the Bank to liquidity for home mortgage financing, they do not fundamentally change the role of the Banks in providing such liquidity, and the restriction is mandated by the Bank Act in such a case. See 12 U.S.C. 1430(g). In any case, the final rule would not make any substantive change to these provisions governing member restriction. Consequently, the Director has determined the rule to be appropriate.
FHFA currently collects information from Bank members regarding their compliance with the community support requirements under existing part 1290. Existing part 1290 also permits Bank members whose access to long-term advances has been restricted for failure to meet the community support requirements to apply directly to FHFA to remove the restriction under certain circumstances. The current collection of information has been approved by the Office of Management and Budget (OMB), and the control number, OMB No. 2590-0005, will expire on March 31, 2020. The final rule amends the community support provisions in part 1290 but does not substantively or materially modify the approved information collection with respect to the members' information collection burden.
The Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601
FHFA has determined that this regulatory action does not qualify as a “rule” under the Congressional Review Act.
Banks and banking, Credit, Federal home loan banks, Housing, Mortgages, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.
Accordingly, for the reasons stated in the preamble, FHFA is amending title 12, chapter XII, part 1290, of the Code of Federal Regulations as follows:
12 U.S.C. 1430(g).
(a)
(b)
(c)
(2)
(3)
(d)
(e)
(f)
Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), Department of Transportation (DOT).
Final rule.
We are adopting a new airworthiness directive (AD) for certain Bombardier, Inc., Model DHC-8-400 series airplanes. This AD was prompted by a report of uncommanded deployment of the ground spoilers when the power levers were advanced for takeoff, which was caused by faulty switches in the power lever module. This AD requires revising the maintenance or inspection program, as applicable. We are issuing this AD to address the unsafe condition on these products.
This AD is effective November 20, 2018.
The Director of the Federal Register approved the incorporation by reference of a certain publication listed in this AD as of November 20, 2018.
For service information identified in this final rule, contact Bombardier, Inc., Q-Series Technical Help Desk, 123 Garratt Boulevard, Toronto, Ontario M3K 1Y5, Canada; telephone 416-375-4000; fax 416-375-4539; email
You may examine the AD docket on the internet at
John P. DeLuca, Aerospace Engineer, Avionics and Administrative Services Section, FAA, New York ACO Branch, 1600 Stewart Avenue, Suite 410, Westbury, NY 11590; telephone 516-228-7369; fax 516-794-5531; email
We issued a notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) to amend 14 CFR part 39 by adding an AD that would apply to certain Bombardier, Inc., Model DHC-8-400 series airplanes. The NPRM published in the
We are issuing this AD to address faulty switches in the power lever module, which could result in uncommanded deployment of the ground spoilers and a possible runway excursion.
Transport Canada Civil Aviation (TCCA), which is the aviation authority for Canada, has issued Canadian AD
There has been an incident of uncommanded deployment of the ground spoilers when the power levers were advanced for take-off. The warning horn sounded and the pilot rejected the take-off. The subsequent investigation determined the root cause of the spoiler deployment was faulty switches in the power lever module. An uncommanded deployment of the ground spoilers may lead to a runway excursion.
This [Canadian] AD mandates the incorporation of a new Certification Maintenance Requirement (CMR) task to check the ground spoiler switches in the power lever module.
Required actions include revising the maintenance or inspection program, as applicable. You may examine the MCAI in the AD docket on the internet at
We gave the public the opportunity to participate in developing this final rule. The following presents the comment received on the NPRM and the FAA's response.
Horizon Air requested that paragraph (g) of the proposed AD be revised to refer to Bombardier Certification Maintenance Requirements (CMR) Task 276000-110 of Q400 Dash 8 (Bombardier) TR ALI-0185, dated March 19, 2018. Horizon Air noted that TR ALI-0185, replaced TR ALI-0173, dated March 14, 2017, which was specified in the proposed AD.
Horizon Air also requested that we include a statement that, “When this temporary revision has been included in general revisions of the PSM [product support manual], the general revisions may be inserted in the maintenance or inspection program, as applicable, provided the relevant information in the general revision is identical to that in [Q400 Dash 8] (Bombardier) TR ALI-0185 [, dated March 19, 2018].”
We agree to clarify. Paragraph (g) of this AD requires operators to incorporate “the information specified in” CMR Task 276000-110 of Q400 Dash 8 (Bombardier) TR ALI-0173, dated March 14, 2017. Task 27600-110 is the same in both TR ALI-0173, dated March 14, 2017; and TR ALI-0185, dated March 19, 2018. Therefore, if operators incorporate TR ALI-0185, dated March 19, 2018, into the maintenance or inspection program, as applicable, they are in compliance with paragraph (g) of this AD (
We reviewed the relevant data, considered the comment received, and determined that air safety and the public interest require adopting this final rule as proposed, except for minor editorial changes. We have determined that these minor changes:
• Are consistent with the intent that was proposed in the NPRM for addressing the unsafe condition; and
• Do not add any additional burden upon the public than was already proposed in the NPRM.
Bombardier has issued Q400 Dash 8 (Bombardier) Temporary Revision ALI-0173, dated March 14, 2017. This service information describes CMR Task 276000-110, “Operational Check of the Ground Spoiler Switches in the Power Lever Module.” This service information is reasonably available because the interested parties have access to it through their normal course of business or by the means identified in the
We estimate that this AD affects 86 airplanes of U.S. registry.
We estimate the following costs to comply with this AD:
We have determined that revising the maintenance or inspection program takes an average of 90 work-hours per operator, although we recognize that this number may vary from operator to operator. In the past, we have estimated that this action takes 1 work-hour per airplane. Since operators incorporate maintenance or inspection program changes for their affected fleet(s), we have determined that a per-operator estimate is more accurate than a per-airplane estimate. Therefore, we estimate the total cost per operator to be $7,650 (90 work-hours × $85 per work-hour).
Title 49 of the United States Code specifies the FAA's authority to issue rules on aviation safety. Subtitle I, section 106, describes the authority of the FAA Administrator. Subtitle VII: Aviation Programs, describes in more detail the scope of the Agency's authority.
We are issuing this rulemaking under the authority described in Subtitle VII, Part A, Subpart III, Section 44701: “General requirements.” Under that section, Congress charges the FAA with promoting safe flight of civil aircraft in air commerce by prescribing regulations for practices, methods, and procedures the Administrator finds necessary for safety in air commerce. This regulation is within the scope of that authority because it addresses an unsafe condition that is likely to exist or develop on products identified in this rulemaking action.
This AD is issued in accordance with authority delegated by the Executive Director, Aircraft Certification Service, as authorized by FAA Order 8000.51C. In accordance with that order, issuance of ADs is normally a function of the Compliance and Airworthiness Division, but during this transition period, the Executive Director has delegated the authority to issue ADs applicable to transport category airplanes and associated appliances to the Director of the System Oversight Division.
This AD will not have federalism implications under Executive Order 13132. This AD will not have a substantial direct effect 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.
For the reasons discussed above, I certify that this AD:
(1) Is not a “significant regulatory action” under Executive Order 12866,
(2) Is not a “significant rule” under the DOT Regulatory Policies and Procedures (44 FR 11034, February 26, 1979),
(3) Will not affect intrastate aviation in Alaska, and
(4) Will not have a significant economic impact, positive or negative, on a substantial number of small entities under the criteria of the Regulatory Flexibility Act.
Air transportation, Aircraft, Aviation safety, Incorporation by reference, Safety.
Accordingly, under the authority delegated to me by the Administrator, the FAA amends 14 CFR part 39 as follows:
49 U.S.C. 106(g), 40113, 44701.
This AD is effective November 20, 2018.
None.
This AD applies to Bombardier, Inc., Model DHC-8-400, -401, and -402 airplanes, certificated in any category, serial numbers 4001 and subsequent.
Air Transport Association (ATA) of America Code 27, Flight controls.
This AD was prompted by a report of uncommanded deployment of the ground spoilers when the power levers were advanced for takeoff, which was caused by faulty switches in the power lever module. We are issuing this AD to address faulty switches in the power lever module, which could result in uncommanded deployment of the ground spoilers and a possible runway excursion.
Comply with this AD within the compliance times specified, unless already done.
Within 30 days after the effective date of this AD: Revise the maintenance or inspection program, as applicable, to incorporate the information specified in Certification Maintenance Requirements (CMR) Task 276000-110 of Q400 Dash 8 (Bombardier) Temporary Revision ALI-0173, dated March 14, 2017.
The initial compliance time for doing the CMR Task 276000-110 specified in paragraph (g) of this AD is within 8,000 flight hours after the effective date of this AD.
After the maintenance or inspection program has been revised as required by paragraph (g) of this AD, no alternative actions (
The following provisions also apply to this AD:
(1)
(2)
(1) Refer to Mandatory Continuing Airworthiness Information (MCAI) Canadian Airworthiness Directive CF-2017-35, dated November 29, 2017, for related information. This MCAI may be found in the AD docket on the internet at
(2) For more information about this AD, contact John P. DeLuca, Aerospace Engineer, Avionics and Administrative Services Section, FAA, New York ACO Branch, 1600 Stewart Avenue, Suite 410, Westbury, NY 11590; telephone 516-228-7369; fax 516-794-5531; email
(1) The Director of the Federal Register approved the incorporation by reference (IBR) of the service information listed in this paragraph under 5 U.S.C. 552(a) and 1 CFR part 51.
(2) You must use this service information as applicable to do the actions required by this AD, unless this AD specifies otherwise.
(i) Q400 Dash 8 (Bombardier) Temporary Revision ALI-0173, dated March 14, 2017.
(ii) Reserved.
(3) For service information identified in this AD, contact Bombardier, Inc., Q-Series Technical Help Desk, 123 Garratt Boulevard, Toronto, Ontario M3K 1Y5, Canada; telephone 416-375-4000; fax 416-375-4539; email
(4) You may view this service information at the FAA, Transport Standards Branch, 2200 South 216th St., Des Moines, WA. For information on the availability of this material at the FAA, call 206-231-3195.
(5) You may view this service information that is incorporated by reference at the National Archives and Records Administration (NARA). For information on the availability of this material at NARA, call 202-741-6030, or go to:
Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), Department of Transportation (DOT).
Final rule.
We are adopting a new airworthiness directive (AD) for certain Bombardier, Inc., Model CL-600-2B16 (CL-604 Variants) airplanes. This AD was prompted by reports of floodlight lamps found burned and the corresponding circuit breaker tripped as a result of fluid entering the cockpit floodlight fixtures. This AD requires installation of new gasket seals on floodlight fixtures. We are issuing this AD to address the unsafe condition on these products.
This AD is effective November 20, 2018.
The Director of the Federal Register approved the incorporation by reference of certain publications listed in this AD as of November 20, 2018.
For service information identified in this final rule, contact Bombardier, Inc., 400 Côte-Vertu Road West, Dorval, Québec H4S 1Y9, Canada; Widebody Customer Response Center North America toll-free telephone 1-
You may examine the AD docket on the internet at
Steven Dzierzynski, Aerospace Engineer, Avionics and Electrical Systems Services Section, FAA, New York ACO Branch, 1600 Stewart Avenue, Suite 410, Westbury, NY 11590; telephone 516-228-7367; fax 516-794-5531; email
We issued a notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) to amend 14 CFR part 39 by adding an AD that would apply to certain Bombardier, Inc., Model CL-600-2B16 (CL-604 Variants) airplanes. The NPRM published in the
We are issuing this AD to address fluid entering the cockpit floodlight fixtures, which could cause short circuits and damage to electrical components, which may result in a fire in the cockpit.
Transport Canada Civil Aviation (TCCA), which is the aviation authority for Canada, has issued Canadian AD CF-2016-40, dated December 15, 2016; and Canadian AD CF-2018-06, dated February 19, 2018; to correct an unsafe condition for certain Bombardier, Inc., Model CL-600-2B16 (CL-604 Variants) airplanes. Canadian AD CF-2016-40 and Canadian AD CF-2018-06 are referred to after this as the Mandatory Continuing Airworthiness Information, or “the MCAI.”
Canadian AD CF-2016-40 states:
Several operators have reported a burning odor and smoke emanating from the cockpit floodlights. Bombardier Aerospace (BA) has determined the cause to be fluid entering into the cockpit floodlight fixtures causing short circuits and damage to electrical components. If not corrected, this condition may result in a fire in the cockpit.
This [Canadian] AD is issued to mandate the installation of a new gasket seal on the floodlight fixture.
Canadian AD CF-2018-06 states:
[Canadian] AD CF-2016-40, applicable to Bombardier Inc. model CL-600-2B16 (604 [CL-604 Variants serial numbers 5301 through 5665 inclusive] and 605 [CL-604 Variants serial numbers 5701 through 5988 inclusive] variants) aeroplanes, was issued to address the potential of water penetrating into cockpit floodlight fixtures. A similar condition exists on the CL-600-2B16 (650 variant [CL-604 Variants serial numbers 6050 through 6070 inclusive]) aeroplanes. This condition can cause short circuits and damage to electrical components, which may result in a fire in the cockpit.
This [Canadian] AD mandates the installation of gasket seals on the pilot and co-pilot floodlight fixtures to prevent fluid from entering them.
We gave the public the opportunity to participate in developing this final rule. We received no comments on the NPRM or on the determination of the cost to the public.
We reviewed the relevant data and determined that air safety and the public interest require adopting this final rule as proposed, except for minor editorial changes. We have determined that these minor changes:
• Are consistent with the intent that was proposed in the NPRM for addressing the unsafe condition; and
• Do not add any additional burden upon the public than was already proposed in the NPRM.
Bombardier has issued the following service information:
• Bombardier Service Bulletin 604-33-007, Revision 02, dated October 2, 2017.
• Bombardier Service Bulletin 605-33-005, Revision 02, dated October 2, 2017.
• Bombardier Service Bulletin 650-33-001, Revision 03, dated October 2, 2017.
The service information describes procedures to install new gasket seals on floodlight fixtures. These documents are distinct since they apply to different configurations of the same airplane model. This service information is reasonably available because the interested parties have access to it through their normal course of business or by the means identified in the
We estimate that this AD affects 123 airplanes of U.S. registry. We estimate the following costs to comply with this AD:
According to the manufacturer, some or all of the costs of this AD may be covered under warranty, thereby reducing the cost impact on affected individuals. We do not control warranty coverage for affected individuals. As a result, we have included all known costs in our cost estimate.
Title 49 of the United States Code specifies the FAA's authority to issue rules on aviation safety. Subtitle I,
We are issuing this rulemaking under the authority described in Subtitle VII, Part A, Subpart III, Section 44701: “General requirements.” Under that section, Congress charges the FAA with promoting safe flight of civil aircraft in air commerce by prescribing regulations for practices, methods, and procedures the Administrator finds necessary for safety in air commerce. This regulation is within the scope of that authority because it addresses an unsafe condition that is likely to exist or develop on products identified in this rulemaking action.
This AD is issued in accordance with authority delegated by the Executive Director, Aircraft Certification Service, as authorized by FAA Order 8000.51C. In accordance with that order, issuance of ADs is normally a function of the Compliance and Airworthiness Division, but during this transition period, the Executive Director has delegated the authority to issue ADs applicable to transport category airplanes and associated appliances to the Director of the System Oversight Division.
This AD will not have federalism implications under Executive Order 13132. This AD will not have a substantial direct effect 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.
For the reasons discussed above, I certify that this AD:
(1) Is not a “significant regulatory action” under Executive Order 12866,
(2) Is not a “significant rule” under the DOT Regulatory Policies and Procedures (44 FR 11034, February 26, 1979),
(3) Will not affect intrastate aviation in Alaska, and
(4) Will not have a significant economic impact, positive or negative, on a substantial number of small entities under the criteria of the Regulatory Flexibility Act.
Air transportation, Aircraft, Aviation safety, Incorporation by reference, Safety.
Accordingly, under the authority delegated to me by the Administrator, the FAA amends 14 CFR part 39 as follows:
49 U.S.C. 106(g), 40113, 44701.
This AD is effective November 20, 2018.
None.
This AD applies to certain Bombardier, Inc., Model CL-600-2B16 (CL-604 Variants) airplanes, certificated in any category, serial numbers 5301 through 5665 inclusive, 5701 through 5988 inclusive, and 6050 through 6070 inclusive.
Air Transport Association (ATA) of America Code 33, Lights.
This AD was prompted by reports of floodlight lamps found burned and the corresponding circuit breaker tripped as a result of fluid entering the cockpit floodlight fixtures. We are issuing this AD to address fluid entering the cockpit floodlight fixtures, which could cause short circuits and damage to electrical components, which may result in a fire in the cockpit.
Comply with this AD within the compliance times specified, unless already done.
(1) For airplanes identified in Bombardier Service Bulletin 604-33-007, Revision 02, dated October 2, 2017: Within 38 months after the effective date of this AD, install new gasket seals in accordance with the Accomplishment Instructions of Bombardier Service Bulletin 604-33-007, Revision 02, dated October 2, 2017.
(2) For airplanes identified in Bombardier Service Bulletin 605-33-005, Revision 02, dated October 2, 2017: Within 38 months after the effective date of this AD, install new gasket seals in accordance with the Accomplishment Instructions of Bombardier Service Bulletin 605-33-005, Revision 02, dated October 2, 2017.
(3) For airplanes identified in Bombardier Service Bulletin 650-33-001, Revision 03, dated October 2, 2017: Within 38 months after the effective date of this AD, install new gasket seals, Modification Summary 600-6537, in accordance with the Accomplishment Instructions of Bombardier Service Bulletin 650-33-001, Revision 03, dated October 2, 2017.
(1) This paragraph provides credit for actions required by (g)(1), if those actions were performed before the effective date using Bombardier Service Bulletin 604-33-007, dated September 29, 2015; or Bombardier Service Bulletin 604-33-007, Revision 01, dated November 30, 2015.
(2) This paragraph provides credit for actions required by (g)(2), if those actions were performed before the effective date using Bombardier Service Bulletin 605-33-005, dated September 29, 2015; or Bombardier Service Bulletin 605-33-005, Revision 01, dated November 30, 2015.
(3) This paragraph provides credit for actions required by (g)(3), if those actions were performed before the effective date using the service information specified in paragraphs (h)(3)(i), (h)(3)(ii), or (h)(3)(iii) of this AD.
(i) Bombardier Service Bulletin 650-33-001, dated October 1, 2015.
(ii) Bombardier Service Bulletin 650-33-001, Revision 01, dated November 30, 2015.
(iii) Bombardier Service Bulletin 650-33-001, Revision 02, dated March 11, 2016.
The following provisions also apply to this AD:
(1)
(2)
(1) Refer to Mandatory Continuing Airworthiness Information (MCAI) Canadian AD CF-2016-40, dated December 15, 2016; and Canadian AD CF-2018-06, dated February 19, 2018, for related information. This MCAI may be found in the AD docket on the internet at
(2) For more information about this AD, contact Steven Dzierzynski, Aerospace Engineer, Avionics and Electrical Systems Services Section, FAA, New York ACO Branch, 1600 Stewart Avenue, Suite 410, Westbury, NY 11590; telephone 516-228-7367; fax 516-794-5531; email
(3) Service information identified in this AD that is not incorporated by reference is available at the addresses specified in paragraphs (k)(3) and (k)(4) of this AD.
(1) The Director of the Federal Register approved the incorporation by reference (IBR) of the service information listed in this paragraph under 5 U.S.C. 552(a) and 1 CFR part 51.
(2) You must use this service information as applicable to do the actions required by this AD, unless this AD specifies otherwise.
(i) Bombardier Service Bulletin 604-33-007, Revision 02, dated October 2, 2017.
(ii) Bombardier Service Bulletin 605-33-005, Revision 02, dated October 2, 2017.
(iii) Bombardier Service Bulletin 650-33-001, Revision 03, dated October 2, 2017.
(3) For service information identified in this AD, contact Bombardier, Inc., 400 Côte-Vertu Road West, Dorval, Québec H4S 1Y9, Canada; Widebody Customer Response Center North America toll-free telephone 1-866-538-1247 or direct-dial telephone 1-514-855-2999; fax 514-855-7401; email
(4) You may view this service information at the FAA, Transport Standards Branch, 2200 South 216th St., Des Moines, WA. For information on the availability of this material at the FAA, call 206-231-3195.
(5) You may view this service information that is incorporated by reference at the National Archives and Records Administration (NARA). For information on the availability of this material at NARA, call 202-741-6030, or go to:
Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), Department of Transportation (DOT).
Final rule.
We are adopting a new airworthiness directive (AD) for certain ATR-GIE Avions de Transport Régional Model ATR42-500 airplanes. This AD was prompted by a determination that more restrictive maintenance requirements and airworthiness limitations are necessary. This AD requires revising the maintenance or inspection program, as applicable, to incorporate new and/or more restrictive maintenance requirements and airworthiness limitations. We are issuing this AD to address the unsafe condition on these products.
This AD is effective November 20, 2018.
The Director of the Federal Register approved the incorporation by reference of certain publications listed in this AD as of November 20, 2018.
For service information identified in this final rule, contact ATR-GIE Avions de Transport Régional, 1, Allée Pierre Nadot, 31712 Blagnac Cedex, France; telephone +33 (0) 5 62 21 62 21; fax +33 (0) 5 62 21 67 18; email
You may examine the AD docket on the internet at
Shahram Daneshmandi, Aerospace Engineer, International Section, Transport Standards Branch, FAA, 2200 South 216th St., Des Moines, WA 98198; telephone and fax 206-231-3220.
We issued a notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) to amend 14 CFR part 39 by adding an AD that would apply to all ATR-GIE Avions de Transport Régional Model ATR42-500 airplanes. The NPRM published in the
We are issuing this AD to address reduced structural integrity of the airplane.
The European Aviation Safety Agency (EASA), which is the Technical Agent for the Member States of the European Union, has issued EASA Airworthiness Directive 2017-0222R1, dated December 15, 2017 (referred to after this as the Mandatory Continuing Airworthiness Information, or “the MCAI”), to correct an unsafe condition for ATR-GIE Avions de Transport Régional Model ATR42-500 airplanes. The MCAI states:
The airworthiness limitations and certification maintenance requirements (CMR) for ATR aeroplanes, which are approved by EASA, are currently defined and published in the ATR42-400/-500 Time Limits (TL) document. These instructions have been identified as mandatory for continued airworthiness.
Failure to accomplish these instructions could result in an unsafe condition [
Consequently, ATR published Revision 11 Temporary revision 01 of the ATR42-400/-500 TL document, which contains new and/or more restrictive CMRs and airworthiness limitations tasks.
For the reasons described above, this [EASA] AD requires accomplishment of the actions specified in the ATR42-400/-500 TL document Revision 11 Temporary revision
This [EASA] AD, in conjunction with two other [EASA] ADs related to ATR42-200/-300/-320 (EASA AD 2017-0221) and ATR72-101/-102/-201/-202/-211/-212/-212A (EASA AD 2017-0223) aeroplanes, retains the requirements of EASA AD 2009-0242 [which corresponds to FAA AD 2008-04-19 R1, Amendment 39-16069 (74 FR 56713, November 3, 2009)] and EASA AD 2012-0193 [which corresponds to FAA AD 2015-26-09, Amendment 39-18357 (81 FR 1483, January 13, 2016)]. Once all these three [EASA] ADs are effective, EASA will cancel EASA AD 2009-0242 and EASA AD 2012-0193.
This [EASA] AD is revised to provide the correct issue date (03 May 2017) of the TLD. The original [EASA] AD inadvertently referenced the EASA approval date for that document.
The required actions include revising the maintenance or inspection program, as applicable, to incorporate new and/or more restrictive maintenance requirements and airworthiness limitations. The unsafe condition is reduced structural integrity of the airplane.
You may examine the MCAI in the AD docket on the internet at
We gave the public the opportunity to participate in developing this final rule. The following presents the comment received on the NPRM and the FAA's response to that comment.
Empire Airlines requested that paragraphs (g) and (h) of the proposed AD be revised to refer to ATR ATR42-400/-500 Time Limits Temporary Revision TR02/17, dated October 2, 2017 (“TR02/17”) instead of ATR ATR42-400/-500 Time Limits Temporary Revision TR01/17, dated May 3, 2017 (“TR01/17”). The commenter stated that TR02/17 includes the information in TR01/17.
We do not agree with the commenter's request; however, we do acknowledge that TR02/17 has been issued. The intent of TR02/17 is to incorporate changes due to ATR42 Modification 7474, which relates to upgraded avionics and is not related to the requirements of this AD. The intent of TR01/17 is to incorporate missing certification maintenance requirements related to the air distribution system and cabin pressure and control monitoring. We have not changed this AD in regard to this issue.
We reviewed the relevant data, considered the comment received, and determined that air safety and the public interest require adopting this final rule as proposed, except for minor editorial changes. We have determined that these minor changes:
• Are consistent with the intent that was proposed in the NPRM for addressing the unsafe condition; and
• Do not add any additional burden upon the public than was already proposed in the NPRM.
ATR-GIE Avions de Transport Régional has issued ATR42-400/-500, Time Limits Document (TL), Revision 11, dated May 5, 2015. This service information describes life limits and maintenance requirements for the affected airplanes.
ATR-GIE Avions de Transport Régional has also issued ATR42-400/-500 Time Limits Temporary Revision TR01/17, dated May 3, 2017, to the ATR ATR42-400/-500 Time Limits Document (TL). This service information describes changes to life limits and maintenance requirements of certain tasks for the affected airplanes.
This service information is reasonably available because the interested parties have access to it through their normal course of business or by the means identified in the
We estimate that this AD affects 4 airplanes of U.S. registry.
We estimate the following costs to comply with this AD:
We have determined that revising the maintenance or inspection program takes an average of 90 work-hours per operator, although this figure may vary from operator to operator. In the past, we have estimated that this action takes 1 work-hour per airplane. Since operators incorporate maintenance or inspection program changes for their affected fleet(s), we have determined that a per-operator estimate is more accurate than a per-airplane estimate. Therefore, we estimate the total cost per operator to be $7,650 (90 work-hours × $85 per work-hour).
Title 49 of the United States Code specifies the FAA's authority to issue rules on aviation safety. Subtitle I, section 106, describes the authority of the FAA Administrator. Subtitle VII: Aviation Programs, describes in more detail the scope of the Agency's authority.
We are issuing this rulemaking under the authority described in Subtitle VII, Part A, Subpart III, Section 44701: “General requirements.” Under that section, Congress charges the FAA with promoting safe flight of civil aircraft in air commerce by prescribing regulations for practices, methods, and procedures the Administrator finds necessary for safety in air commerce. This regulation is within the scope of that authority because it addresses an unsafe condition that is likely to exist or develop on products identified in this rulemaking action.
This AD is issued in accordance with authority delegated by the Executive Director, Aircraft Certification Service, as authorized by FAA Order 8000.51C. In accordance with that order, issuance of ADs is normally a function of the Compliance and Airworthiness Division, but during this transition period, the Executive Director has delegated the authority to issue ADs applicable to transport category airplanes and associated appliances to the Director of the System Oversight Division.
This AD will not have federalism implications under Executive Order 13132. This AD will not have a substantial direct effect 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.
For the reasons discussed above, I certify that this AD:
(1) Is not a “significant regulatory action” under Executive Order 12866,
(2) Is not a “significant rule” under the DOT Regulatory Policies and Procedures (44 FR 11034, February 26, 1979),
(3) Will not affect intrastate aviation in Alaska, and
(4) Will not have a significant economic impact, positive or negative, on a substantial number of small entities under the criteria of the Regulatory Flexibility Act.
Air transportation, Aircraft, Aviation safety, Incorporation by reference, Safety.
Accordingly, under the authority delegated to me by the Administrator, the FAA amends 14 CFR part 39 as follows:
49 U.S.C. 106(g), 40113, 44701.
This AD is effective November 20, 2018.
This AD affects the ADs specified in paragraphs (b)(1), (b)(2), and (b)(3) of this AD.
(1) AD 2000-23-04 R1, Amendment 39-12174 (66 FR 19381, April 16, 2001) (“AD 2000-23-04 R1”).
(2) AD 2008-04-19 R1, Amendment 39-16069 (74 FR 56713, November 3, 2009) (“AD 2008-04-19 R1”).
(3) AD 2015-26-09, Amendment 39-18357 (81 FR 1483, January 13, 2016) (“AD 2015-26-09”).
This AD applies to ATR-GIE Avions de Transport Régional Model ATR42-500 airplanes, certificated in any category, with an original airworthiness certificate or original export certificate of airworthiness dated on or before May 3, 2017.
Air Transport Association (ATA) of America Code 05, Time limits/maintenance checks.
This AD was prompted by a determination that more restrictive maintenance requirements and airworthiness limitations are necessary. We are issuing this AD to prevent reduced structural integrity of the airplane.
Comply with this AD within the compliance times specified, unless already done.
Within 90 days after the effective date of this AD, revise the maintenance or inspection program, as applicable, to incorporate the information specified in ATR ATR42-400/ -500, Time Limits Document (TL), Revision 11, dated May 5, 2015; and ATR ATR42-400/-500 Time Limits Temporary Revision TR01/17, dated May 3, 2017. The initial compliance time for accomplishing the tasks is at the applicable times specified in ATR ATR42-400/-500, Time Limits Document (TL), Revision 11, dated May 5, 2015; and ATR ATR42-400/-500 Time Limits Temporary Revision TR01/17, dated May 3, 2017; or within 90 days after the effective date of this AD; whichever occurs later, except for those certification maintenance requirements (CMRs) tasks identified in figure 1 to paragraphs (g) and (h) of this AD.
For the CMR tasks listed in figure 1 to paragraphs (g) and (h) of this AD, the initial compliance time for accomplishing the tasks is at the applicable time specified in ATR ATR42-400/-500 Time Limits Temporary Revision TR01/17, dated May 3, 2017; or within the compliance time specified in figure 1 to paragraphs (g) and (h) of this AD; whichever occurs later.
After the maintenance or inspection program, as applicable, has been revised as required by paragraph (g) of this AD, no alternative actions (
Accomplishing the actions required by paragraph (g) of this AD terminates all requirements of AD 2000-23-04 R1 and all requirements of the ADs specified in paragraphs (j)(1) and (j)(2) of this AD for ATR-GIE Avions de Transport Régional Model ATR42-500 airplanes only.
(1) AD 2008-04-19 R1.
(2) AD 2015-26-09.
The following provisions also apply to this AD:
(1)
(2)
(1) Refer to Mandatory Continuing Airworthiness Information (MCAI) EASA AD 2017-0222R1, dated December 15, 2017, for related information. This MCAI may be found in the AD docket on the internet at
(2) For more information about this AD, contact Shahram Daneshmandi, Aerospace Engineer, International Section, Transport
(1) The Director of the Federal Register approved the incorporation by reference (IBR) of the service information listed in this paragraph under 5 U.S.C. 552(a) and 1 CFR part 51.
(2) You must use this service information as applicable to do the actions required by this AD, unless this AD specifies otherwise.
(i) ATR ATR42-400/-500, Time Limits Document (TL), Revision 11, dated May 5, 2015.
(ii) ATR ATR42-400/-500 Time Limits Temporary Revision TR01/17, dated May 3, 2017.
(3) For service information identified in this AD, contact ATR GIE Avions de Transport Régional, 1, Allée Pierre Nadot, 31712 Blagnac Cedex, France; telephone +33 (0) 5 62 21 62 21; fax +33 (0) 5 62 21 67 18; email
(4) You may view this service information at the FAA, Transport Standards Branch, 2200 South 216th St., Des Moines, WA. For information on the availability of this material at the FAA, call 206-231-3195.
(5) You may view this service information that is incorporated by reference at the National Archives and Records Administration (NARA). For information on the availability of this material at NARA, call 202-741-6030, or go to:
Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), Department of Transportation (DOT).
Final rule.
We are superseding Airworthiness Directive (AD) 2017-16-07, which applied to certain Airbus SAS Model A330-200, A330-200 Freighter, A330-300, A340-500, and A340-600 series airplanes; and Model A340-313 airplanes. AD 2017-16-07 required inspection of the fuselage bulk cargo door frames at specific locations, and corrective action if necessary. This AD requires new inspections of certain attachment holes for residual surface treatment and cracking, and corrective action if necessary; and provides an optional terminating action for the inspections. This AD also revises the applicability to add certain airplanes and remove others. This AD was prompted by a determination that only airplanes having certain manufacturer serial numbers (MSNs) are affected by tartaric sulfuric anodizing (TSA)/chromic acid anodizing (CAA) surface treatment in the door fitting attachment holes, and that airplanes having certain MSNs were excluded. This AD is intended to complete certain mandated programs intended to support the airplane reaching its limit of validity (LOV) of the engineering data that support the established structural maintenance program. We are issuing this AD to address the unsafe condition on these products.
This AD is effective November 20, 2018.
The Director of the Federal Register approved the incorporation by reference of certain publications listed in this AD as of November 20, 2018.
For service information identified in this final rule, contact Airbus SAS, Airworthiness Office—EAL, Rond-Point Emile Dewoitine No: 2, 31700 Blagnac Cedex, France, France; telephone +33 5 61 93 36 96; fax +33 5 61 93 45 80; email
You may examine the AD docket on the internet at
Vladimir Ulyanov, Aerospace Engineer, International Section, Transport Standards Branch, FAA, 2200 South 216th St., Des Moines, WA 98198; telephone and fax 206-231-3229.
We issued a notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) to amend 14 CFR part 39 to supersede AD 2017-16-07, Amendment 39-18984 (82 FR 41874, September 5, 2017) (“AD 2017-16-07”). AD 2017-16-07 applied certain Airbus Model A330-200, A330-200 Freighter, A330-300, A340-500, and A340-600 series airplanes; and Model A340-313 airplanes. The NPRM published in the
The European Aviation Safety Agency (EASA), which is the Technical Agent for the Member States of the European Union, has issued EASA AD 2018-0005, dated January 10, 2018 (referred to after this as the Mandatory Continuing Airworthiness Information, or “the MCAI”), to correct an unsafe condition for certain Airbus SAS Model A330-200, A330-200 Freighter, and A330-300 series airplanes, and Airbus SAS Model A340-200 and A340-300 series airplanes. The MCAI states:
In the frame of the certification of the A330 Extended Service Goal exercise, it was
This condition, if not detected and corrected, could lead to cracks in the primary structure, possibly resulting in in-flight loss of a bulk cargo door, consequent decompression and potential damage to, and reduced control of, the aeroplane.
To initially address this potential unsafe condition, Airbus issued Alert Operators Transmission (AOT) A53L012-16 to provide instructions to inspect the fuselage bulk cargo door frames at specific locations. Consequently, EASA issued AD 2016-0102 [which corresponds to FAA AD 2017-16-07], requiring repetitive non-destructive test (rototest and high-frequency eddy-current (HFEC)) inspection or visual detailed (DET) inspections [to detect cracking] of the affected areas, and, depending on findings, accomplishment of a repair.
Since that [EASA] AD was issued, it was determined that only aeroplanes from MSN 0400 to MSN 1779 are affected by CAA or TSA surface treatment issue in the door fitting attachment holes. However, it was also determined that aeroplanes MSN 0001 to MSN 0399 are affected in the same attachment holes due to a fatigue issue, therefore, the same inspections must also be accomplished on these aeroplanes. In addition, based on inspection results and calculation, Airbus redefined inspection thresholds and intervals, depending on aeroplane type, model and utilisation. Airbus published SB A330-53-3278 and SB A340-53-4239 providing the inspection instructions at the specific locations with extended inspection thresholds and intervals. Airbus also determined that the actions should not be required for A340-500 and -600 models, as for these aeroplanes, the unsafe condition would only develop beyond the Design Service Goal of these aeroplanes. Finally, Airbus developed modification (mod) 206409 and published associated SB A330-53-3275 and SB A340-53-4238, as applicable, as optional terminating action.
For the reasons described above, this [EASA] AD retains the requirements of EASA AD 2016-0102, which is superseded, expands the Applicability and requires redefined repetitive inspections of the holes at the upper and lower door support fittings of FR 67 and FR 69 RH and the holes at door latch fitting of FR 69 RH. This [EASA] AD also introduces an optional modification, which constitutes terminating action for the repetitive inspections as required by this [EASA] AD.
The optional modification involves related investigative actions of eddy current rotating probe testing for cracks of the support fittings and the frame holes at frame (FR) 67 and FR 69. You may examine the MCAI in the AD docket on the internet at
We gave the public the opportunity to participate in developing this final rule. We received no comments on the NPRM or on the determination of the cost to the public.
We reviewed the relevant data and determined that air safety and the public interest require adopting this final rule as proposed, except for minor editorial changes. We have determined that these minor changes:
• Are consistent with the intent that was proposed in the NPRM for addressing the unsafe condition; and
• Do not add any additional burden upon the public than was already proposed in the NPRM.
Airbus SAS has issued the following service information.
• Service Bulletin A330-53-3275, dated September 8, 2017.
• Service Bulletin A330-53-3278, dated August 22, 2017.
• Service Bulletin A340-53-4238, dated September 8, 2017.
• Service Bulletin A340-53-4239, dated September 5, 2017.
Airbus Service Bulletins A330-53-3278 and A340-53-4239 describe procedures for rototest, HFEC/ultrasonic and detailed inspections for residual surface treatment and cracking of the upper and lower right-hand fuselage bulk cargo door support fitting attachment holes at FR 67 and FR 69 and the right-hand fuselage bulk cargo door latch fitting attachment holes at FR 69. Airbus Service Bulletins A330-53-3275 and A340-53-4238 describe procedures for a modification, which includes eddy current rotating probe testing for cracks of the support fittings and the frame holes at FR 67 and FR 69, and removal of TSA or CAA in the final holes of the bulk door frames FR 67 and FR 69. These documents are distinct since they apply to different airplane models. This service information is reasonably available because the interested parties have access to it through their normal course of business or by the means identified in the
We estimate that this AD affects 102 airplanes of U.S. registry. We estimate the following costs to comply with this AD:
We have received no definitive data that enables us to provide cost estimates for the on-condition actions specified in this AD.
Title 49 of the United States Code specifies the FAA's authority to issue rules on aviation safety. Subtitle I, section 106, describes the authority of the FAA Administrator. Subtitle VII: Aviation Programs, describes in more detail the scope of the Agency's authority.
We are issuing this rulemaking under the authority described in Subtitle VII, Part A, Subpart III, Section 44701: “General requirements.” Under that section, Congress charges the FAA with promoting safe flight of civil aircraft in air commerce by prescribing regulations for practices, methods, and procedures the Administrator finds necessary for safety in air commerce. This regulation is within the scope of that authority because it addresses an unsafe condition that is likely to exist or develop on products identified in this rulemaking action.
This AD is issued in accordance with authority delegated by the Executive Director, Aircraft Certification Service, as authorized by FAA Order 8000.51C. In accordance with that order, issuance of ADs is normally a function of the Compliance and Airworthiness Division, but during this transition period, the Executive Director has
We determined that this AD will not have federalism implications under Executive Order 13132. This AD will not have a substantial direct effect 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.
For the reasons discussed above, I certify that this AD:
1. Is not a “significant regulatory action” under Executive Order 12866;
2. Is not a “significant rule” under the DOT Regulatory Policies and Procedures (44 FR 11034, February 26, 1979);
3. Will not affect intrastate aviation in Alaska; and
4. Will not have a significant economic impact, positive or negative, on a substantial number of small entities under the criteria of the Regulatory Flexibility Act.
Air transportation, Aircraft, Aviation safety, Incorporation by reference, Safety.
Accordingly, under the authority delegated to me by the Administrator, the FAA amends 14 CFR part 39 as follows:
49 U.S.C. 106(g), 40113, 44701.
This AD is effective November 20, 2018.
This AD replaces AD 2017-16-07, Amendment 39-18984 (82 FR 41874, September 5, 2017) (“AD 2017-16-07”).
This AD applies to the following Airbus SAS airplanes, certificated in any category, manufacturer serial numbers (MSNs) 0001 to 1779 inclusive; except airplanes on which Airbus Service Bulletin A330-53-3275 or Airbus Service Bulletin A340-53-4238 has been embodied.
(1) Model A330-201, -202, -203, -223, and -243 airplanes.
(2) Model A330-223F and -243F airplanes.
(3) Model A330-301, -302, -303, -321, -322, -323, -341, -342, and -343 airplanes.
(4) Model A340-211, -212, and -213 airplanes.
(5) Model A340-311, -312, and -313 airplanes.
Air Transport Association (ATA) of America Code 53, Fuselage.
This AD is prompted by a determination that only airplanes having certain MSNs are affected by tartaric sulfuric anodizing (TSA)/chromic acid anodizing (CAA) surface treatment in the door fitting attachment holes, and that airplanes having certain MSNs were excluded from AD 2017-16-07. This AD is intended to complete certain mandated programs intended to support the airplane reaching its limit of validity (LOV) of the engineering data that support the established structural maintenance program. We are issuing this AD to detect and correct fatigue cracks in the bulk cargo door frames, caused by TSA/CAA surface treatment in certain bulk cargo door frame holes. Cracks in the bulk cargo door frames can cause the in-flight loss of a bulk cargo door, damage to the airplane, and subsequent reduced control of the airplane.
Comply with this AD within the compliance times specified, unless already done.
Before exceeding the thresholds specified in table 1 to paragraph (g) of this AD, or within the applicable time specified in paragraph (g)(1) or (g)(2) of this AD, whichever is later: Do a rototest, high frequency eddy current (HFEC), ultrasonic, or detailed inspection, as applicable, for residual surface treatment and cracking of the upper and lower right-hand fuselage bulk cargo door support fitting attachment holes at FR 67 and FR 69 and the right-hand fuselage bulk cargo door latch fitting attachment holes at FR 69, in accordance with the Accomplishment Instructions of Airbus Service Bulletin A330-53-3278, dated August 22, 2017; or Airbus Service Bulletin A340-53-4239, dated September 5, 2017; as applicable. Thereafter, depending on the areas and inspection methods as defined in table 2 to paragraph (g) of this AD, repeat the inspection at intervals not exceeding those specified in table 3 to paragraph (g) of this AD.
(1) For airplanes having MSN 0001 through 0399 inclusive: Within 200 flight cycles after the effective date of this AD.
(2) For airplanes having MSN 0400 through 1779 inclusive: Within 800 flight cycles after the effective date of this AD.
If any discrepancy is found during any inspection required by paragraph (g) of this AD, before further flight, repair using a method approved by the Manager, International Section, Transport Standards Branch, FAA; or the European Aviation Safety Agency (EASA); or Airbus SAS's EASA Design Organization Approval (DOA). If approved by the DOA, the approval must include the DOA-authorized signature.
Accomplishment of a repair on an airplane, as required by paragraph (h) of this AD, does not constitute terminating action for the inspections required by paragraph (g) of this AD for that airplane, unless otherwise specified in repair instructions approved by the Manager, International Section, Transport Standards Branch, FAA; or EASA; or Airbus SAS's EASA DOA. If approved by the DOA, the approval must include the DOA-authorized signature.
Accomplishment of the modification, including applicable related investigative and corrective actions and removal of TSA or CAA in the final holes of the bulk door frames FR 67 and FR 69, as applicable, specified in, and in accordance with the AI of Airbus Service Bulletin A330-53-3275, dated September 8, 2017; or Airbus Service Bulletin A340-53-4238, dated September 8, 2017; as applicable; constitutes terminating action for the inspections required by paragraph (g) of this AD for that airplane, unless otherwise specified in the repair instructions approved by the Manager, International Section, Transport Standards Branch, FAA; or EASA; or Airbus SAS's EASA DOA. If approved by the DOA, the approval must include the DOA-authorized signature.
This paragraph provides credit for the actions required by paragraph (g) of this AD, if those actions were performed before the effective date of this AD using Airbus Alert Operators Transmission (AOT) A53L012-16, dated May 30, 2016; or Rev 01, dated March 9, 2017.
(1) Refer to Mandatory Continuing Airworthiness Information (MCAI) EASA AD 2018-0005, dated January 10, 2018, for related information. This MCAI may be found in the AD docket on the internet at
(2) For more information about this AD, contact Vladimir Ulyanov, Aerospace Engineer, International Section, Transport Standards Branch, FAA, 2200 South 216th St., Des Moines, WA 98198; telephone and fax 206-231-3229.
(3) Service information identified in this AD that is not incorporated by reference is available at the addresses specified in paragraphs (n)(3) and (n)(4) of this AD.
(1) The Director of the Federal Register approved the incorporation by reference (IBR) of the service information listed in this paragraph under 5 U.S.C. 552(a) and 1 CFR part 51.
(2) You must use this service information as applicable to do the actions required by this AD, unless this AD specifies otherwise.
(i) Airbus Service Bulletin A330-53-3275, dated September 8, 2017.
(ii) Airbus Service Bulletin A330-53-3278, dated August 22, 2017.
(iii) Airbus Service Bulletin A340-53-4238, dated September 8, 2017.
(iv) Airbus Service Bulletin A340-53-4239, dated September 5, 2017.
(3) For service information identified in this AD, contact Airbus SAS, Airworthiness Office—EAL, Rond-Point Emile Dewoitine No: 2, 31700 Blagnac Cedex, France, France;
(4) You may view this service information at the FAA, Transport Standards Branch, 2200 South 216th St., Des Moines, WA. For information on the availability of this material at the FAA, call 206-231-3195.
(5) You may view this service information that is incorporated by reference at the National Archives and Records Administration (NARA). For information on the availability of this material at NARA, call 202-741-6030, or go to:
Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.
Final rule.
We are superseding Airworthiness Directive (AD) 2015-09-07, which applied to all The Boeing Company Model 787 airplanes. AD 2015-09-07 required a repetitive maintenance task for electrical power deactivation. This AD requires installing new software for the generator control unit (GCU). This AD also removes certain airplanes from the applicability. This AD was prompted by the determination that a Model 787 airplane that has been powered continuously for 248 days can lose all alternating current (AC) electrical power due to the GCUs simultaneously going into failsafe mode. We are issuing this AD to address the unsafe condition on these products.
This AD is effective November 20, 2018.
The Director of the Federal Register approved the incorporation by reference of certain publications listed in this AD as of November 20, 2018.
The Director of the Federal Register approved the incorporation by reference of certain other publications listed in this AD as of May 1, 2015 (80 FR 24789, May 1, 2015).
For service information identified in this final rule, contact Boeing Commercial Airplanes, Attention: Contractual & Data Services (C&DS), 2600 Westminster Blvd., MC 110-SK57, Seal Beach, CA 90740-5600; telephone 562-797-1717; internet
You may examine the AD docket on the internet at
Joe Salameh, Aerospace Engineer, Systems and Equipment Section, FAA, Seattle ACO Branch, 2200 South 216th St., Des Moines, WA 98198; phone and fax: 206-231-3536; email:
We issued a notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) to amend 14 CFR part 39 to supersede AD 2015-09-07, Amendment 39-18153 (80 FR 24789, May 1, 2015) (“AD 2015-09-07”). AD 2015-09-07 applied to all The Boeing Company Model 787 airplanes. The NPRM published in the
We gave the public the opportunity to participate in developing this AD. The following presents the comments received on the NPRM and the FAA's response to each comment.
The Air Line Pilots Association, International (ALPA) and American Airlines indicated their support for the NPRM.
Boeing requested that we update the Costs of Compliance section of the proposed AD to state that “55 airplanes of U.S. registry” are affected. Boeing noted that its records show 55 N-registered airplanes, not 47 as stated in the proposed AD.
We agree with the commenter's request for the reason provided. We have updated the Costs of Compliance section of this AD accordingly.
Boeing requested that we revise the Costs of Compliance section of the proposed AD to state that warranty remedies are not available for Boeing Service Bulletin B787-81205-SB240063-00, Issue 002, dated June 7, 2016. Boeing noted that Boeing Service Bulletin B787-81205-SB240063-00, Issue 002, dated June 7, 2016, states “Boeing warranty remedies are not available for the configuration changes set forth in this service bulletin. Notwithstanding, Boeing will provide the supplier software referenced in this service bulletin at no charge. This offer will expire eight years from the original issue date of this service bulletin.”
We acknowledge the commenter's request and agree to clarify. The warranty information in the Costs of Compliance section of this AD is meant to be informational, and is included when the manufacturer's service information states warranty coverage may be available. We do not control warranty coverage and operators must work with the manufacturer to determine if they are eligible for a warranty. We have revised the warranty information in the Costs of Compliance section of this AD to note that some of the software costs may be covered under warranty.
Boeing requested that we clarify or confirm that requiring operators to concurrently install new software as specified in paragraph (i) of the proposed AD will not require operators to request alternative methods of compliance (AMOCs) for installing later-approved software revisions in accordance with future service bulletins. Boeing noted that Boeing Service Bulletin B787-81205-SB420006-00 includes instructions to install several software part numbers that will bring airplanes up to common interface control document (ICD) 9.3 configuration, which is not a safety-related project. Boeing further noted that several other service bulletins call out common ICD 9.3 as a concurrent requirement.
Based on the commenter's request, we have changed paragraphs (h), (i)(1)(i), (i)(1)(ii), and (i)(2) of this AD to allow operators to install later-approved software versions, provided those later-approved versions meet certain conditions. Therefore, operators will not be required to obtain AMOCs to install newer versions of the software required by paragraph (i) of this AD. Similarly, operators will not be required to obtain AMOCs to install newer versions of the software required by paragraph (h) of this AD.
Boeing and United Airlines (UAL) requested that we provide credit for certain actions done in accordance with Issue 002 of Boeing Service Bulletin B787-81205-SB420006-00. Boeing also requested that we provide credit for certain actions done in accordance with Issue 001 of Boeing Service Bulletin B787-81205-SB420006-00. UAL noted that it had accomplished Boeing Service Bulletin B787-81205-SB420006-00, Issue 002, dated February 13, 2015, on its fleet. UAL added that Boeing Service Bulletin B787-81205-SB420006-00, Issue 003, dated October 15, 2015, was issued to correct software part numbers for certain groups of airplanes, and none of those airplanes are in its fleet. Boeing noted that Issue 002 and Issue 003 of Boeing Service Bulletin B787-81205-SB420006-00 were issued to provide clarification and to provide additional required work for a limited group of airplanes. Boeing suggested that we revise paragraph (j) of the proposed AD to provide credit for the earlier service bulletin revisions for certain airplanes and provide credit for the earlier revisions for certain other airplanes provided that additional work is done on those airplanes.
We agree with the commenters' requests for the reasons provided. We have changed paragraphs (j)(1) and (j)(2) of this AD and added paragraph (j)(3) to this AD to provide credit for actions required by paragraphs (i)(1)(ii) and (i)(2) of this AD for certain airplanes.
We reviewed the relevant data, considered the comments received, and determined that air safety and the public interest require adopting this AD with the changes described previously, and minor editorial changes. We have determined that these minor changes:
• Are consistent with the intent that was proposed in the NPRM for addressing the unsafe condition; and
• Do not add any additional burden upon the public than was already proposed in the NPRM.
We also determined that these changes will not increase the economic burden on any operator or increase the scope of this AD.
We reviewed the following service information.
• Boeing Service Bulletin B787-81205-SB240063-00, Issue 002, dated June 7, 2016, which describes procedures for installing operational program software (OPS) into each of the six GCUs and doing a software check. This service information specifies to concurrently accomplish the following two service bulletins.
• Boeing Service Bulletin B787-81205-SB280018-00, Issue 001, dated April 17, 2014, which describes procedures for installing fuel quantity management program software and doing a software check.
• Boeing Service Bulletin B787-81205-SB420006-00, Issue 003, dated October 15, 2015, which describes procedures for installing common interface control document 9.3 software and doing a software check.
• Boeing Multi Operator Message MOM-MOM-15-0248-01B, dated April 19, 2015; and Boeing Multi Operator Message MOM-MOM-15-0248-01B(R1), dated April 20, 2015. This service information describes procedures for electrical power deactivation of Model 787 airplanes. These documents are distinct due to editorial revisions.
This service information is reasonably available because the interested parties have access to it through their normal course of business or by the means identified in the
We estimate that this AD affects 55 airplanes of U.S. registry. We estimate the following costs to comply with this AD:
According to the manufacturer, some of the software costs of this AD may be covered under warranty, thereby reducing the cost impact on affected individuals. We do not control warranty coverage for affected individuals. As a result, we have included all available costs in our cost estimate.
Title 49 of the United States Code specifies the FAA's authority to issue rules on aviation safety. Subtitle I, Section 106, describes the authority of the FAA Administrator. Subtitle VII, Aviation Programs, describes in more detail the scope of the Agency's authority.
We are issuing this rulemaking under the authority described in Subtitle VII, Part A, Subpart III, Section 44701, “General requirements.” Under that section, Congress charges the FAA with promoting safe flight of civil aircraft in air commerce by prescribing regulations for practices, methods, and procedures the Administrator finds necessary for safety in air commerce. This regulation is within the scope of that authority because it addresses an unsafe condition that is likely to exist or develop on products identified in this rulemaking action.
This AD is issued in accordance with authority delegated by the Executive Director, Aircraft Certification Service, as authorized by FAA Order 8000.51C. In accordance with that order, issuance of ADs is normally a function of the Compliance and Airworthiness Division, but during this transition period, the Executive Director has delegated the authority to issue ADs applicable to transport category airplanes and associated appliances to the Director of the System Oversight Division.
We have determined that this AD will not have federalism implications under Executive Order 13132. This AD will not have a substantial direct effect 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.
For the reasons discussed above, I certify that this AD:
(1) Is not a “significant regulatory action” under Executive Order 12866,
(2) Is not a “significant rule” under DOT Regulatory Policies and Procedures (44 FR 11034, February 26, 1979),
(3) Will not affect intrastate aviation in Alaska, and
(4) Will not have a significant economic impact, positive or negative, on a substantial number of small entities under the criteria of the Regulatory Flexibility Act.
Air transportation, Aircraft, Aviation safety, Incorporation by reference, Safety.
Accordingly, under the authority delegated to me by the Administrator, the FAA amends 14 CFR part 39 as follows:
49 U.S.C. 106(g), 40113, 44701.
This AD is effective November 20, 2018.
This AD replaces AD 2015-09-07, Amendment 39-18153 (80 FR 24789, May 1, 2015) (“AD 2015-09-07”).
This AD applies to The Boeing Company Model 787-8 and 787-9 airplanes, certificated in any category, as identified in Boeing Service Bulletin B787-81205-SB240063-00, Issue 002, dated June 7, 2016.
Air Transport Association (ATA) of America Code 24, Electrical power.
This AD was prompted by the determination that a Model 787 airplane that has been powered continuously for 248 days can lose all alternating current (AC) electrical power due to the generator control units (GCUs) simultaneously going into failsafe mode. This condition is caused by a software counter internal to the GCUs that will overflow after 248 days of continuous power. We are issuing this AD to address loss of all AC electrical power, which could result in loss of control of the airplane.
Comply with this AD within the compliance times specified, unless already done.
This paragraph restates the actions required by paragraph (g) of AD 2015-09-07, with a new reference to terminating action. At the latest of the times specified in paragraphs (g)(1), (g)(2), and (g)(3) of this AD, accomplish electrical power deactivation on the airplane, in accordance with step 2) in “DESIRED ACTION” of Boeing Multi Operator Message MOM-MOM-15-0248-01B, dated April 19, 2015; or Boeing Multi Operator Message MOM-MOM-15-0248-01B(R1), dated April 20, 2015. The main and auxiliary power unit (APU) batteries do not need to be disconnected when performing the electrical power deactivation. Repeat the electrical power deactivation thereafter at intervals not to exceed 120 days until the software installation required by paragraph (h) of this AD is done.
(1) Within 120 days after the last electrical power deactivation in accordance with step 2) in “DESIRED ACTION” of Boeing Multi Operator Message MOM-MOM-15-0248-01B, dated April 19, 2015; or Boeing Multi Operator Message MOM-MOM-15-0248-01B(R1), dated April 20, 2015.
(2) Within 120 days after the date of issuance of the original certificate of airworthiness or the date of issuance of the original export certificate of airworthiness.
(3) Within 7 days after May 1, 2015 (the effective date of AD 2015-09-07).
Within 12 months after the effective date of this AD: Install new operational program software (OPS), or later-approved version, into each of the six GCUs, do a software check, and do all applicable corrective actions before further flight, in accordance with the Accomplishment Instructions of Boeing Service Bulletin B787-81205-SB240063-00, Issue 002, dated June 7, 2016.
(1) For Group 1 airplanes as identified in Boeing Service Bulletin B787-81205-SB240063-00, Issue 002, dated June 7, 2016: Prior to or concurrently with accomplishing the actions required by paragraph (h) of this AD, do the actions specified in paragraph (i)(1)(i) and (i)(1)(ii) of this AD.
(i) Install new fuel quantity management program software, or later-approved version, and do a software check, in accordance with the Accomplishment Instructions of Boeing Service Bulletin B787-81205-SB280018-00, Issue 001, dated April 17, 2014. Later-approved versions of the software are only those Boeing software versions that are approved as a replacement for the applicable software, and are approved as part of the type design by the FAA or the Boeing Commercial Airplanes ODA after issuance of Boeing Service Bulletin B787-81205-SB280018-00, Issue 001, dated April 17, 2014. If any software check fails, before further flight, do corrective actions, repeat the check, and do applicable corrective actions until the software passes the check.
(ii) Install new common interface control document 9.3 software, or later-approved version, and do software checks, in accordance with the Accomplishment Instructions of Boeing Service Bulletin B787-81205-SB420006-00, Issue 003, dated October 15, 2015. Later-approved versions of the software are only those Boeing software versions that are approved as a replacement for the applicable software, and are approved as part of the type design by the FAA or the Boeing Commercial Airplanes ODA after issuance of Boeing Service Bulletin B787-81205-SB420006-00, Issue 003, dated October 15, 2015. If any software check fails, before further flight, do corrective actions, repeat the check, and do applicable corrective actions until the software passes the check.
(2) For Group 2 airplanes as identified in Boeing Service Bulletin B787-81205-SB240063-00, Issue 002, dated June 7, 2016: Prior to or concurrently with accomplishing the actions required by paragraph (h) of this AD, install new common interface control document 9.3 software, or later-approved version, and do software checks, in accordance with the Accomplishment Instructions of Boeing Service Bulletin B787-81205-SB420006-00, Issue 003, dated October 15, 2015. Later-approved versions of the software are only those Boeing software versions that are approved as a replacement for the applicable software, and are approved as part of the type design by the FAA or the Boeing Commercial Airplanes ODA after issuance of Boeing Service Bulletin B787-81205-SB420006-00, Issue 003, dated October 15, 2015. If any software check fails, before further flight, do corrective actions, repeat the check, and do applicable corrective actions until the software passes the check.
(1) This paragraph provides credit for the actions specified in paragraph (h) of this AD, if those actions were performed before the effective date of this AD using Boeing Service Bulletin B787-81205-SB240063-00, Issue 001, dated December 22, 2015.
(2) This paragraph provides credit for the actions specified in paragraph (i)(1)(ii) and (i)(2) of this AD, if those actions were performed before the effective date of this AD using Boeing Service Bulletin B787-81205-SB420006-00, Issue 001, dated January 22, 2015, provided that the applicable actions specified in Table 13 and Table 14, as applicable, of paragraph 4, “Description,” of Boeing Service Bulletin B787-81205-SB420006-00, Issue 003, dated October 15, 2015, are done within 12 months after the effective date of this AD.
(3) This paragraph provides credit for the actions specified in paragraph (i)(1)(ii) and (i)(2) of this AD, if those actions were performed before the effective date of this AD using Boeing Service Bulletin B787-81205-SB420006-00, Issue 002, dated February 13, 2015, provided that the applicable actions specified in Table 14 of paragraph 4, “Description,” of Boeing Service Bulletin B787-81205-SB420006-00, Issue 003, dated October 15, 2015, are done within 12 months after the effective date of this AD.
(1) The Manager, Seattle ACO Branch, FAA, has the authority to approve AMOCs for this AD, if requested using the procedures found in 14 CFR 39.19. In accordance with 14 CFR 39.19, send your request to your principal inspector or local Flight Standards District Office, as appropriate. If sending information directly to the manager of the certification office, send it to the attention of the person identified in paragraph (l)(1) of this AD. Information may be emailed to:
(2) Before using any approved AMOC, notify your appropriate principal inspector, or lacking a principal inspector, the manager of the local flight standards district office/certificate holding district office.
(3) An AMOC that provides an acceptable level of safety may be used for any repair, modification, or alteration required by this AD if it is approved by the Boeing Commercial Airplanes ODA that has been authorized by the Manager, Seattle ACO Branch, to make those findings. To be approved, the repair method, modification deviation, or alteration deviation must meet the certification basis of the airplane, and the approval must specifically refer to this AD.
(4) AMOCs approved previously for AD 2015-09-07 are approved as AMOCs for the corresponding provisions of paragraph (g) of this AD.
(5) For service information that contains steps that are labeled as Required for Compliance (RC), the provisions of paragraphs (k)(5)(i) and (k)(5)(ii) of this AD apply.
(i) The steps labeled as RC, including substeps under an RC step and any figures identified in an RC step, must be done to comply with the AD. If a step or substep is labeled “RC Exempt,” then the RC requirement is removed from that step or substep. An AMOC is required for any deviations to RC steps, including substeps and identified figures.
(ii) Steps not labeled as RC may be deviated from using accepted methods in accordance with the operator's maintenance or inspection program without obtaining approval of an AMOC, provided the RC steps, including substeps and identified figures, can still be done as specified, and the airplane can be put back in an airworthy condition.
(1) For more information about this AD, contact Joe Salameh, Aerospace Engineer, Systems and Equipment Section, FAA, Seattle ACO Branch, 2200 South 216th St., Des Moines, WA 98198; phone and fax: 206-231-3536; email:
(2) Service information identified in this AD that is not incorporated by reference is available at the addresses specified in paragraphs (m)(5) and (m)(6) of this AD.
(1) The Director of the Federal Register approved the incorporation by reference (IBR) of the service information listed in this paragraph under 5 U.S.C. 552(a) and 1 CFR part 51.
(2) You must use this service information as applicable to do the actions required by this AD, unless the AD specifies otherwise.
(3) The following service information was approved for IBR on November 20, 2018.
(i) Boeing Service Bulletin B787-81205-SB240063-00, Issue 002, dated June 7, 2016.
(ii) Boeing Service Bulletin B787-81205-SB280018-00, Issue 001, dated April 17, 2014.
(iii) Boeing Service Bulletin B787-81205-SB420006-00, Issue 003, dated October 15, 2015.
(4) The following service information was approved for IBR on May 1, 2015 (84 FR 24789, May 1, 2015).
(i) Boeing Multi Operator Message MOM-MOM-15-0248-01B, dated April 19, 2015. The date appears only on the first page of this document.
(ii) Boeing Multi Operator Message MOM-MOM-15-0248-01B(R1), dated April 20, 2015. The date appears only on the first page of this document.
(5) For service information identified in this AD, contact Boeing Commercial Airplanes, Attention: Contractual & Data Services (C&DS), 2600 Westminster Blvd., MC 110-SK57, Seal Beach, CA 90740-5600; telephone 562-797-1717; internet
(6) You may view this service information at the FAA, Transport Standards Branch,
(7) You may view this service information that is incorporated by reference at the National Archives and Records Administration (NARA). For information on the availability of this material at NARA, call 202-741-6030, or go to:
Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.
Final rule.
We are adopting a new airworthiness directive (AD) for all The Boeing Company Model 737-100, -200, -200C, -300, -400, -500 series airplanes. This AD was prompted by the results of a fleet survey that revealed cracking in the bulkhead frame web at a certain body station. This AD requires repetitive inspections of the bulkhead frame web at a certain station, and applicable on-condition actions. We are issuing this AD to address the unsafe condition on these products.
This AD is effective November 20, 2018.
The Director of the Federal Register approved the incorporation by reference of a certain publication listed in this AD as of November 20, 2018.
For service information identified in this final rule, contact Boeing Commercial Airplanes, Attention: Contractual & Data Services (C&DS), 2600 Westminster Blvd., MC 110-SK57, Seal Beach, CA 90740-5600; telephone 562-797-1717; internet
You may examine the AD docket on the internet at
George Garrido, Aerospace Engineer, Airframe Section, FAA, Los Angeles ACO Branch, 3960 Paramount Boulevard, Lakewood, CA 90712-4137; phone: 562-627-5232; fax: 562-627-5210; email:
We issued a notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) to amend 14 CFR part 39 by adding an AD that would apply to all The Boeing Company Model 737-100, -200, -200C, -300, -400, -500 series airplanes. The NPRM published in the
We are issuing this AD to address cracking in the station (STA) 259.5 bulkhead frame web from the first stiffener above stringer S-10 to S-13. Such cracking could result in reduced structural integrity of the airplane.
We gave the public the opportunity to participate in developing this final rule. The following presents the comments received on the NPRM and the FAA's response to each comment.
Boeing requested that the Summary section and Related Service Information paragraph in the NPRM be revised to clarify that the corrective actions include more than just repairs. Boeing stated that the service information does not describe defined repairs but indicates that if any crack is found, contact Boeing for repair instructions and do the repair and repeat the instructions.
We agree with the commenter's request for the reasons provided by the commenter. We have revised the Summary section of this final rule by changing “repair if necessary” to “applicable on-condition actions.” We have revised the “Related Service Information under 1 CFR part 51” paragraph of this final rule by clarifying the description of the service information to “. . . low frequency eddy current inspections of the STA 259.5 bulkhead frame web from the first stiffener above stringer S-10 to S-13, on the left and right sides of the airplane and applicable on-condition actions.”
Boeing requested that Group 1 airplanes, as specified in Boeing Alert Requirements Bulletin 737-53A1369 RB, dated October 12, 2017, be addressed in the body of the proposed AD. Boeing stated that this change would allow operators with airplanes that are not subject to the limit of validity a means to comply with the requirements specified in the proposed AD.
We agree with the commenter's request for the reasons provided by the commenter. Group 1 airplanes are those having line numbers 1 through 291 that have accumulated flight cycles beyond the limit of validity of the maintenance program. We have revised paragraph (g) of this AD to address Group 1 airplanes, added paragraph (h) of this AD to address Group 2 and 3 airplanes, and redesignated the subsequent paragraphs accordingly.
Aviation Partners Boeing stated that accomplishing the Supplemental Type Certificate (STC) ST01219SE does not affect the ability to accomplish the actions specified in the NPRM.
We concur with the commenter. We have redesignated paragraph (c) of the proposed AD as (c)(1) and added paragraph (c)(2) to this AD to state that installation of STC ST01219SE does not affect the ability to accomplish the actions required by this final rule. Therefore, for airplanes on which STC ST01219SE is installed, a “change in product” alternative method of compliance (AMOC) approval request is not necessary to comply with the requirements of 14 CFR 39.17.
We reviewed the relevant data, considered the comments received, and determined that air safety and the public interest require adopting this final rule with the changes described previously and minor editorial changes. We have determined that these minor changes:
• Are consistent with the intent that was proposed in the NPRM for addressing the unsafe condition; and
• Do not add any additional burden upon the public than was already proposed in the NPRM.
We also determined that these changes will not increase the economic burden on any operator or increase the scope of this final rule.
We reviewed Boeing Alert Requirements Bulletin 737-53A1369 RB, dated October 12, 2017. The service information describes procedures for repetitive high frequency eddy current inspections and low frequency eddy current inspections of the STA 259.5 bulkhead frame web from the first stiffener above stringer S-10 to S-13, on the left and right sides of the airplane and applicable on-condition actions. This service information is reasonably available because the interested parties have access to it through their normal course of business or by the means identified in the
We estimate that this AD affects 411 airplanes of U.S. registry. We estimate the following costs to comply with this AD:
We have received no definitive data that would enable us to provide cost estimates for the on-condition actions specified in this AD.
Title 49 of the United States Code specifies the FAA's authority to issue rules on aviation safety. Subtitle I, section 106, describes the authority of the FAA Administrator. Subtitle VII: Aviation Programs, describes in more detail the scope of the Agency's authority.
We are issuing this rulemaking under the authority described in Subtitle VII, Part A, Subpart III, Section 44701: “General requirements.” Under that section, Congress charges the FAA with promoting safe flight of civil aircraft in air commerce by prescribing regulations for practices, methods, and procedures the Administrator finds necessary for safety in air commerce. This regulation is within the scope of that authority because it addresses an unsafe condition that is likely to exist or develop on products identified in this rulemaking action.
This AD is issued in accordance with authority delegated by the Executive Director, Aircraft Certification Service, as authorized by FAA Order 8000.51C. In accordance with that order, issuance of ADs is normally a function of the Compliance and Airworthiness Division, but during this transition period, the Executive Director has delegated the authority to issue ADs applicable to transport category airplanes and associated appliances to the Director of the System Oversight Division.
This AD will not have federalism implications under Executive Order 13132. This AD will not have a substantial direct effect 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.
For the reasons discussed above, I certify that this AD:
(1) Is not a “significant regulatory action” under Executive Order 12866,
(2) Is not a “significant rule” under DOT Regulatory Policies and Procedures (44 FR 11034, February 26, 1979),
(3) Will not affect intrastate aviation in Alaska, and
(4) Will not have a significant economic impact, positive or negative, on a substantial number of small entities under the criteria of the Regulatory Flexibility Act.
Air transportation, Aircraft, Aviation safety, Incorporation by reference, Safety.
Accordingly, under the authority delegated to me by the Administrator, the FAA amends 14 CFR part 39 as follows:
49 U.S.C. 106(g), 40113, 44701.
This AD is effective November 20, 2018.
None.
(1) This AD applies to all The Boeing Company Model 737-100, -200, -200C, -300, -400, and -500 series airplanes, certificated in any category.
(2) Installation of Supplemental Type Certificate (STC) ST01219SE does not affect the ability to accomplish the actions required by this AD. Therefore, for airplanes on which STC ST01219SE is installed, a “change in product” alternative method of compliance (AMOC) approval request is not necessary to comply with the requirements of 14 CFR 39.17.
Air Transport Association (ATA) of America Code 53; Fuselage.
This AD was prompted by the results of a fleet survey that revealed cracking in the bulkhead frame web at a certain body station. We are issuing this AD to address cracking in the station (STA) 259.5 bulkhead frame web from the first stiffener above stringers S-10 to S-13. Such cracking could result in reduced structural integrity of the airplane.
Comply with this AD within the compliance times specified, unless already done.
For airplanes identified as Group 1 in Boeing Alert Requirements Bulletin 737-53A1369 RB, dated October 12, 2017: Within 120 days after the effective date of this AD, inspect the airplane and do all applicable on-condition actions using a method approved in accordance with the procedures specified in paragraph (j) of this AD.
For airplanes identified as Group 2 and 3 in Boeing Alert Requirements Bulletin 737-53A1369 RB, dated October 12, 2017: Except as required by paragraph (i) of this AD, at the applicable times specified in the “Compliance” paragraph of Boeing Alert Requirements Bulletin 737-53A1369 RB, dated October 12, 2017, do all applicable actions identified in, and in accordance with, the Accomplishment Instructions of Boeing Alert Requirements Bulletin 737-53A1369 RB, dated October 12, 2017.
Guidance for accomplishing the actions required by this AD is included in Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 737-53A1369, dated October 12, 2017, which is referred to in Boeing Alert Requirements Bulletin 737-53A1369 RB, dated October 12, 2017.
(1) For purposes of determining compliance with the requirements of this AD: Where Boeing Alert Requirements Bulletin 737-53A1369 RB, dated October 12, 2017, uses the phrase “the original issue date of Requirements Bulletin 737-53A1369,” this AD requires using the effective date of this AD.
(2) Where Boeing Alert Requirements Bulletin 737-53A1369 RB, dated October 12, 2017, specifies contacting Boeing, this AD requires repair using a method approved in accordance with the procedures specified in paragraph (j) of this AD.
(1) The Manager, Los Angeles ACO Branch, FAA, has the authority to approve AMOCs for this AD, if requested using the procedures found in 14 CFR 39.19. In accordance with 14 CFR 39.19, send your request to your principal inspector or local Flight Standards District Office, as appropriate. If sending information directly to the manager of the certification office, send it to the attention of the person identified in paragraph (k) of this AD. Information may be emailed to:
(2) Before using any approved AMOC, notify your appropriate principal inspector, or lacking a principal inspector, the manager of the local flight standards district office/certificate holding district office.
(3) An AMOC that provides an acceptable level of safety may be used for any repair, modification, or alteration required by this AD if it is approved by the Boeing Commercial Airplanes Organization Designation Authorization (ODA) that has been authorized by the Manager, Los Angeles ACO Branch, FAA, to make those findings. To be approved, the repair method, modification deviation, or alteration deviation must meet the certification basis of the airplane, and the approval must specifically refer to this AD.
For more information about this AD, contact George Garrido, Aerospace Engineer, Airframe Section, FAA, Los Angeles ACO Branch, 3960 Paramount Boulevard, Lakewood, CA 90712-4137; phone: 562-627-5232; fax: 562-627-5210; email:
(1) The Director of the Federal Register approved the incorporation by reference (IBR) of the service information listed in this paragraph under 5 U.S.C. 552(a) and 1 CFR part 51.
(2) You must use this service information as applicable to do the actions required by this AD, unless the AD specifies otherwise.
(i) Boeing Alert Requirements Bulletin 737-53A1369 RB, dated October 12, 2017.
(ii) Reserved.
(3) For service information identified in this AD, contact Boeing Commercial Airplanes, Attention: Contractual & Data Services (C&DS), 2600 Westminster Blvd., MC 110-SK57, Seal Beach, CA 90740-5600; telephone 562-797-1717; internet
(4) You may view this service information at the FAA, Transport Standards Branch, 2200 South 216th St., Des Moines, WA. For information on the availability of this material at the FAA, call 206-231-3195.
(5) You may view this service information that is incorporated by reference at the National Archives and Records Administration (NARA). For information on the availability of this material at NARA, call 202-741-6030, or go to:
Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), Department of Transportation (DOT).
Final rule.
We are superseding Airworthiness Directive (AD) 2012-22-10, which applied to certain Bombardier, Inc., Model CL-600-2C10 (Regional Jet Series 700, 701, & 702) airplanes, Model CL-600-2D15 (Regional Jet Series 705) airplanes, Model CL-600-2D24 (Regional Jet Series 900) airplanes, and Model CL-600-2E25 (Regional Jet Series 1000) airplanes. AD 2012-22-10 required repetitive inspections to determine that cotter pins are installed at affected wing-to-fuselage attachment joints and replacement if necessary. This AD retains the initial inspection of the wing-to-fuselage attachment joints, and removes the repetitive inspections of all but the forward keel beam attachment joint. This AD also changes the repetitive inspection interval for the forward keel beam attachment joint. This AD was prompted by a determination that additional nuts of the forward keel beam attachment joint should be inspected, and that repetitive inspections of certain wing-to-fuselage attachment joints are not necessary. We are issuing this AD to address the unsafe condition on these products.
This AD is effective November 20, 2018.
The Director of the Federal Register approved the incorporation by reference of a certain publication listed in this AD as of November 20, 2018.
For service information identified in this final rule, contact Bombardier, Inc., 400 Côte-Vertu Road West, Dorval, Québec H4S 1Y9, Canada; Widebody Customer Response Center North America toll-free telephone 1-866-538-1247 or direct-dial telephone 514-855-5000; fax 514-855-7401; email
You may examine the AD docket on the internet at
Andrea Jimenez, Aerospace Engineer, Airframe and Mechanical Systems Section, FAA, New York ACO Branch, 1600 Stewart Avenue, Suite 410, Westbury, NY 11590; telephone 516-228-7330; fax 516-794-5531.
We issued a notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) to amend 14 CFR part 39 to supersede AD 2012-22-10, Amendment 39-17246 (77 FR 67267, November 9, 2012) (“AD 2012-22-10”). AD 2012-22-10 applied to certain Bombardier, Inc., Model CL-600-2C10 (Regional Jet Series 700, 701, & 702) airplanes, Model CL-600-2D15 (Regional Jet Series 705) airplanes, Model CL-600-2D24 (Regional Jet Series 900) airplanes, and Model CL-600-2E25 (Regional Jet Series 1000) airplanes. The NPRM published in the
Transport Canada Civil Aviation (TCCA), which is the aviation authority for Canada, has issued Canadian AD CF-2012-10R1, dated January 22, 2018 (referred to after this as the Mandatory Continuing Airworthiness Information, or “the MCAI”), to correct an unsafe condition for certain Bombardier, Inc., Model CL-600-2C10 (Regional Jet Series 700, 701, & 702) airplanes, Model CL-600-2D15 (Regional Jet Series 705) airplanes, Model CL-600-2D24 (Regional Jet Series 900) airplanes, and Model CL-600-2E25 (Regional Jet Series 1000) airplanes. The MCAI states:
The manufacturer has determined that wing-to-fuselage attachment nuts, part number (P/N) SH670-35635-1, SH670-35440-951, SH670-35440-3, SH670-35635-1, and 95136D-2412, installed at six attachment joint locations, do not conform to the certification design requirements for dual locking features. The nuts are not of the self-locking type as required and do not provide the frictional thread interference required to prevent the nut from backing off the bolt. As a result, only a single locking device, the cotter pin, is provided at these critical joints. In the case where a nut becomes loose, in combination with a missing or broken cotter pin, the attachment bolt at the wing-to-fuselage joint could migrate and fall out. Loss of two attachment joints could potentially result in the loss of the wing.
The original version of this [Canadian] AD [which corresponds to FAA AD 2012-22-10] mandated initial and repeat detailed visual inspections (DVIs) of each affected wing-to-fuselage attachment joint to ensure that a cotter pin was installed.
Design review and analysis of the inspection findings since the original issue of this [Canadian] AD have led us to determine that additional nuts at the forward keel beam joint should also be included in the inspection and that the repetitive inspection of some wing-to-fuselage attachment joints is not required. This [Canadian] AD maintains the initial inspection requirements [for missing or failed (. . .) cotter pins] for six attachment joint locations, and removes the repetitive inspection requirements for all but the forward keel beam attachment joint. This [Canadian] AD also requires a different repetitive inspection interval, and the [Canadian] AD applicability has been changed for the initial inspection to account for changes made in production.
You may examine the MCAI in the AD docket on the internet at
We gave the public the opportunity to participate in developing this final rule. We have considered the comment received. The Air Line Pilots Association, International (ALPA) reviewed and expressed support for the NPRM.
We have removed paragraph (j)(2) of the proposed AD and redesignated paragraph (j)(1) of the proposed AD as paragraph (j) of this AD because the airplanes identified in paragraph (j)(2) of the proposed AD are included in paragraph (j)(1) of the proposed AD. We have also clarified in paragraph (j) of this AD that any previous inspection done using earlier revisions of the service information is acceptable.
We reviewed the relevant data, considered the comment received, and determined that air safety and the public interest require adopting this final rule with the changes described previously and minor editorial changes. We have determined that these minor changes:
• Are consistent with the intent that was proposed in the NPRM for addressing the unsafe condition; and
• Do not add any additional burden upon the public than was already proposed in the NPRM.
We also determined that these changes will not increase the economic burden on any operator or increase the scope of this final rule.
Bombardier, Inc. has issued Service Bulletin 670BA-53-042, Revision B, dated October 20, 2017. This service information describes procedures for detailed inspections of the wing-to-fuselage attachment joints, and of the attachment nuts at the forward keel beam attachment joint for missing or failed cotter pins. This service information is reasonably available because the interested parties have access to it through their normal course of business or by the means identified in the
We estimate that this AD affects 274 airplanes of U.S. registry. We estimate the following costs to comply with this AD:
We have received no definitive data that would enable us to provide cost estimates for the on-condition actions specified in this AD. We have no way of determining the number of aircraft that may need these actions.
Title 49 of the United States Code specifies the FAA's authority to issue rules on aviation safety. Subtitle I, section 106, describes the authority of the FAA Administrator. Subtitle VII: Aviation Programs, describes in more detail the scope of the Agency's authority.
We are issuing this rulemaking under the authority described in Subtitle VII, Part A, Subpart III, Section 44701: “General requirements.” Under that section, Congress charges the FAA with promoting safe flight of civil aircraft in air commerce by prescribing regulations for practices, methods, and procedures the Administrator finds necessary for safety in air commerce. This regulation is within the scope of that authority because it addresses an unsafe condition that is likely to exist or develop on products identified in this rulemaking action.
This AD is issued in accordance with authority delegated by the Executive Director, Aircraft Certification Service, as authorized by FAA Order 8000.51C. In accordance with that order, issuance of ADs is normally a function of the Compliance and Airworthiness Division, but during this transition period, the Executive Director has delegated the authority to issue ADs applicable to transport category airplanes and associated appliances to the Director of the System Oversight Division.
We determined that this AD will not have federalism implications under Executive Order 13132. This AD will not have a substantial direct effect 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.
For the reasons discussed above, I certify that this AD:
1. Is not a “significant regulatory action” under Executive Order 12866;
2. Is not a “significant rule” under the DOT Regulatory Policies and Procedures (44 FR 11034, February 26, 1979);
3. Will not affect intrastate aviation in Alaska; and
4. Will not have a significant economic impact, positive or negative, on a substantial number of small entities under the criteria of the Regulatory Flexibility Act.
Air transportation, Aircraft, Aviation safety, Incorporation by reference, Safety.
Accordingly, under the authority delegated to me by the Administrator, the FAA amends 14 CFR part 39 as follows:
49 U.S.C. 106(g), 40113, 44701.
This AD is effective November 20, 2018.
This AD replaces AD 2012-22-10, Amendment 39-17246 (77 FR 67267, November 9, 2012) (“AD 2012-22-10”).
This AD applies to the airplanes identified in paragraphs (c)(1), (c)(2), and (c)(3) of this AD, certificated in any category.
(1) Bombardier, Inc., Model CL-600-2C10 (Regional Jet Series 700, 701, & 702) airplanes, serial numbers 10002 and subsequent.
(2) Bombardier, Inc., Model CL-600-2D15 (Regional Jet Series 705) airplanes and Model CL-600-2D24 (Regional Jet Series 900) airplanes, serial numbers 15001 and subsequent.
(3) Bombardier, Inc., Model CL-600-2E25 (Regional Jet Series 1000) airplanes, serial numbers 19001 and subsequent.
Air Transport Association (ATA) of America Code 57, Wings.
This AD was prompted by a report that certain wing-to-fuselage attachment nuts do not conform to the certification design requirements for dual locking features, and a determination that additional nuts of the forward keel beam attachment joint should be inspected, and that repetitive inspections of certain wing-to-fuselage attachment joints are not necessary. We are issuing this AD to address loss of the wing-to-fuselage attachment joints, which could result in loss of the wing, and consequent reduced, or complete loss of, controllability of the airplane.
Comply with this AD within the compliance times specified, unless already done.
For airplanes identified in paragraphs (g)(1), (g)(2), and (g)(3) of this AD: Within 3,000 flight hours or 18 months, whichever occurs first after December 14, 2012 (the effective date of AD 2012-22-10), perform a detailed inspection for missing or failed cotter pins at each affected wing-to-fuselage attachment joint, in accordance with Part A through Part C of the Accomplishment Instructions of Bombardier Service Bulletin 670BA-53-042, Revision B, dated October 20, 2017.
(1) Bombardier, Inc., Model CL-600-2C10 (Regional Jet Series 700, 701, & 702) airplanes, serial numbers 10002 through 10337 inclusive.
(2) Bombardier, Inc., Model CL-600-2D15 (Regional Jet Series 705) airplanes and Model CL-600-2D24 (Regional Jet Series 900) airplanes, serial numbers 15001 through 15299 inclusive.
(3) Bombardier, Inc., Model CL-600-2E25 (Regional Jet Series 1000) airplanes, serial numbers 19001 through 19037 inclusive.
Within the compliance time specified in figure 1 to paragraph (h) of this AD: Perform a detailed inspection of the attachment nuts at the forward keel beam attachment joint for missing or failed cotter pins, in accordance with Part D of the Accomplishment Instructions of Bombardier Service Bulletin 670BA-53-042, Revision B, dated October 20, 2017. Repeat the inspection thereafter at intervals not to exceed 8,800 flight hours, in accordance with Part E of the Accomplishment Instructions of Bombardier Service Bulletin 670BA-53-042, Revision B, dated October 20, 2017.
If any cotter pin is found missing or failed during any inspection required by this AD: Before further flight, replace the cotter pin using a method approved by the Manager, New York ACO Branch FAA; or Transport Canada Civil Aviation (TCCA); or Bombardier, Inc.'s TCCA Design Approval Organization (DAO). If approved by the DAO, the approval must include the DAO-authorized signature.
This paragraph provides credit for the inspections required by paragraphs (g) and (h) of this AD, if the inspection was performed before the effective date of this AD, using Bombardier Service Bulletin 670BA-53-042, dated December 21, 2011; or Bombardier Service Bulletin 670BA-53-042, Revision A, dated April 27, 2012.
(1)
(i) Before using any approved AMOC, notify your appropriate principal inspector, or lacking a principal inspector, the manager of the local flight standards district office/certificate holding district office.
(ii) AMOCs approved previously for AD 2012-22-10, are approved as AMOCs for the corresponding provisions in paragraphs (g) and (h) of this AD.
(2)
(1) Refer to Mandatory Continuing Airworthiness Information (MCAI) Canadian AD CF-2012-10R1, dated January 22, 2018, for related information. This MCAI may be found in the AD docket on the internet at
(2) For more information about this AD, contact Andrea Jimenez, Aerospace Engineer, Airframe and Mechanical Systems Section, FAA, New York ACO Branch, 1600 Stewart Avenue, Suite 410, Westbury, NY 11590; telephone 516-228-7330; fax 516-794-5531.
(3) Service information identified in this AD that is not incorporated by reference is available at the addresses specified in paragraphs (m)(3) and (m)(4) of this AD.
(1) The Director of the Federal Register approved the incorporation by reference (IBR) of the service information listed in this paragraph under 5 U.S.C. 552(a) and 1 CFR part 51.
(2) You must use this service information as applicable to do the actions required by this AD, unless this AD specifies otherwise.
(i) Bombardier Service Bulletin 670BA-53-042, Revision B, dated October 20, 2017.
(ii) Reserved.
(3) For service information identified in this AD, contact Bombardier, Inc., 400 Côte-Vertu Road West, Dorval, Québec H4S 1Y9, Canada; Widebody Customer Response Center North America toll-free telephone 1-866-538-1247 or direct-dial telephone 514-855-5000; fax 514-855-7401; email
(4) You may view this service information at the FAA, Transport Standards Branch, 2200 South 216th St., Des Moines, WA. For information on the availability of this material at the FAA, call 206-231-3195.
(5) You may view this service information that is incorporated by reference at the National Archives and Records Administration (NARA). For information on the availability of this material at NARA, call 202-741-6030, or go to:
Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), Department of Transportation (DOT).
Final rule.
We are adopting a new airworthiness directive (AD) for certain Bombardier, Inc., Model BD-700-1A10 and BD-700-1A11 airplanes. This AD
This AD is effective November 20, 2018.
The Director of the Federal Register approved the incorporation by reference of certain publications listed in this AD as of November 20, 2018.
For service information identified in this final rule, contact Bombardier, Inc., 400 Côte-Vertu Road West, Dorval, Québec H4S 1Y9, Canada; telephone 514-855-5000; fax 514-855-7401; email
You may examine the AD docket on the internet at
Aziz Ahmed, Aerospace Engineer, FAA, New York ACO Branch, 1600 Stewart Avenue, Suite 410, Westbury, New York 11590; telephone: 516-287-7329; fax: 516-794-5531; email:
We issued a notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) to amend 14 CFR part 39 by adding an AD that would apply to certain Bombardier, Inc., Model BD-700-1A10 and BD-700-1A11 airplanes. The NPRM published in the
We are issuing this AD to address any cracking in the support bracket of the elevator bell crank, which could lead to detachment of the bracket and loss of functionality of the elevator on the affected side, and result in reduced controllability of the airplane. Failure of both brackets could result in loss of pitch control of the airplane.
Transport Canada Civil Aviation (TCCA), which is the aviation authority for Canada, has issued Canadian AD CF-2017-32, dated October 10, 2017 (referred to after this as the Mandatory Continuing Airworthiness Information, or “the MCAI”), to correct an unsafe condition on certain Bombardier, Inc., Model BD-700-1A10 and BD-700-1A11 airplanes. The MCAI states:
During a repair on an aircraft in-service, cracking was observed at the fastener holes of the left hand side elevator bell crank support bracket for the control linkage in the vertical stabilizer. Further investigation confirmed the presence of similar cracking on other aircraft on both the left and right hand side brackets. An investigation found that the fastener holes on some brackets did not conform to the required tolerance and fastener installation resulted in fastener hole cracks.
This [Canadian] AD requires an inspection of both elevator bell crank support brackets, and replacement if they are found cracked or do not meet the required fastener hole tolerance. Left unrepaired, cracking of an elevator bell crank support bracket could lead to detachment of the bracket and loss of functionality of the elevator on the affected side, resulting in reduced controllability of the aircraft. Failure of both brackets could result in loss of pitch control of the aircraft.
You may examine the MCAI in the AD docket on the internet at
We gave the public the opportunity to participate in developing this final rule. The following presents the comments received on the NPRM and the FAA's response to each comment.
Bombardier requested that we revise the NPRM to incorporate the latest service information. Bombardier stated that Service Bulletin 700-27-5009, Revision 02, dated June 15, 2018, corrects a typographical error made to the affected airplane serial number listing. Bombardier also requested that we add Bombardier Service Bulletin 700-27-5009, Revision 01, dated July 18, 2017, to the “Credit for Previous Actions” paragraph.
We agree with the commenter's request. We have revised paragraph (g) of this AD to incorporate Bombardier Service Bulletin 700-27-5009, Revision 02, dated June 15, 2018, for accomplishing the actions in this AD. Bombardier Service Bulletin 700-27-5009, Revision 02, dated June 15, 2018, revises the effectivity to include an airplane already included in the applicability of this AD, and includes minor edits that do not affect the scope of this AD. We have also revised paragraph (h) of this AD to include Bombardier Service Bulletin 700-27-5009, Revision 01, dated July 18, 2017.
NetJets requested that we clarify the omission of a certain serial number in the service information. NetJets commented that serial number 9732 is specified in the applicability paragraph of the NPRM, but it is not specified in Bombardier Service Bulletin 700-27-5009, Revision 01, dated July 18, 2017; or Bombardier Service Bulletin 700-27-6009, Revision 01, dated July 18, 2017.
We agree to provide clarification for the commenter. Serial number 9732 is not specified in the effectivity of Bombardier Service Bulletin 700-27-5009, Revision 01, dated July 18, 2017; or Bombardier Service Bulletin 700-27-6009, Revision 01, dated July 18, 2017, but Bombardier Service Bulletin 700-27-5009, Revision 02, dated June 15, 2018, adds serial number 9732 to the effectivity. As we stated previously, we have revised this AD to include Bombardier Service Bulletin 700-27-5009, Revision 02, dated June 15, 2018, for accomplishing the actions in this AD. Serial number 9732 was previously included in paragraph (c) of this AD, and the applicability of an AD takes
We reviewed the relevant data, considered the comments received, and determined that air safety and the public interest require adopting this final rule with the changes described previously and minor editorial changes. We have determined that these minor changes:
• Are consistent with the intent that was proposed in the NPRM for addressing the unsafe condition; and
• Do not add any additional burden upon the public than was already proposed in the NPRM.
We also determined that these changes will not increase the economic burden on any operator or increase the scope of this final rule.
Bombardier has issued Service Bulletin 700-27-5009, Revision 02, dated June 15, 2018; and Service Bulletin 700-27-6009, Revision 01, dated July 18, 2017. This service information describes an eddy current inspection on certain support brackets of the elevator bell crank for any cracking at the fastener holes, a measurement to confirm that the fastener hole diameters are within tolerance, and replacement with a new support bracket of the elevator bell crank. These documents are distinct since they apply to different airplane models. This service information is reasonably available because the interested parties have access to it through their normal course of business or by the means identified in the
We estimate that this AD affects 109 airplanes of U.S. registry.
We estimate the following costs to comply with this AD:
We estimate the following costs to do any necessary replacement that would be required based on the results of the proposed inspection. We have no way of determining the number of aircraft that might need this replacement:
According to the manufacturer, all of the costs of this AD may be covered under warranty, thereby reducing the cost impact on affected individuals. We do not control warranty coverage for affected individuals. As a result, we have included all costs in our cost estimate.
Title 49 of the United States Code specifies the FAA's authority to issue rules on aviation safety. Subtitle I, section 106, describes the authority of the FAA Administrator. Subtitle VII: Aviation Programs, describes in more detail the scope of the Agency's authority.
We are issuing this rulemaking under the authority described in Subtitle VII, Part A, Subpart III, Section 44701: “General requirements.” Under that section, Congress charges the FAA with promoting safe flight of civil aircraft in air commerce by prescribing regulations for practices, methods, and procedures the Administrator finds necessary for safety in air commerce. This regulation is within the scope of that authority because it addresses an unsafe condition that is likely to exist or develop on products identified in this rulemaking action.
This AD is issued in accordance with authority delegated by the Executive Director, Aircraft Certification Service, as authorized by FAA Order 8000.51C. In accordance with that order, issuance of ADs is normally a function of the Compliance and Airworthiness Division, but during this transition period, the Executive Director has delegated the authority to issue ADs applicable to transport category airplanes and associated appliances to the Director of the System Oversight Division.
This AD will not have federalism implications under Executive Order 13132. This AD will not have a substantial direct effect 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.
For the reasons discussed above, I certify that this AD:
(1) Is not a “significant regulatory action” under Executive Order 12866,
(2) Is not a “significant rule” under the DOT Regulatory Policies and Procedures (44 FR 11034, February 26, 1979),
(3) Will not affect intrastate aviation in Alaska, and
(4) Will not have a significant economic impact, positive or negative, on a substantial number of small entities under the criteria of the Regulatory Flexibility Act.
Air transportation, Aircraft, Aviation safety, Incorporation by reference, Safety.
Accordingly, under the authority delegated to me by the Administrator, the FAA amends 14 CFR part 39 as follows:
49 U.S.C. 106(g), 40113, 44701.
This AD is effective November 20, 2018.
None.
This AD applies to Bombardier, Inc., Model BD-700-1A10 and BD-700-1A11 airplanes, certificated in any category, serial numbers 9492 through 9711 inclusive, 9713 through 9717 inclusive, 9719 through 9726 inclusive, 9728, 9730, 9732, 9733, 9743, and 9751.
Air Transport Association (ATA) of America Code 27, Flight controls.
This AD was prompted by a report of cracking at the fastener holes of the left-hand-side support bracket of the elevator bell crank for the control linkage in the vertical stabilizer. We are issuing this AD to address any cracking in the support bracket of the elevator bell crank, which could lead to detachment of the bracket and loss of functionality of the elevator on the affected side, and result in reduced controllability of the airplane. Failure of both brackets could result in loss of pitch control of the airplane.
Comply with this AD within the compliance times specified, unless already done.
Within 60 months after the effective date of this AD, or before accumulating 7,500 total flight cycles, whichever occurs first: Do an eddy current inspection of the support brackets of the elevator bell crank, part number (P/N) GD248-8750-3 and P/N GD248-8750-4, for any cracking at the fastener holes, and do a measurement to confirm that the fastener hole diameters are within tolerance, as applicable, in accordance with the Accomplishment Instructions of Bombardier Service Bulletin 700-27-5009, Revision 02, dated June 15, 2018 (for Model BD-700-1A11 airplanes); or Bombardier Service Bulletin 700-27-6009, Revision 01, dated July 18, 2017 (for Model BD-700-1A10 airplanes). If any cracking is found or if any fastener hole is out of tolerance, before further flight, replace with a new support bracket, in accordance with the Accomplishment Instructions of Bombardier Service Bulletin 700-27-5009, Revision 02, dated June 15, 2018 (for Model BD-700-1A11 airplanes); or Bombardier Service Bulletin 700-27-6009, Revision 01, dated July 18, 2017 (for Model BD-700-1A10 airplanes).
This paragraph provides credit for actions required by paragraph (g) of this AD, if those actions were performed before the effective date of this AD using the service information specified in paragraphs (h)(1), (h)(2), and (h)(3), as applicable.
(1) Bombardier Service Bulletin 700-27-5009, dated May 29, 2017.
(2) Bombardier Service Bulletin 700-27-5009, Revision 01, dated July 18, 2017.
(3) Bombardier Service Bulletin 700-27-6009, dated May 29, 2017.
The following provisions also apply to this AD:
(1)
(2)
(1) Refer to Mandatory Continuing Airworthiness Information (MCAI) Canadian AD CF-2017-32, dated October 10, 2017, for related information. This MCAI may be found in the AD docket on the internet at
(2) For more information about this AD, contact Aziz Ahmed, Aerospace Engineer, FAA, New York ACO Branch, 1600 Stewart Avenue, Suite 410, Westbury, New York 11590; telephone: 516-287-7329; fax: 516-794-5531; email:
(3) Service information identified in this AD that is not incorporated by reference is available at the addresses specified in paragraphs (k)(3) and (k)(4) of this AD.
(1) The Director of the Federal Register approved the incorporation by reference (IBR) of the service information listed in this paragraph under 5 U.S.C. 552(a) and 1 CFR part 51.
(2) You must use this service information as applicable to do the actions required by this AD, unless this AD specifies otherwise.
(i) Bombardier Service Bulletin 700-27-5009, Revision 02, dated June 15, 2018.
(ii) Bombardier Service Bulletin 700-27-6009, Revision 01, dated July 18, 2017.
(3) For service information identified in this AD, contact Bombardier, Inc., 400 Côte-Vertu Road West, Dorval, Québec H4S 1Y9, Canada; telephone 514-855-5000; fax 514-855-7401; email
(4) You may view this service information at the FAA, Transport Standards Branch, 2200 South 216th St., Des Moines, WA. For information on the availability of this material at the FAA, call 206-231-3195.
(5) You may view this service information that is incorporated by reference at the National Archives and Records Administration (NARA). For information on the availability of this material at NARA, call 202-741-6030, or go to:
Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), Department of Transportation (DOT).
Final rule.
We are superseding Airworthiness Directive (AD) 2006-07-26, which applied to all ATR-GIE Avions de Transport Régional Model ATR42 airplanes. AD 2006-07-26 required a one-time inspection to detect discrepancies (
This AD is effective November 20, 2018.
The Director of the Federal Register approved the incorporation by reference of a certain publication listed in this AD as of November 20, 2018.
For service information identified in this final rule, contact ATR-GIE Avions de Transport Régional, 1 Allée Pierre Nadot, 31712 Blagnac Cedex, France; telephone +33 (0) 5 62 21 62 21; fax +33 (0) 5 62 21 67 18; email
You may examine the AD docket on the internet at
Shahram Daneshmandi, Aerospace Engineer, International Section, Transport Standards Branch, FAA, 2200 South 216th St., Des Moines, WA 98198; telephone and fax 206-231-3220.
We issued a notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) to amend 14 CFR part 39 to supersede AD 2006-07-26, Amendment 39-14553 (71 FR 18205, April 11, 2006) (“AD 2006-07-26”). AD 2006-07-26 applied to all ATR-GIE Avions de Transport Régional Model ATR42 airplanes. The NPRM published in the
The European Aviation Safety Agency (EASA), which is the Technical Agent for the Member States of the European Union, has issued EASA AD 2017-0244, dated December 7, 2017 (referred to after this as the Mandatory Continuing Airworthiness Information, or “the MCAI”), to correct an unsafe condition for all ATR-GIE Avions de Transport Régional Model ATR42 airplanes. The MCAI states:
Occurrence was reported of detecting cracks on the wing of one in-service ATR 42 aeroplane in 2004. The cracks were found on the upper feet of ribs and on the upper skin of the wing outer boxes.
This condition, if not detected and corrected, could adversely affect the structural integrity of the aeroplane.
To address this potential unsafe condition, ATR issued Service Bulletin (SB) ATR42-57-0064 to provide inspection instructions and DGAC [Direction Générale de l'Aviation Civile] France issued [French] AD F-2004-191 (EASA approval 2004-12117) [which corresponds to FAA AD 2006-07-26] to require, for aeroplanes having accumulated more than 4,000 flight cycles (FC), a one-time Detailed Visual Inspection (DVI) of outer wing box upper skin and upper rib feet, on the right hand (RH) and left hand (LH) sides, from rib 24 to rib 29. After that [French] AD was issued, based on inspection results (all aeroplanes inspected, no similar case found), it was determined that these cracks were an isolated case.
More recently, three other cases were reported, indicating that this may not be an isolated case and that cracks could occur in this area of the wings on other ATR 42 aeroplanes. Consequently, ATR published SB ATR42-57-0074 (hereafter referred as ‘ATR SB’ in this [EASA] AD) to provide inspection instructions.
For the reasons described above, this [EASA] AD supersedes DGAC France AD F-2004-191 and requires repetitive DVI of the same wing areas and, depending on findings, accomplishment of a repair.
You may examine the MCAI in the AD docket on the internet at
We gave the public the opportunity to participate in developing this final rule. The following presents the comment received on the NPRM and the FAA's response.
Empire Airlines stated that paragraphs (g) and (i) of the proposed AD refer to ATR Service Bulletin ATR42-57-0074, dated October 19, 2017. Empire Airlines also stated that service bulletin has been revised.
We infer that Empire Airlines requested that the references in paragraphs (g) and (i) of this AD be revised to refer to ATR Service Bulletin ATR42-57-0074, Revision 01, dated January 8, 2018. We agree to refer to the latest revision of the service information since the changes introduced in this revision do not affect the AD requirements. We have revised paragraphs (g) and (i) of this AD accordingly. We have also added paragraph (k) to this AD to provide credit for accomplishing ATR Service Bulletin ATR42-57-0074, dated October 19, 2017.
We reviewed the relevant data, considered the comment received, and determined that air safety and the public interest require adopting this final rule with the change described previously and minor editorial changes. We have determined that these minor changes:
• Are consistent with the intent that was proposed in the NPRM for addressing the unsafe condition; and
• Do not add any additional burden upon the public than was already proposed in the NPRM.
We also determined that these changes will not increase the economic burden on any operator or increase the scope of this final rule.
ATR-GIE Avions de Transport Régional has issued ATR Service Bulletin ATR42-57-0074, Revision 01, dated January 8, 2018. This service information describes procedures for inspecting the outer wing box upper skin and upper rib feet, on the left-hand and right-hand wings, for discrepancies. This service information is reasonably available because the interested parties have access to it through their normal course of business or by the means identified in the
We estimate that this AD affects 37 airplanes of U.S. registry. We estimate the following costs to comply with this AD:
We have received no definitive data that would enable us to provide cost estimates for the on-condition actions specified in this AD.
A federal agency may not conduct or sponsor, and a person is not required to respond to, nor shall a person be subject to penalty for failure to comply with a collection of information subject to the requirements of the Paperwork Reduction Act unless that collection of information displays a current valid OMB control number. The control number for the collection of information required by this AD is 2120-0056. The paperwork cost associated with this AD has been detailed in the Costs of Compliance section of this document and includes time for reviewing instructions, as well as completing and reviewing the collection of information. Therefore, all reporting associated with this AD is mandatory. Comments concerning the accuracy of this burden and suggestions for reducing the burden should be directed to the FAA at 800 Independence Ave. SW, Washington, DC 20591, ATTN: Information Collection Clearance Officer, AES-200.
Title 49 of the United States Code specifies the FAA's authority to issue rules on aviation safety. Subtitle I, section 106, describes the authority of the FAA Administrator. Subtitle VII: Aviation Programs, describes in more detail the scope of the Agency's authority.
We are issuing this rulemaking under the authority described in Subtitle VII, Part A, Subpart III, Section 44701: “General requirements.” Under that section, Congress charges the FAA with promoting safe flight of civil aircraft in air commerce by prescribing regulations for practices, methods, and procedures the Administrator finds necessary for safety in air commerce. This regulation is within the scope of that authority because it addresses an unsafe condition that is likely to exist or develop on products identified in this rulemaking action.
This AD is issued in accordance with authority delegated by the Executive Director, Aircraft Certification Service, as authorized by FAA Order 8000.51C. In accordance with that order, issuance of ADs is normally a function of the Compliance and Airworthiness Division, but during this transition period, the Executive Director has delegated the authority to issue ADs applicable to transport category airplanes and associated appliances to the Director of the System Oversight Division.
We determined that this AD will not have federalism implications under Executive Order 13132. This AD will not have a substantial direct effect 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.
For the reasons discussed above, I certify that this AD:
1. Is not a “significant regulatory action” under Executive Order 12866;
2. Is not a “significant rule” under the DOT Regulatory Policies and Procedures (44 FR 11034, February 26, 1979);
3. Will not affect intrastate aviation in Alaska; and
4. Will not have a significant economic impact, positive or negative, on a substantial number of small entities under the criteria of the Regulatory Flexibility Act.
Air transportation, Aircraft, Aviation safety, Incorporation by reference, Safety.
Accordingly, under the authority delegated to me by the Administrator, the FAA amends 14 CFR part 39 as follows:
49 U.S.C. 106(g), 40113, 44701.
This AD is effective November 20, 2018.
This AD replaces AD 2006-07-26, Amendment 39-14553 (71 FR 18205, April 11, 2006) (“AD 2006-07-26”).
This AD applies to ATR-GIE Avions de Transport Régional Model ATR42-200, -300, -320, and -500 airplanes, certificated in any category, all manufacturer serial numbers.
Air Transport Association (ATA) of America Code 57, Wings.
This AD was prompted by reports of cracking on the left-hand and right-hand wings, of the outer wing box upper skin and upper rib feet. We are issuing this AD to address discrepancies (
Comply with this AD within the compliance times specified, unless already done.
Within the initial compliance time specified in table 1 to paragraph (g) of this AD, and thereafter at intervals not to exceed 48 months or 6,000 flight cycles, whichever occurs first: Do a detailed visual inspection for discrepancies on the left-hand and right-hand wings, of the outer wing box upper skin and upper rib feet, between rib 24 and rib 29. Do the inspection in accordance with the Accomplishment Instructions of ATR Service Bulletin ATR42-57-0074, Revision 01, dated January 8, 2018.
If any discrepancy is found during any inspection required by paragraph (g) of this AD: Before further flight, repair using a method approved by the Manager, International Section, Transport Standards Branch, FAA; or the European Aviation Safety Agency (EASA); or ATR-GIE Avions de Transport Régional's EASA Design Organization Approval (DOA). If approved by the DOA, the approval must include the DOA-authorized signature. Do the repair within the compliance time specified in the approved repair method.
At the applicable time specified in paragraph (i)(1) or (i)(2) of this AD: Report all findings (both positive and negative) of the inspections required by paragraph (g) of this AD to ATR-GIE Avions de Transport Régional, using the information in ATR Service Bulletin ATR42-57-0074, Revision 01, dated January 8, 2018.
(1) If the inspection was done on or after the effective date of this AD: Submit the report within 30 days after performing the inspection.
(2) If the inspection was done before the effective date of this AD: Submit the report within 30 days after the effective date of this AD.
Unless the repair instructions specify otherwise, repair of an airplane as required by paragraph (h) of this AD is not considered terminating action for the repetitive detailed visual inspections required by paragraph (g) of this AD.
This paragraph provides credit for actions required by paragraphs (g) and (i) of this AD, if those actions were performed before the effective date of this AD using ATR Service Bulletin ATR42-57-0074, dated October 19, 2017.
A federal agency may not conduct or sponsor, and a person is not required to respond to, nor shall a person be subject to a penalty for failure to comply with a collection of information subject to the requirements of the Paperwork Reduction Act unless that collection of information displays a current valid OMB Control Number. The OMB Control Number for this information collection is 2120-0056. Public reporting for this collection of information is estimated to be approximately 1 hour per response, including the time for reviewing instructions, completing and reviewing the collection of information. All responses to this collection of information are mandatory. Comments concerning the accuracy of this burden and suggestions for reducing the burden should be directed to the FAA at: 800 Independence Ave. SW, Washington, DC 20591, Attn: Information Collection Clearance Officer, AES-200.
(1)
(2)
(1) Refer to Mandatory Continuing Airworthiness Information (MCAI) EASA AD 2017-0244, dated December 7, 2017, for related information. This MCAI may be found in the AD docket on the internet at
(2) For more information about this AD, contact Shahram Daneshmandi, Aerospace Engineer, International Section, Transport Standards Branch, FAA, 2200 South 216th St., Des Moines, WA 98198; telephone and fax 206-231-3220.
(3) Service information identified in this AD that is not incorporated by reference is available at the addresses specified in paragraphs (o)(3) and (o)(4) of this AD.
(1) The Director of the Federal Register approved the incorporation by reference (IBR) of the service information listed in this paragraph under 5 U.S.C. 552(a) and 1 CFR part 51.
(2) You must use this service information as applicable to do the actions required by this AD, unless this AD specifies otherwise.
(i) ATR Service Bulletin ATR42-57-0074, Revision 01, dated January 8, 2018.
(ii) Reserved.
(3) For service information identified in this AD, contact ATR-GIE Avions de Transport Régional, 1 Allée Pierre Nadot, 31712 Blagnac Cedex, France; telephone +33 (0) 5 62 21 62 21; fax +33 (0) 5 62 21 67 18; email
(4) You may view this service information at the FAA, Transport Standards Branch, 2200 South 216th St., Des Moines, WA. For information on the availability of this material at the FAA, call 206-231-3195.
(5) You may view this service information that is incorporated by reference at the National Archives and Records Administration (NARA). For information on the availability of this material at NARA, call 202-741-6030, or go to:
Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.
Final rule; technical amendment.
This action amends the legal description of Class E surface airspace at Lancaster Airport, Lancaster, PA, by removing the Lancaster VORTAC from the header, and rewording the description for clarity. Also, this action amends the legal description of Class E surface airspace at Williamsport Regional Airport, Williamsport, PA, by removing the Williamsport Regional Airport ILS localizer from the header, and rewording the description for clarity. Finally, this action amends the legal description of Class E airspace designated as an extension to Class D airspace at Williamsport Regional Airport by rewording the description for clarity. This action does not affect the boundaries or operating requirements of the airspace.
Effective 0901 UTC, November 8, 2018. The Director of the Federal Register approves this incorporation by reference action under title 1, Code of Federal Regulations, part 51, subject to the annual revision of FAA Order 7400.11 and publication of conforming amendments.
FAA Order 7400.11.C Airspace Designations and Reporting Points, and subsequent amendments can be viewed online at
FAA Order 7400.11, Airspace Designations and Reporting Points, is published yearly and effective on September 15.
John Fornito, Operations Support Group, Eastern Service Center, Federal Aviation Administration, 1701 Columbia Avenue, College Park, GA 30337; telephone (404) 305-6364.
The FAA's authority to issue rules regarding aviation safety is found in Title 49 of the U.S. Code. Subtitle 1, Section 106, describes the authority of the FAA Administrator. Subtitle VII, Aviation Programs, describes in more detail the scope of the agency's authority. This rulemaking is promulgated under the authority described in Subtitle VII, Part A, Subpart I, Section 40103. Under that section, the FAA is charged with prescribing regulations to assign the use of airspace necessary to ensure the safety of aircraft and the efficient use of airspace. This regulation is within the scope of that authority as it makes a clerical correction to the headers and descriptions of Lancaster Airport, Lancaster, PA, and Williamsport Regional Airport, Williamsport, PA.
The FAA Aeronautical Information Services branch found the Class E surface airspace descriptors for Lancaster Airport, Lancaster, PA, and Williamsport Regional Airport, Williamsport, PA required clarification as published in FAA Order 7400.11C, Airspace Designations and Reporting Points. The headers of Class E surface area airspace were incorrect in the Order. Also, a clerical amendment in the legal description also is made to the airspace designation, by adding verbiage to the description, for clarity.
Class E airspace designations are published in paragraph 6002, and 6004, respectively, of FAA Order 7400.11C dated August 13, 2018, and effective September 15, 2018, which is incorporated by reference in 14 CFR part 71.1. The Class E airspace designations listed in this document will be published subsequently in the Order.
This document amends FAA Order 7400.11C, Airspace Designations and Reporting Points, dated August 13, 2018, and effective September 15, 2018. FAA Order 7400.11C is publicly available as listed in the
This action amends Title 14 Code of Federal Regulations (14 CFR) part 71 by correcting the headers and descriptors of Class E surface airspace of Lancaster Airport, Lancaster, PA, and Williamsport Regional Airport, Williamsport, PA. The Lancaster VORTAC is removed from Lancaster, PA header, and the Williamsport Regional Airport ILS localizer is removed from the Williamsport, PA, header, as neither are used in the descriptors. Also, “That airspace extending from the surface” is added to the Class E surface airspace descriptor of both airports, and “to a 7-mile radius of the airport “is added to the Class E airspace designated as an extension to a Class D surface area of Williamsport Regional Airport's descriptor.
This is an administrative change and does not affect the boundaries, or operating requirements of the airspace, therefore, notice and public procedure under 5 U.S.C. 553(b) are unnecessary.
The FAA has determined that this regulation only involves an established body of technical regulations for which frequent and routine amendments are necessary to keep them operationally current. Therefore, this regulation: (1) Is not a “significant regulatory action” under Executive Order 12866; (2) is not a “significant rule” under DOT Regulatory Policies and Procedures (44 FR 11034; February 26, 1979); and (3) does not warrant preparation of a regulatory evaluation as the anticipated impact is so minimal. Since this is a routine matter that only affects air traffic procedures and air navigation, it is certified that this rule, when promulgated, does not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities under the criteria of the Regulatory Flexibility Act.
The FAA has determined that this action qualifies for categorical exclusion under the National Environmental Policy Act in accordance with FAA Order 1050.1F, “Environmental Impacts: Policies and Procedures,” paragraph 5-6.5.a. This airspace action is not expected to cause any potentially significant environmental impacts, and no extraordinary circumstances exist that warrant preparation of an environmental assessment.
Airspace, Incorporation by reference, Navigation (air).
In consideration of the foregoing, the Federal Aviation Administration amends 14 CFR part 71 as follows:
49 U.S.C. 106(g); 40103, 40113, 40120; E.O. 10854, 24 FR 9565, 3 CFR, 1959-1963 Comp., p. 389.
That airspace extending from the surface within a 4.1-mile radius of Lancaster Airport, and that airspace extending upward from the surface. This Class E airspace area is effective during the specific dates and times established in advance by a Notice to Airmen. The effective date and time will thereafter be continuously published in the Chart Supplement.
That airspace extending from the surface within a 4.2-mile radius of Williamsport Regional Airport. This Class E airspace area is effective during the specific dates and times established in advance by a Notice to Airmen. The effective date and time will thereafter be continuously published in the Chart Supplement.
That airspace extending upward from the surface from the 4.2-mile radius of Williamsport Regional Airport to a 7-mile radius of the airport, extending clockwise from a 270° bearing to the 312° bearing from the airport and within an 11.3-mile radius of the airport extending clockwise from the 312° bearing to the 350° bearing from the airport and within an 11.3-mile radius of the airport extending clockwise from the 004° bearing to the 099° bearing from the airport and within 3.5 miles south of the airport east localizer course extending from the 4.2-mile radius of the airport east to the 099° bearing from the airport.
Coast Guard, DHS.
Notice of deviation from drawbridge regulation.
The Coast Guard has issued a temporary deviation from the operating schedule that governs the Borden Avenue Bridge across Dutch Kills, mile 1.2, at Queens, NY. The deviation is necessary to facilitate bridge repairs. This temporary deviation allows the bridge to remain in the closed-to-navigation position during bridge repairs.
This deviation is effective without actual notice from October 16, 2018 to 11:59 p.m. on November 17, 2018. For enforcement purposes, actual notice will be used will be used from 12:01 a.m. on September 28, 2018 to October 16, 2018.
The docket for this deviation, USCG-2018-0434 is available at
If you have questions on this temporary deviation, call or email Stephanie E. Lopez, Bridge Management Specialist, First District Bridge Branch, U.S. Coast Guard; telephone 212-514-4335, email
The owner of the bridge, the New York City Department of Transportation, requested a temporary deviation to facilitate punch list work involving the Borden Avenue Bridge control house roof repairs. The Borden Avenue Bridge across Dutch Kills, Queens, has a vertical clearance in the closed position of 4 feet at mean high water and 9 feet at mean low water. The existing bridge operating regulations are found at 33 CFR 117.801(c).
This temporary deviation allows the Borden Avenue Bridge to stay in the closed position from 12:01 a.m. on September 28, 2018 to 11:59 p.m. on November 17, 2018. At no time can the bridge open to marine traffic. No one has signaled to request that this bridge open to marine traffic since December 15, 2014. The bridge will not be able to open for emergencies and there is no immediate alternate route for vessels to pass.
The Coast Guard will also inform the users of the waterways through our Local and Broadcast Notices to Mariners of the change in operating schedule for the bridge so that vessel operators can arrange their transits to minimize any impact caused by the temporary deviation.
In accordance with 33 CFR 117.35(e), the drawbridge must return to its regular operating schedule immediately at the end of the effective period of this temporary deviation. This deviation from the operating regulations is authorized under 33 CFR 117.35.
Office of Postsecondary Education, Department of Education.
Final regulations.
The Secretary removes outdated regulations for two programs no longer authorized by Federal law: The Teacher Quality Enhancement Grants (TQE) program and the Preparing Tomorrow's Teachers to Use Technology (PT3) program. Therefore, the associated regulations are unnecessary.
This action is effective October 16, 2018.
Linda Byrd-Johnson, U.S. Department of Education, 400 Maryland Avenue SW, Room 270-02, Washington, DC 20202-6200. Telephone: (202) 453-6060. Email:
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.
On February 24, 2017, President Trump signed Executive Order 13777, “Enforcing the Regulatory Reform Agenda,” which established a Federal policy “to alleviate unnecessary regulatory burdens” on the American people. Section 3(a) of the Executive order directed each Federal agency to establish a Regulatory Reform Task Force, the duty of which is to evaluate existing regulations and “make recommendations to the agency head regarding their repeal, replacement, or modification.” Section 3(d)(ii) of the Executive order specifically instructs the Task Force to identify regulations that are “are outdated, unnecessary, or ineffective.” The Department is undertaking this regulatory action consistent with that objective.
The TQE and PT3 programs are no longer authorized by the Higher Education Act of 1965, as amended (HEA). Pursuant to the Higher Education Opportunity Act (Pub. L. 110-315) enacted in 2008, these programs were replaced. The TQE program was replaced with the Teacher Quality Partnership program, and the PT3 program was replaced with the Preparing Teachers for Digital Age Learners program. Neither new program uses the regulations from the replaced programs. Accordingly, the Secretary removes 34 CFR parts 611 and 614 because they are obsolete. The Secretary also removes parts 636, 649, 680, 693, and 695-699, which had been reserved, to streamline the Department's regulations.
Under the Administrative Procedure Act (5 U.S.C. 553) (APA) the Department generally offers interested parties the opportunity to comment on proposed regulations. However, the APA provides that an agency is not required to conduct notice-and-comment rulemaking when the agency, for good cause, finds that the requirement is impracticable, unnecessary, or contrary to the public interest (5 U.S.C. 553(b)(B) and (d)(3)). There is good cause to waive rulemaking in this case because these final regulations have become obsolete. This regulatory action adopts no new regulations and does not establish or affect substantive policy. Therefore, under 5 U.S.C. 553(b)(B), the Secretary has determined that obtaining public comment on the removal of the regulations is unnecessary.
The APA also generally requires that regulations be published at least 30 days before their effective date, unless the agency has good cause to implement its regulations sooner (5 U.S.C. 553(d)(3)). Again, because this final regulatory action merely removes outdated regulations, the Secretary is also waiving the 30-day delay in the effective date of these regulatory changes under 5 U.S.C. 553(d)(3).
Under Executive Order 12866, the Secretary must determine whether this regulatory action is “significant” and, therefore, subject to the requirements of the Executive order and subject to review by the Office of Management and Budget (OMB). Section 3(f) of Executive Order 12866 defines a “significant regulatory action” as an action likely to result in a rule that may—
(1) Have an annual effect on the economy of $100 million or more, or adversely affect a sector of the economy, productivity, competition, jobs, the environment, public health or safety, or State, local, or Tribal governments or communities in a material way (also referred to as an “economically significant” rule);
(2) Create serious inconsistency or otherwise interfere with an action taken or planned by another agency;
(3) Materially alter the budgetary impacts of entitlement grants, user fees, or loan programs or the rights and obligations of recipients thereof; or
(4) Raise novel legal or policy issues arising out of legal mandates, the President's priorities, or the principles stated in the Executive order.
This final regulatory action is not a significant regulatory action subject to review by OMB under section 3(f) of Executive Order 12866.
Under Executive Order 13771, for each new regulation that the Department proposes for notice and comment or otherwise promulgates that is a significant regulatory action under Executive Order 12866 and that imposes total costs greater than zero, it must identify two deregulatory actions. For FY 2018, any new incremental costs associated with a new regulation must be fully offset by the elimination of existing costs through deregulatory actions, unless required by law or approved in writing by the Director of the OMB. Because this final rule is not a significant regulatory action, the requirement to offset new regulations in Executive Order 13771 does not apply.
We have also reviewed these regulations under Executive Order 13563, which supplements and explicitly reaffirms the principles, structures, and definitions governing regulatory review established in Executive Order 12866. To the extent permitted by law, Executive Order 13563 requires that an agency—
(1) Propose or adopt regulations only on a reasoned determination that their benefits justify their costs (recognizing that some benefits and costs are difficult to quantify);
(2) Tailor its regulations to impose the least burden on society, consistent with obtaining regulatory objectives and taking into account—among other things and to the extent practicable—the costs of cumulative regulations;
(3) In choosing among alternative regulatory approaches, select those approaches that maximize net benefits (including potential economic, environmental, public health and safety, and other advantages; distributive impacts; and equity);
(4) To the extent feasible, specify performance objectives, rather than the behavior or manner of compliance a regulated entity must adopt; and
(5) Identify and assess available alternatives to direct regulation, including economic incentives—such as user fees or marketable permits—to encourage the desired behavior, or provide information that enables the public to make choices.
Executive Order 13563 also requires an agency “to use the best available techniques to quantify anticipated present and future benefits and costs as accurately as possible.” The Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs of OMB has emphasized that these techniques may include “identifying changing future compliance costs that might result from technological innovation or anticipated behavioral changes.”
We are issuing this final regulatory action only on a reasoned determination that its benefits justify its costs. In choosing among alternative regulatory approaches, we selected those approaches that maximize net benefits. Based on the analysis that follows, the Department believes that these final regulations are consistent with the principles in Executive Order 13563.
We also have determined that this regulatory action does not unduly interfere with State, local, and Tribal governments in the exercise of their governmental functions.
In accordance with both Executive orders, the Department has assessed the potential costs and benefits, both quantitative and qualitative, of this regulatory action. Because the rescinded regulations are obsolete, we do not believe that this action will result in any additional costs or benefits.
Pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 601(2), the Regulatory Flexibility Act applies only to rules for which an agency publishes a general notice of proposed rulemaking. The Regulatory Flexibility Act does not apply to this rulemaking because there is good cause to waive notice and comment under 5 U.S.C. 553.
These regulations do not contain any information collection requirements.
These programs are subject to Executive Order 12372 and the regulations in 34 CFR part 79. One of the objectives of the Executive order is to foster an intergovernmental partnership and a strengthened federalism. The Executive order relies on processes developed by State and local governments for coordination and review of proposed Federal financial assistance.
You may also access documents of the Department published in the
Colleges and universities, Elementary and secondary education, Grant programs-education.
Grant programs-education, colleges and universities.
For the reasons discussed in the preamble, and under the authority at 20 U.S.C. 3474 and 20 U.S.C. 1221e-3, the Secretary amends chapter VI of title 34 of the Code of Federal Regulations as follows:
U.S. Copyright Office, Library of Congress.
Interim rule with request for comments.
The U.S. Copyright Office is issuing interim regulations pursuant to the Classics Protection and Access Act, title II of the recently enacted Orrin G. Hatch-Bob Goodlatte Music Modernization Act. These regulations pertain to the filing of schedules by rights owners listing their sound recordings fixed before February 15, 1972, and the filing of contact information by entities publicly performing these sound recordings by means of digital audio transmission. As required under the Act, the Office is also specifying how individuals may request timely notification of the filing of such schedules with the Office. These regulations are issued on an interim basis with opportunity for comment to comply with statutory requirements and to ensure that both rights owners and transmitting entities can promptly make use of these new filing mechanisms to protect their respective legal interests. The Office welcomes comment on these interim rules.
The effective date of the interim regulations is October 16, 2018. Written comments must be received no later than 11:59 p.m. Eastern Time on November 15, 2018.
For reasons of government efficiency, the Copyright Office is using the
Regan A. Smith, General Counsel and Associate Register of Copyrights, by email at
On October 11, 2018, the president signed into law the Orrin G. Hatch-Bob Goodlatte Music Modernization Act,
Specifically, to be eligible for these remedies, rights owners must typically file schedules listing their Pre-1972 Sound Recordings (“Pre-1972 Schedules”) with the U.S. Copyright Office (the “Office”), which are then indexed into the Office's public records.
In addition, rights owners must provide specific notice of unauthorized use to certain entities that were previously transmitting Pre-1972 Sound Recordings, before pursuing certain remedies against them. To be entitled to receive direct notice of unauthorized activity from a rights owner, an entity must have been publicly performing a Pre-1972 Sound Recording by means of digital audio transmission at the time of enactment of section 1401 and must file its contact information with the Copyright Office within 180 days of enactment, that is, by April 9, 2019.
The Office promulgates the following interim rule to establish and govern the filing of Pre-1972 Schedules, the filing of contact information by entities publicly performing Pre-1972 Sound Recordings by means of digital audio transmission at the time of enactment of section 1401 (“Notice of Contact Information”), and the means by which individuals may request and receive timely notification when Pre-1972 Schedules are indexed into the Office's public records.
Under the interim rule, rights owners may file Pre-1972 Schedules with the Office using a form provided on the Office's website. At present, the form is an Excel spreadsheet template. This format is required so that the Office can timely ingest the Pre-1972 Schedules and index them into a searchable database available to prospective users, including persons who may otherwise wish to make noncommercial uses of these works, and the general public. The database of Pre-1972 Schedules is available on the Office's website at
For each sound recording, the Pre-1972 Schedule must include the rights owner's name, the sound recording title, and the featured artist. Rights owners may also include additional optional information pursuant to the instructions on the form and the Office's website. For example, the Pre-1972 Schedule may include, for each sound recording, album title information, any alternate sound recording title(s), the publication date, the label name, and the rights owner's contact information. A rights owner may elect to include this optional information on a recording-by-recording basis. In addition, the individual submitting the Pre-1972 Schedule must certify that she has appropriate authority to submit the schedule and that all information submitted to the Office is true, accurate, and complete to the best of the individual's knowledge, and is made in good faith. The Office may reject any Pre-1972 Schedule that fails to comply with these requirements or any additional requirements provided on the Office's website or the form itself.
As noted above, for a rights owner to be eligible to recover statutory damages and/or attorneys' fees for the unauthorized use of a Pre-1972 Sound Recording, the use must occur at least 90 days after a Pre-1972 Schedule that includes the recording is “indexed into the public records of the Copyright Office”
The interim rule also states that if ownership of a Pre-1972 Sound Recording changes after its inclusion in a Pre-1972 Schedule filed with the Office, the Office will consider the schedule to be effective as to any successor in interest. A successor in interest may, but is not required to file a new schedule. The Office invites public comments on whether it should accept transfers of rights ownership and other documents pertaining to a Pre-1972 Sound Recording (excluding Pre-1972 Schedules) for recordation, even though they are not transfers of copyright ownership or documents pertaining to a copyright under 17 U.S.C. 205.
At present, the Office has not implemented a means for rights owners to correct limited mistakes in Pre-1972 Schedules indexed into the Office's public records (
As required by the Music Modernization Act, the interim regulations also confirm that persons may request timely notification of when Pre-1972 Schedules are indexed into the Office's public records by following the instructions provided by the Copyright Office on its website. Presently, individuals requesting such notification can subscribe to a weekly email through a service similar to the Office's NewsNet service, which will provide a link to the Office's online database of indexed Pre-1972 Schedules. The Office's searchable database defaults to listing the sound recordings with the most recent index dates first, so individuals should easily be able to identify recently indexed filings.
As with similar types of filings made with the Office, the interim rule states that the Office does not review Pre-1972 Schedules for legal sufficiency, interpret their content, or screen them for errors or discrepancies.
Regarding filing fees, the Copyright Act grants the Office authority to establish, adjust, and recover fees for services provided to the public.
Under the interim rule, transmitting entities may file a Notice of Contact Information with the Office using a form and instructions specified on the Office's website. The Office is using
The Notice of Contact Information must include the legal name, email address, and physical street address of the transmitting entity to which rights owners should send notifications of claimed violations of 17 U.S.C. 1401(a).
If an entity submits a Notice of Contact Information following the instructions provided by the Office, including paying the appropriate fee, the Office will make the Notice publicly available in a searchable online directory, available on the Office's website at
The Office concludes that during the interim period, the appropriate fee to file a Notice of Contact Information will be similar to the fee previously in effect for service providers to designate an agent to receive notifications of claimed copyright infringement under 17 U.S.C. 512(c).
These interim regulations will go into effect immediately after publication of this document in the
Copyright, General provisions.
For the reasons set forth in the preamble, the Copyright Office amends 37 CFR part 201 as follows:
17 U.S.C. 702.
(c) * * *
(b) * * *
(12) Notices of contact information for transmitting entities publicly performing pre-1972 sound recordings by means of digital audio transmission (17 U.S.C. 1401(f)(5)(B); see § 201.36).
(13) Schedules of pre-1972 sound recordings (17 U.S.C. 1401(f)(5)(A); see § 201.35).
(a)
(b)
(1) Unless otherwise specified, the terms used have the meanings set forth in 17 U.S.C. 1401.
(2) A
(c)
(d)
(1) For each sound recording listed, the right's owner name, sound recording title, and featured artist;
(2) A certification that the individual submitting the schedule of pre-1972 sound recordings has appropriate authority to submit the schedule and that all information submitted to the Office is true, accurate, and complete to the best of the individual's knowledge, information, and belief, and is made in good faith.
(3) For each sound recording listed, the rights owner may opt to include additional information as permitted and in the format specified by the Office's form or instructions, such as publication date, or alternate title information.
(e)
(f)
(g)
(h)
(i)
(a)
(b)
(1) Unless otherwise specified, the terms used have the meanings set forth in 17 U.S.C. 1401.
(2) A
(3) A
(c)
(d)
(1) The full legal name, email address, and physical street address of the transmitting entity to which rights owners should send notifications of claimed violations of 17 U.S.C. 1401(a). A post office box may not be substituted for the street address of a transmitting entity. Related or affiliated transmitting entities that are separate legal entities (
(2) The website(s) and/or application(s) through which the transmitting entity publicly performs pre-1972 sound recordings by means of digital audio transmission.
(3) A certification that the transmitting entity was publicly performing pre-1972 sound recordings by means of digital audio transmission as of October 11, 2018.
(4) A certification that the individual submitting the notice has appropriate authority to submit the notice and that all information submitted to the Office is true, accurate, and complete to the best of the individual's knowledge, information, and belief, and is made in good faith.
(5) The transmitting entity may opt to include alternate names for which the transmitting entity seeks application of 17 U.S.C. 1401(f)(5)(B)(iii), such as names that the public would be likely to use to search for the transmitting entity in the Copyright Office's online directory of transmitting entities publicly performing pre-1972 sound recordings by means of digital audio transmission, including names under which the transmitting entity is doing business and other commonly used names. Separate legal entities are not considered alternate names.
(e)
Approved by:
Postal Regulatory Commission.
Final rule.
The Commission adopts a final rule concerning mail preparation changes. The rule as adopted removes reference to procedures relying on the existence of a substantive standard for mail preparation changes in response to the recent decision in
David A. Trissell, General Counsel, at 202-789-6820.
In this Order, the Commission adopts a final rule concerning mail preparation changes. The final rule partially rescinds an existing Commission rule and is located at 39 CFR part 3010. The rule as adopted removes reference to procedures relying on the existence of a substantive standard for mail preparation changes in response to the recent decision in
In Order No. 3047, the Commission developed a substantive standard to determine when a mail preparation change would constitute a “change in rates” under 39 U.S.C. 3622.
In conjunction with Order No. 3047, the Commission initiated a rulemaking proceeding to develop procedures to ensure that the Postal Service properly applies the Commission's standard when making a determination of whether a mail preparation change has a rate effect.
Shortly after the Commission adopted the final rule in this docket, the Court issued its decision in
On August 9, 2018, the Commission issued the notice of proposed rulemaking (NPR), setting forth a proposed rescission to the rule set forth in § 3010.23(d)(5) that created procedures concerning mail preparation changes.
On September 13, 2018, the Commission received comments in response to the NPR from the Association for Postal Commerce (PostCom), the Postal Service, and the Public Representative.
To support its request for the Commission to temporarily suspend enforcement of the rule as opposed to rescission through rulemaking, PostCom points to the Commission's intention to develop an appropriate standard in a separate rulemaking.
The Postal Service also indicates that it has already complied with the publication requirement that the Commission proposes to retain in the rule.
He notes that it would be futile to require the Postal Service to affirmatively designate whether a change requires compliance with § 3010.23(d)(2) when there is no standard to measure compliance.
The Public Representative also supports the Commission's retention of the single source reporting requirement.
The comments reflect general support for the removal of portions of the procedural rule concerning mail preparation changes that rely on the existence of a substantive standard. PostCom suggests an alternative procedure to temporarily suspend enforcement of the rule as opposed to formally rescinding portions of this rulemaking.
When promulgating the final rule concerning mail preparation changes, the Commission intended for it to apply regardless of how the Court modified the standard. Order No. 4393 at 14. However, the Court did not modify the standard, it vacated it in its entirety. The components of the procedural rule in § 3010.23(d)(5) requiring the Postal Service to provide an affirmative designation of compliance and setting an evidentiary burden require the existence of a standard. While the Commission has initiated an advance notice of proposed rulemaking to gather proposals for a new standard, the Commission cannot predict the outcome of those proceedings.
Although PostCom may be correct that a temporary suspension of a procedural rule is within the Commission's authority, a rulemaking is more appropriate for the present situation. As this procedural rule was promulgated via notice and comment rulemaking, the Commission will use the same process to rescind a major portion of the rule.
Accordingly, the Commission adopts a final rule that rescinds two components of the rule requiring an affirmative designation and evidentiary burden. For the affirmative designation portion of the rule, the Postal Service would be unable to designate whether a particular mail preparation change requires compliance with § 3010.23(d)(2) because it no longer has a standard to apply to determine compliance. Similarly, the Postal Service could not show it made a correct determination by a preponderance of the evidence without having a standard. Parties would also be unable to rebut the Postal Service's determination with information absent a standard. For these reasons, removing those portions of the rule is appropriate.
The remaining part of the rule requires the Postal Service to provide published notice of all mail preparation changes in a single source. The Commission retains this portion of the rule because it provides notice and transparency for all mail preparation changes and does not rely on existence of a standard.
The Regulatory Flexibility Act requires federal agencies, in promulgating rules, to consider the impact of those rules on small entities.
The Commission's primary responsibility is in the regulatory oversight of the United States Postal Service. The rules that are the subject of this rulemaking have an impact on participation in Commission proceedings, but impose no further financial obligation upon any entity. For entities other than the United Stated Postal Service, participation is strictly voluntary. Based on these findings, the Chairman of the Commission certifies that the rules that are the subject of this rulemaking will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities. Therefore, pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 605(b), this rulemaking is exempt from the initial and final regulatory flexibility analysis requirements of 5 U.S.C. 603 and 604.
1. Part 3010 of title 39, Code of Federal Regulations, is revised as set forth below the signature of this Order, effective 30 days after publication in the
2. The Secretary shall arrange for publication of this Order in the
By the Commission.
Administrative practice and procedure, Postal Service.
For the reasons discussed in the preamble, the Commission amends chapter III of title 39 of the Code of Federal Regulations as follows:
39 U.S.C. 503; 3662.
(d) * * *
(5)
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
Correcting amendments.
The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is correcting errors in the regulatory text regarding the designation of certain areas in nine states for the 2015 ozone national ambient air quality standards (NAAQS). The designation rules were signed by the EPA Administrator on November 6, 2017, and April 30, 2018. The errors include typographical and formatting errors and the omission from the regulatory tables of several counties designated as attainment/unclassifiable. The EPA is correcting the errors consistent with the rulemaking record. The affected areas are located in California, Illinois, Indiana, Kentucky, Michigan, Montana, Ohio, Pennsylvania and Virginia.
The effective date of this rule is November 15, 2018.
The EPA has established a docket for the designation actions for the 2015 ozone NAAQS under Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2017-0548. All documents in the docket are listed in the index at
In addition, the EPA has established a website for the ozone designation rulemakings at
Denise Scott, Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Mail Code C539-01, Research Triangle Park, NC 27711, phone number (919) 541-4280 or by email at:
This rule corrects errors in the regulatory text designating certain areas for the 2015 ozone NAAQS as provided in the designation rules signed by the EPA Administrator on November 6, 2017 (November 16, 2017; 82 FR 54232), and on April 30, 2018 (June 4, 2018; 83 FR 25776). The EPA is correcting the errors consistent with the rulemaking record. The affected areas are located in California, Illinois, Indiana, Kentucky, Michigan, Montana, Ohio, Pennsylvania and Virginia. The corrections for each state are discussed below and the corrected regulatory text is provided at the end of this action.
The EPA is correcting two errors in the regulatory table for California for designations promulgated in the April 30, 2018, ozone designations rule. The EPA is moving the entry for the “Butte County, CA” nonattainment area so that the area will be listed in alphabetical order and, thus, will be listed before the entry for the “Calaveras County, CA” nonattainment area. The EPA is also correcting a typographical error in the entry for the “Pechanga Band of Luiseño Mission Indians of the Pechanga Reservation” nonattainment area by revising “Pu'eskaMountain” to read “Pu'eska Mountain.”
The EPA is correcting the regulatory table for Illinois to include McHenry County and Monroe County as attainment/unclassifiable areas. The EPA is adding those counties to the regulatory table, consistent with the rulemaking record for the April 30, 2018, ozone designations rule. The EPA is also moving the entry for “Bond County” so that it will be listed in alphabetical order and, thus, will be listed before the entry for “Boone County.”
McHenry County, Illinois, is part of the Chicago-Naperville, Illinois-Indiana-Wisconsin (IL-IN-WI), Combined Statistical Area (CSA).
Monroe County, Illinois, is part of the St. Louis, Missouri-Illinois (MO-IL) Core Based Statistical Area (CBSA). The EPA's final TSD for the St. Louis, MO-IL nonattainment area states, “The EPA
The EPA is correcting the regulatory table for Indiana to include Scott County, Union County, and Washington County as attainment/unclassifiable areas. The EPA is adding those counties to the regulatory table, consistent with the rulemaking record for the April 30, 2018, ozone designation rule.
Scott County, Indiana, and Washington County, Indiana, are part of the Louisville/Jefferson County—Elizabethtown—Madison, Kentucky-Indiana (KY-IN) CSA. The EPA's final TSD for the Louisville, KY-IN nonattainment area states that, “The area of analysis for the Louisville, KY-IN area included the Louisville/Jefferson County—Elizabethtown—Madison, KY-IN CSA. The Louisville/Jefferson County—Elizabethtown—Madison, KY-IN CSA is comprised of the following counties: Bullitt County (KY); Hardin County (KY); Henry County (KY); Jefferson County (KY); Larue County (KY); Meade County (KY); Nelson County (KY); Oldham County (KY); Shelby County (KY); Spencer County (KY); Trimble County (KY); Clark County (IN); Floyd County (IN); Harrison County (IN); Jefferson County (IN); Scott County (IN); and Washington County (IN). The EPA applied the five factors recommended in its guidance to the area of analysis to determine the nonattainment area boundary.” In the TSD section, “Conclusion for Louisville, KY-IN Area,” the EPA identified the portions of Indiana that were being designated as part of the nonattainment area and stated, “The EPA is not including the remaining analyzed counties within the nonattainment boundary of the Louisville, KY-IN nonattainment area.” The EPA's final TSD for the Louisville, KY-IN nonattainment area is located in the docket for the April 30, 2018, designations rule (document number EPA-HQ-OAR-2017-0548-0396) and is the key document setting forth the designations for the Indiana counties in the Louisville/Jefferson County—Elizabethtown—Madison, KY-IN CSA.
Union County, Indiana is part of the Cincinnati-Wilmington-Maysville, Ohio-Kentucky-Indiana (OH-KY-IN) CSA. The EPA's final TSD for Cincinnati, OH-KY-IN area states that, “For the Cincinnati area, the starting point for the analysis (the area of analysis), is the Cincinnati-Wilmington-Maysville, OH-KY-IN CSA. . . . The Cincinnati-Wilmington-Maysville, OH-KY-IN CSA includes the following counties: Dearborn County (IN), Ohio County (IN), Union County (IN), Boone County (KY), Bracken County (KY), Campbell County (KY), Gallatin County (KY), Grant County (KY), Kenton County (KY), Mason County (KY), Pendleton County (KY), Brown County (OH), Butler County (OH), Clermont County (OH), Clinton County (OH), Hamilton County (OH), and Warren County (OH). The EPA applied the five factors recommended in its guidance to the area of analysis to determine the nonattainment boundary.” In the TSD section, “Conclusion for the Cincinnati Area,” the EPA stated, “The EPA is not modifying the states' recommendations for nonattainment boundaries. Based on the assessment of factors described previously, the EPA has concluded that the following counties or portions of counties meet the CAA criteria for inclusion in the Cincinnati nonattainment area: Butler, Clermont, Hamilton and Warren in Ohio and the parts of Boone, Campbell and Kenton Counties in Kentucky identified in Kentucky's recommendation.” No Indiana counties were included in the Cincinnati nonattainment area. The EPA's final TSD for the Cincinnati, OH-KY-IN nonattainment area is located in the docket for the April 30, 2018, designations rule (document number EPA-HQ-OAR-2017-0548-0397) and is the key document setting forth the designations for the Indiana counties in the Cincinnati-Wilmington-Maysville, OH-KY-IN CSA.
In a letter from the EPA Administrator to the governor of Indiana, sent at the same time the April 30, 2018, rule was signed, the EPA identified the counties the EPA was designating as nonattainment as part of the Chicago, IL-IN-WI and Louisville, KY-IN nonattainment areas and stated that the remaining portions of Indiana, which includes Scott County, Union County and Washington County, were being designated as attainment/unclassifiable.
The EPA is correcting two errors in the regulatory table for Kentucky designations promulgated in the April 30, 2018, ozone designations rule. The EPA is moving the entry for “Mason County” so that it will be listed in alphabetical order and, thus, will be listed before the entry for “Meade County.” The EPA is also correcting a typographical error by revising “Larue County” to read “LaRue County.”
The EPA is correcting three errors in the regulatory table for Michigan for designations promulgated in the April 30, 2018, ozone designations rule. In the regulatory table for Michigan, the EPA is correcting a typographical error in the boundary description for the partial Allegan County, Michigan, nonattainment area by revising “Manlus Township” to read “Manlius Township.” The EPA is moving the entry for “Alger County” so that it will be listed in alphabetical order and, thus, will be listed before the entry for “Allegan County (part) remainder.” The EPA is moving the entry for “Sanilac County” so that it will be listed in alphabetical order and, thus, will be listed before the entry for “Schoolcraft County.”
In the November 6, 2017, designations rule, the EPA regulatory table identified all the counties in Montana as a single statewide attainment/unclassifiable area. The state of Montana subsequently notified the EPA that on September 21, 2016, it had recommended the
The EPA is correcting the regulatory table for Ohio to include Carroll County as an attainment/unclassifiable area. The EPA is adding the county to the regulatory table, consistent with the rulemaking record for the April 30, 2018, ozone designation rule.
Carroll County, Ohio, is part of the Cleveland-Akron-Canton, Ohio CSA. The EPA's final TSD for Ohio states that, “For the Cleveland area, the starting point for the area of analysis is the Cleveland-Akron-Canton, Ohio CSA which includes the following counties: Erie, Huron, Lorain, Medina, Summit, Stark, Carroll, Cuyahoga, Lake, Geauga, Portage, Ashtabula, and Tuscarawas.” In the TSD section, “Conclusion for the Cleveland Area,” the EPA stated, “After evaluating the five factors, the EPA is not modifying the State's recommendation and is designating Cuyahoga, Geauga, Lake, Lorain, Medina, Portage, and Summit Counties as the Cleveland nonattainment area for the 2015 ozone NAAQS.” The EPA's final TSD for Ohio is located in the docket for the April 30, 2018, designations rule (document number EPA-HQ-OAR-2017-0548-0381) and is the key document setting forth the designations for the counties in Ohio.
In a letter from the EPA Administrator to the governor of Ohio, sent at the same time the April 30, 2018, rule was signed, the EPA identified the counties the EPA was designating as nonattainment as part of the Cincinnati, OH-KY, Cleveland, Ohio, and Columbus, Ohio nonattainment areas and provided that the remaining portions of Ohio, which includes Carroll County, were being designated as attainment/unclassifiable.
In the April 30, 2018, designations rule, the EPA did not include Carbon, Lehigh, Monroe, Northampton and Pike Counties in the designation regulatory table for Pennsylvania. The EPA is adding those counties to the table consistent with the rulemaking record. These five counties are part of the New York-Newark, New York-New Jersey-Connecticut-Pennsylvania (NY-NJ-CT-PA) CSA. The EPA's final TSD for the New York-Northern New Jersey-Long Island, NY-NJ-CT nonattainment area states that the area of analysis is the CSA, with the additional county of Middlesex in Connecticut. The nonattainment area is also referred to as the New York Metro Nonattainment Area. In the final TSD section “Conclusion for The New York Metro Area,” the EPA states, “The counties of Dutchess, Orange, Putnam and Ulster in New York; Carbon, Lehigh, Monroe, Northampton and Pike in Pennsylvania are being excluded from the New York Metro nonattainment area. . . . .” The EPA's final TSD for New York-Northern New Jersey-Long Island, NY-NJ-CT nonattainment area is located in the docket for April 30, 2018, designation rule (document number EPA-HQ-OAR-0548-0411).
In a letter from the EPA Administrator to the governor of Pennsylvania, sent at the same time the April 30, 2018, rule was signed, the EPA summarized the portions of Pennsylvania that the agency was designating. The EPA identified the counties in Pennsylvania that were being designated as nonattainment as part of the Philadelphia-Wilmington-Atlantic City, PA-NJ-MD-DE nonattainment area and provided that the remaining portions of the state, which includes Carbon, Lehigh, Monroe, Northampton and Pike Counties, were being designated as attainment/unclassifiable.
In the April 30, 2018, designation rule, the EPA listed two areas out of order in the designation regulatory table for Virginia. To correct the formatting error, the EPA is moving the entries for the “Fredericksburg City” and “Winchester City” attainment/unclassifiable areas to list them alphabetically with the other independent cities that are designated as attainment/unclassifiable. Thus, the “Fredericksburg City” attainment/unclassifiable area will be listed after the entry for “Franklin City” attainment/unclassifiable area and the “Winchester City” attainment/unclassifiable area will be listed after the entry for “Williamsburg City” attainment/unclassifiable area.
This action is exempt from review by the OMB because it responds to the CAA requirement to promulgate air quality designations after promulgation of a new or revised NAAQS.
This action is not an Executive Order 13771 regulatory action because actions such as air quality designations associated with a new or revised NAAQS are exempt from review under Executive Order 12866.
This action does not impose an information collection burden under the PRA. In this action, the EPA is correcting errors in the regulatory text regarding the designation of certain areas for the 2015 ozone NAAQS consistent with the rulemaking record. This action does not contain any information collection activities.
This designation action under Clean Air Act (CAA) section 107(d) is not subject to the RFA. The RFA applies only to rules subject to notice-and-comment rulemaking requirements under the Administrative Procedure Act (APA), 5 U.S.C. 553, or any other statute. Section 107(d)(2)(B) of the CAA explicitly provides that designations are exempt from the notice-and-comment provisions of the APA. In addition, designations under CAA section 107(d) are not among the list of actions that are subject to the notice-and-comment rulemaking requirements of CAA section 307(d).
This action does not contain any unfunded mandate as described in UMRA, 2 U.S.C. 1531-1538 and does not significantly or uniquely affect small governments. The 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
This action does not have tribal implications as specified in Executive Order 13175. This action corrects errors in the regulatory tables in the ozone designation rules signed by the EPA Administrator on November 6, 2017, and April 30, 2018. The corrections are consistent with the rulemaking record. Thus, Executive Order 13175 does not apply.
The EPA interprets Executive Order 13045 as applying 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 establish an environmental standard intended to mitigate health or safety risks.
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.
This action does not have disproportionately high and adverse human health or environmental effects on minority populations, low-income populations and/or indigenous peoples, as specified in Executive Order 12898 (59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994). This action corrects errors in the regulatory text regarding the designation of certain areas in for the 2015 ozone NAAQS. The corrections are consistent with the rulemaking record for the designation rules signed by the EPA Administrator on November 6, 2017, and April 30, 2018.
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 U.S. This action is not a “major rule” as defined by 5 U.S.C. 804(2).
Environmental protection, Air pollution control, National parks, Wilderness areas.
For the reasons set forth in the preamble, 40 CFR part 81 is corrected as follows:
42 U.S.C. 7401,
The additions read as follows:
The additions read as follows:
The additions read as follows:
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
Final rule.
The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is taking final action to amend the Federal regulations to withdraw certain freshwater acute and chronic aquatic life water quality criteria and certain human health (water and organisms) water quality criteria, applicable to certain waters of California because California adopted, and the Agency approved, criteria for these parameters that are protective of the uses for the waterbodies. In this action, the EPA is amending the Federal regulations to withdraw those certain criteria applicable to California as described in the December 11, 2017 proposed rule. The withdrawal will enable California to implement their EPA-approved water quality criteria.
This final rule is effective on November 15, 2018.
The EPA has established a docket for this action identified by Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-OW-2017-0303, at
For additional information about the EPA's public docket, visit the EPA Docket Center homepage at
For information with respect to California, contact Diane E. Fleck, P.E. Esq., U.S. EPA Region 9, WTR-2, 75 Hawthorne St., San Francisco, CA 94105
No one is affected by the final action contained in this document. This final action would merely serve to withdraw certain Federal water quality criteria that have been applicable to California and are no longer needed in light of the EPA-approved state water quality criteria. If you have any questions regarding the applicability of this action to a particular entity, consult the person identified in the preceding section entitled
On May 18, 2000, the EPA promulgated a final rule known as the “California Toxics Rule” (“CTR”) at 40 CFR 131.38. The CTR final rule established numeric water quality criteria for priority toxic pollutants for the State of California, because the State had not complied fully with Section 303(c)(2)(B) of the Clean Water Act (CWA) (65 FR 31682).
Consistent with the basic tenet of the CWA, the EPA developed its water quality standards program emphasizing State primacy. Although in the CTR the EPA promulgated toxic criteria for California, the Agency prefers that states maintain primacy, revise their own standards, and achieve full compliance (see 57 FR 60860, December 22, 1992). As described in the preamble to the final CTR (see 65 FR 31682 (May 18, 2000)), when California adopts, and the EPA approves, water quality criteria that meet the requirements of the CWA, the Agency will issue a rule amending the CTR to withdraw the Federal criteria applicable to California.
On December 11, 2017, the EPA proposed the withdrawal of certain freshwater aquatic life (acute and chronic) water quality criteria and certain federally promulgated human health (water and organisms) water quality criteria, applicable in California (see 82 FR 58156, December 11, 2017). The EPA received comments on the proposed rule and a listing of the comments, and the Agency's responses, are contained in the document “Response to Comments for Water Quality Standards; Withdrawal of Certain Federal Water Quality Criteria Applicable to California: Lead, Chlorodibromomethane and Dichlorobromomethane,” which can be accessed at OW docket number EPA-HQ-OW-2017-0303. Today, the EPA is taking final action on its proposal. The withdrawal of the federally promulgated criteria will enable California to implement its EPA-approved water quality criteria for these parameters.
As discussed in the proposal (see 82 FR 58156, December 11, 2017), this final rule amends the Federal regulations in the CTR to withdraw the following criteria: freshwater acute and chronic aquatic life criteria for lead for the Los Angeles River and its tributaries; and human health (water & organisms) criteria for chlorodibromomethane and dichlorobromomethane for a segment of New Alamo Creek and a segment of Ulatis Creek. The EPA approved the State's criteria for lead and for chlorodibromomethane and dichlorobromomethane for these waters because the Agency determined that the State's criteria were scientifically sound and protective of the designated uses for these certain waters and met the requirements of the CWA and the Agency's implementing regulations at 40 CFR part 131. The State calls these criteria site-specific water quality objectives or site-specific objectives. More information on the EPA's actions which approved the California's site-specific objectives can be accessed at OW docket number EPA-HQ-OW-2017-0303.
This final rule will result in the withdrawal of the federally promulgated criteria for these certain waters under the CTR. However, the criteria for lead, chlorodibromomethane, and dichlorobromomethane for other waters in California that are currently part of the CTR remain in the Federal promulgation.
No changes to this final rule were made in response to the comments received on the proposed rule. The EPA received nine comments on the proposed rule through the public docket which are described in more detail in this section. Two anonymous comments and one environmental group opposed the proposed rule to withdraw certain Federal criteria because California's criteria are higher numerically than the Federal criteria. Regarding the State's aquatic life criteria for lead, the EPA indicated that the State has provided analyses that show the criteria are protective of aquatic life, and that the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service agreed that the criteria would not likely adversely affect any listed threatened or endangered species or their critical habitat. Regarding the State's human health criteria for chlorodibromomethane and dichlorobromomethane, the EPA indicated in its response that, as described in Agency's Record of Decision supporting the approval of the state's criteria, states and authorized tribes have the flexibility to adopt water quality criteria that result in a risk level higher than 10
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 is a deregulatory action under Executive Order 13771. This rule is expected to provide meaningful burden reduction by withdrawal of certain federally promulgated criteria in certain waters of California.
This action does not impose any new information collection burden under the PRA because it is administratively withdrawing Federal requirements that are no longer needed in California. It does not include any information collection, reporting, or recordkeeping requirements. The OMB has previously approved the information collection requirements contained in the existing regulations at 40 CFR part 131 and has assigned OMB control number 2040-0286.
The Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA) generally requires an agency to prepare a regulatory flexibility analysis of any rule subject to notice and comment rulemaking requirements under the Administrative Procedure Act or any other statute unless the agency certifies that the rule will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities. Small entities include small businesses, small organizations, and small governmental jurisdictions.
For purposes of assessing the impacts of this rule on small entities, small entity is defined as: (1) A small business as defined by the Small Business Administration's (SBA) regulations at 13 CFR 121.201; (2) a small governmental jurisdiction that is a government of a city, county, town, school district or special district with a population of less than 50,000; and (3) a small organization that is any not-for-profit enterprise which is independently owned and operated and is not dominant in its field.
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 does not contain any unfunded mandate as described in UMRA, 2 U.S.C. 1531-1538, and does not significantly or uniquely affect small governments. As this action withdraws certain federally promulgated criteria, the 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 rule imposes no regulatory requirements or costs on any state or local governments. Thus, Executive Order 13132 does not apply to this action.
In the spirit of Executive Order 13132, and consistent with the EPA policy to promote communications between the Agency and state and local governments, the Agency specifically solicited comment on this action from state and local officials.
This action does not have tribal implications, as specified in Executive Order 13175. This rule imposes no regulatory requirements or costs on any tribal government. It does not have substantial direct effects on tribal governments, the relationship between the Federal Government and tribes, or on the distribution of power and responsibilities between the Federal Government and tribes. Thus, Executive Order 13175 does not apply to this action.
This action is not subject to Executive Order 13045 (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997) because it is not economically significant as defined in Executive Order 12866, and because the Agency does not believe the environmental health or safety risks addressed by this action present a disproportionate risk to children.
This rule 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.
Executive Order 12898 (59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994) establishes Federal executive policy on environmental justice. Its main provision directs Federal agencies, to the greatest extent practicable and permitted by law, to make environmental justice part of their mission by identifying and addressing, as appropriate, disproportionately high and adverse human health or environmental effects of their programs, policies, and activities on minority populations and low-income populations in the United States.
The EPA believes that this action does not have disproportionately high and adverse human health or environmental effects on minority populations, low-income populations and/or indigenous peoples, as specified in Executive Order 12898 (59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994). The EPA has previously determined, based on the most current science and the Agency's CWA Section 304(a) recommended criteria, that California's adopted and the Agency-approved criteria are protective of human health.
The Congressional Review Act, 5 U.S.C. 801
Environmental protection, Administrative practice and procedure, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Water pollution control.
For the reasons set out in the preamble title 40, chapter I, part 131 of the Code of Federal Regulation is amended as follows:
33 U.S.C. 1251
(b)(1) * * *
National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), Commerce.
Temporary rule; General category October-November fishery for 2018; fishery reopening.
NMFS has determined that a reopening of the Atlantic bluefin tuna (BFT) General category fishery is warranted. This action is intended to provide a reasonable opportunity to harvest the full annual U.S. bluefin tuna quota without exceeding it, while maintaining an equitable distribution of fishing opportunities across time periods; help achieve optimum yield in the bluefin tuna fishery; and optimize the ability of all permit categories to harvest their full bluefin tuna quota allocations. This action applies to Atlantic tunas General category (commercial) permitted vessels and Atlantic Highly Migratory Species (HMS) Charter/Headboat category permitted vessels with a commercial sale endorsement when fishing commercially for BFT.
Effective 12:30 a.m., local time, October 15, 2018, through 11:30 p.m., local time, October 16, 2018.
Sarah McLaughlin or Brad McHale, 978-281-9260.
Regulations implemented under the authority of the Atlantic Tunas Convention Act (ATCA; 16 U.S.C. 971
NMFS recently published a final rule (
As of October 11, 2018, reports show that the General category landed 81.8 mt before closing. This represents 64 percent of the adjusted October through November subquota of 127.2 mt. Based on early October landings rates, NMFS has determined that reopening the General category fishery for two days is appropriate given the amount of unused October through November subquota (
Therefore, the General category fishery will reopen at 12:30 a.m., October 15, 2018, and close at 11:30 p.m., October 16, 2018. The General category daily retention limit during this reopening remains the same as prior to closing: one large medium or giant bluefin tuna per vessel per day/trip. This action applies to those vessels permitted in the General category, as well as to those HMS Charter/Headboat permitted vessels with a commercial sale endorsement when fishing commercially for BFT. Retaining, possessing, or landing large medium or giant BFT by persons aboard vessels permitted in the General and HMS Charter/Headboat categories must cease at 11:30 p.m. local time on October 16, 2018.
The General category will reopen automatically on December 1, 2018, for the December 2018 subquota period at the default one-fish level. In December 2017, NMFS adjusted the General category base subquota for the December 2018 period to 10 mt (82 FR 60680, December 22, 2017), although this amount increased to 14.6 mt with finalization of the quota rule. Based on quota availability in the Reserve, NMFS may consider transferring additional quota to the December subquota period, as appropriate.
Fishermen may catch and release (or tag and release) BFT of all sizes, subject to the requirements of the catch-and-release and tag-and-release programs at § 635.26. All BFT that are released must be handled in a manner that will maximize their survival, and without removing the fish from the water, consistent with requirements at § 635.21(a)(1). For additional information on safe handling, see the “Careful Catch and Release” brochure available at
NMFS will continue to monitor the BFT fishery closely. Dealers are required to submit landing reports within 24 hours of a dealer receiving BFT. Late reporting by dealers compromises NMFS' ability to timely implement actions such as quota and retention limit adjustment, as well as closures, and may result in enforcement actions. Additionally, and separate from the dealer reporting requirement, General and HMS Charter/Headboat category vessel owners are required to report the catch of all BFT retained or discarded dead within 24 hours of the landing(s) or end of each trip, by accessing
Depending on the level of fishing effort and catch rates of BFT, NMFS may determine that additional adjustments are necessary to ensure available subquotas are not exceeded or to enhance scientific data collection from, and fishing opportunities in, all geographic areas. If needed, subsequent adjustments will be published in the
The Assistant Administrator for NMFS (AA) finds that it is impracticable and contrary to the public interest to provide prior notice of, and an opportunity for public comment on, this action for the following reasons:
The regulations implementing the 2006 Consolidated HMS FMP and amendments provide for inseason actions to respond to the unpredictable nature of BFT availability on the fishing grounds, the migratory nature of this species, and the regional variations in the BFT fishery. Affording prior notice and opportunity for public comment to implement the fishery reopening is impracticable and contrary to the public interest. The General category recently closed, but based on available BFT quotas, fishery performance in recent weeks, and the availability of BFT on the fishing grounds, responsive reopening of the fishery is warranted to allow fishermen to take advantage of availability of fish and of quota. NMFS could not have proposed this action earlier, as it needed to consider and respond to updated data and information about fishery conditions and this year's landings. If NMFS was to offer a public comment period now, after having appropriately considered that data, it would preclude fishermen from harvesting BFT that are legally available. Therefore, the AA finds good cause under 5 U.S.C. 553(b)(B) to waive prior notice and the opportunity for public comment. For all of the above reasons, there also is good cause under 5 U.S.C. 553(d) to waive the 30-day delay in effectiveness.
This action is being taken under § 635.27(a)(1), and is exempt from review under Executive Order 12866.
16 U.S.C. 971
Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.
Notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM).
We propose to adopt a new airworthiness directive (AD) for certain The Boeing Company Model 737-100, -200, -200C, -300, -400, and -500 series airplanes. This proposed AD was prompted by reports that frame web and frame integral inboard chord cracking is occurring on multiple airplanes in multiple locations below the passenger floor. This proposed AD would require repetitive detailed, general visual, and high frequency eddy current (HFEC) inspections of the section 43 lower lobe frames at certain stations; an inspection to determine if certain repairs are installed; and applicable on-condition actions. We are proposing this AD to address the unsafe condition on these products.
We must receive comments on this proposed AD by November 30, 2018.
You may send comments, using the procedures found in 14 CFR 11.43 and 11.45, by any of the following methods:
•
•
•
•
For service information identified in this NPRM, contact Boeing Commercial Airplanes, Attention: Contractual & Data Services (C&DS), 2600 Westminster Blvd., MC 110-SK57, Seal Beach, CA 90740-5600; telephone 562-797-1717; internet
You may examine the AD docket on the internet at
Lu Lu, Aerospace Engineer, Airframe Section, FAA, Seattle ACO Branch, 2200 South 216th St., Des Moines, WA 98198; phone and fax: 206-231-3525; email:
We invite you to send any written relevant data, views, or arguments about this proposal. Send your comments to an address listed under the
We will post all comments we receive, without change, to
We have received reports indicating that frame web and frame integral inboard chord cracking is occurring on multiple airplanes in multiple locations below the passenger floor in section 43 from station (STA) 380 to STA 520. This condition, if not addressed, could result in the failure of one or more frames. The failure of multiple frames or the combination of a severed frame and cracks in fuselage chem-milled pockets in this area could lead to uncontrolled decompression of the airplane.
We reviewed Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 737-53A1361, dated July 17, 2018. The service information describes procedures for repetitive detailed, general visual, and HFEC inspections of the section 43 lower lobe frames from STA 380 to STA 520; a general visual inspection to determine if certain repairs are installed; and applicable on-condition actions. This service information is reasonably available because the interested parties have access to it through their normal course of business or by the means identified in the
We are proposing this AD because we evaluated all the relevant information and determined the unsafe condition described previously is likely to exist or develop in other products of the same type design.
This proposed AD would require accomplishment of the actions identified as “RC” (required for compliance) in the Accomplishment Instructions of Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 737-53A1361, dated July 17, 2018, described previously, except for any differences identified as exceptions in the regulatory text of this proposed AD.
For information on the procedures and compliance times, see this service information at
We estimate that this proposed AD affects 262 airplanes of U.S. registry. We estimate the following costs to comply with this proposed AD:
We have received no definitive data that would enable us to provide cost estimates for the on-condition actions specified in this proposed AD.
Title 49 of the United States Code specifies the FAA's authority to issue rules on aviation safety. Subtitle I, section 106, describes the authority of the FAA Administrator. Subtitle VII: Aviation Programs, describes in more detail the scope of the Agency's authority.
We are issuing this rulemaking under the authority described in Subtitle VII, Part A, Subpart III, Section 44701: “General requirements.” Under that section, Congress charges the FAA with promoting safe flight of civil aircraft in air commerce by prescribing regulations for practices, methods, and procedures the Administrator finds necessary for safety in air commerce. This regulation is within the scope of that authority because it addresses an unsafe condition that is likely to exist or develop on products identified in this rulemaking action.
This proposed AD is issued in accordance with authority delegated by the Executive Director, Aircraft Certification Service, as authorized by FAA Order 8000.51C. In accordance with that order, issuance of ADs is normally a function of the Compliance and Airworthiness Division, but during this transition period, the Executive Director has delegated the authority to issue ADs applicable to transport category airplanes to the Director of the System Oversight Division.
We determined that this proposed AD would not have federalism implications under Executive Order 13132. This proposed AD would not have a substantial direct effect 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.
For the reasons discussed above, I certify this proposed regulation:
(1) Is not a “significant regulatory action” under Executive Order 12866,
(2) Is not a “significant rule” under the DOT Regulatory Policies and Procedures (44 FR 11034, February 26, 1979),
(3) Will not affect intrastate aviation in Alaska, and
(4) Will not have a significant economic impact, positive or negative, on a substantial number of small entities under the criteria of the Regulatory Flexibility Act.
Air transportation, Aircraft, Aviation safety, Incorporation by reference, Safety.
Accordingly, under the authority delegated to me by the Administrator, the FAA proposes to amend 14 CFR part 39 as follows:
49 U.S.C. 106(g), 40113, 44701.
We must receive comments by November 30, 2018.
None.
This AD applies to The Boeing Company Model 737-100, -200, -200C, -300, -400, and -500 series airplanes, certificated in any category, as identified in Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 737-53A1361, dated July 17, 2018.
Air Transport Association (ATA) of America Code 53, Fuselage.
This AD was prompted by reports that frame web and frame integral inboard chord cracking is occurring on multiple airplanes in multiple locations below the passenger floor. We are issuing this AD to address frame cracking, which could result in the failure of multiple frames or the combination of a severed frame and cracks in fuselage chem-milled pockets in this area, which could lead to uncontrolled decompression of the airplane.
Comply with this AD within the compliance times specified, unless already done.
(1) For airplanes identified as Group 1 in Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 737-53A1361, dated July 17, 2018: Within 120 days after the effective date of this AD, inspect the airplane and do all applicable corrective actions using a method approved in accordance with the procedures specified in paragraph (i) of this AD.
(2) For airplanes identified as Groups 2 through 6 in Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 737-53A1361, dated July 17, 2018: Except as required by paragraph (h) of this AD, at the applicable times specified in paragraph 1.E., “Compliance,” of Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 737-53A1361, dated July 17, 2018, do all applicable actions identified as “RC” (required for compliance) in, and in accordance with, the Accomplishment Instructions of Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 737-53A1361, dated July 17, 2018
(1) For purposes of determining compliance with the requirements of this AD: Where Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 737-53A1361, dated July 17, 2018, uses the phrase “the original issue date of this service bulletin,” this AD requires using “the effective date of this AD.”
(2) Where Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 737-53A1361, dated July 17, 2018, specifies contacting Boeing for repair instructions or contacting Boeing for alternative inspections: This AD requires doing the repair, or the alternative inspections and applicable on-condition actions, using a method approved in accordance with the procedures specified in paragraph (i) of this AD.
(1) The Manager, Los Angeles ACO Branch, FAA, has the authority to approve AMOCs
(2) Before using any approved AMOC, notify your appropriate principal inspector, or lacking a principal inspector, the manager of the local flight standards district office/certificate holding district office.
(3) An AMOC that provides an acceptable level of safety may be used for any repair, modification, or alteration required by this AD if it is approved by the Boeing Commercial Airplanes Organization Designation Authorization (ODA) that has been authorized by the Manager, Los Angeles ACO Branch, FAA, to make those findings. To be approved, the repair method, modification deviation, or alteration deviation must meet the certification basis of the airplane, and the approval must specifically refer to this AD.
(4) Except as required by paragraph (h)(2) of this AD: For service information that contains steps that are labeled as RC, the provisions of paragraphs (i)(4)(i) and (i)(4)(ii) of this AD apply.
(i) The steps labeled as RC, including substeps under an RC step and any figures identified in an RC step, must be done to comply with the AD. If a step or substep is labeled “RC Exempt,” then the RC requirement is removed from that step or substep. An AMOC is required for any deviations to RC steps, including substeps and identified figures.
(ii) Steps not labeled as RC may be deviated from using accepted methods in accordance with the operator's maintenance or inspection program without obtaining approval of an AMOC, provided the RC steps, including substeps and identified figures, can still be done as specified, and the airplane can be put back in an airworthy condition.
(1) For more information about this AD, contact Lu Lu, Aerospace Engineer, Airframe Section, FAA, Seattle ACO Branch, 2200 South 216th St., Des Moines, WA 98198; phone and fax: 206-231-3525; email:
(2) For information about AMOCs, contact George Garrido, Aerospace Engineer, Airframe Section, FAA, Los Angeles ACO Branch, 3960 Paramount Boulevard, Lakewood, CA 90712-4137; phone: 562-627-5232; fax: 562-627-5210; email:
(3) For service information identified in this AD, contact Boeing Commercial Airplanes, Attention: Contractual & Data Services (C&DS), 2600 Westminster Blvd., MC 110-SK57, Seal Beach, CA 90740-5600; telephone 562-797-1717; internet
Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.
Notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM).
We propose to adopt a new airworthiness directive (AD) for certain The Boeing Company Model 737-100, -200, -200C, -300, -400, and -500 series airplanes. This proposed AD was prompted by reports of cracking in the frame web, frame integral inboard chord, and fail-safe chord on multiple airplanes in multiple locations below the passenger floor, in addition to an evaluation by the design approval holder (DAH) indicating that certain fuselage frame splices are subject to widespread fatigue damage (WFD). This proposed AD would require repetitive inspections of certain fuselage upper frames, side frames, fail-safe chords, inboard chords, frame webs, and stringers; an inspection for the presence of repairs in certain inspections zones and open tooling holes; and applicable on-condition actions. We are proposing this AD to address the unsafe condition on these products.
We must receive comments on this proposed AD by November 30, 2018.
You may send comments, using the procedures found in 14 CFR 11.43 and 11.45, by any of the following methods:
•
•
•
•
For service information identified in this NPRM, contact Boeing Commercial Airplanes, Attention: Contractual & Data Services (C&DS), 2600 Westminster Blvd., MC 110-SK57, Seal Beach, CA 90740-5600; telephone 562-797-1717; internet
You may examine the AD docket on the internet at
Lu Lu, Aerospace Engineer, Airframe Section, FAA, Seattle ACO Branch, 2200 South 216th St., Des Moines, WA 98198; phone and fax: 206-231-3525; email:
We invite you to send any written relevant data, views, or arguments about this proposal. Send your comments to an address listed under the
We will post all comments we receive, without change, to
Fatigue damage can occur locally, in small areas or structural design details, or globally, in widespread areas. Multiple-site damage is widespread damage that occurs in a large structural element such as a single rivet line of a lap splice joining two large skin panels. Widespread damage can also occur in multiple elements such as adjacent frames or stringers. Multiple-site damage and multiple-element damage cracks are typically too small initially to be reliably detected with normal inspection methods. Without intervention, these cracks will grow, and eventually compromise the structural integrity of the airplane. This condition is known as WFD. It is associated with general degradation of large areas of structure with similar structural details and stress levels. As an airplane ages, WFD will likely occur, and will certainly occur if the airplane is operated long enough without any intervention.
The FAA's WFD final rule (75 FR 69746, November 15, 2010) became effective on January 14, 2011. The WFD rule requires certain actions to prevent structural failure due to WFD throughout the operational life of certain existing transport category airplanes and all of these airplanes that will be certificated in the future. For existing and future airplanes subject to the WFD rule, the rule requires that DAHs establish a limit of validity (LOV) of the engineering data that support the structural maintenance program. Operators affected by the WFD rule may not fly an airplane beyond its LOV, unless an extended LOV is approved.
The WFD rule (75 FR 69746, November 15, 2010) does not require identifying and developing maintenance actions if the DAHs can show that such actions are not necessary to prevent WFD before the airplane reaches the LOV. Many LOVs, however, do depend on accomplishment of future maintenance actions. As stated in the WFD rule, any maintenance actions necessary to reach the LOV will be mandated by airworthiness directives through separate rulemaking actions.
In the context of WFD, this action is necessary to enable DAHs to propose LOVs that allow operators the longest operational lives for their airplanes, and still ensure that WFD will not occur. This approach allows for an implementation strategy that provides flexibility to DAHs in determining the timing of service information development (with FAA approval), while providing operators with certainty regarding the LOV applicable to their airplanes.
We have received a report indicating that cracking is being found in the frame web, frame integral inboard chord, and fail-safe chord on multiple frame locations, below the passenger floor, on multiple Model 737-100, -200, -200C, -300, -400 and -500 series airplanes. In addition, the fuselage frame splices from station (STA) 380 to STA 520 and STA 727A to STA 907 between stringers S-13 and S-14, are subject to WFD. This condition, if not addressed, could result in the cracks growing large enough to sever frames. Continued operation with multiple adjacent severed frames or a combination of a severed frame adjacent to fuselage skin cracks in chem-milled pockets could result in a loss of structural integrity or uncontrolled decompression.
We reviewed Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 737-53A1360, dated June 21, 2018. The service information describes procedures for repetitive inspections of certain fuselage upper frames, side frames, fail-safe chords, inboard chords, frame webs, and stringers; an inspection for the presence of repairs in certain inspections zones and open tooling holes; and applicable on-condition actions. This service information is reasonably available because the interested parties have access to it through their normal course of business or by the means identified in the
We are proposing this AD because we evaluated all the relevant information and determined the unsafe condition described previously is likely to exist or develop in other products of the same type design.
This proposed AD would require accomplishment of the actions identified as “RC” (required for compliance) in the Accomplishment Instructions of Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 737-53A1360, dated June 21, 2018, described previously, except for any differences identified as exceptions in the regulatory text of this proposed AD and except as discussed under “Differences Between this Proposed AD and the Service Information.”
For information on the procedures and compliance times, see this service information at
Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 737-53A1360, dated June 21, 2018, specifies that the additional inspections and applicable on-condition actions identified in Table 9, “Inspection of the Fuselage Frame Integral Inboard Chord and Web from STA 360 to STA 400, Right Side,” of Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 737-53A1360, dated June 21, 2018, must be done only for Group 3 airplanes. However, this proposed AD also requires that for Group 2 and Groups 4 through 9 airplanes identified in Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 737-53A1360, dated June 21, 2018, that have been modified to a cargo configuration, those additional inspections and applicable on-condition actions must also be done. We have coordinated this difference with Boeing.
We estimate that this proposed AD affects 262 airplanes of U.S. registry. We estimate the following costs to comply with this proposed AD:
We have received no definitive data that would enable us to provide cost estimates for the on-condition actions specified in this proposed AD.
Title 49 of the United States Code specifies the FAA's authority to issue rules on aviation safety. Subtitle I, section 106, describes the authority of the FAA Administrator. Subtitle VII: Aviation Programs, describes in more detail the scope of the Agency's authority.
We are issuing this rulemaking under the authority described in Subtitle VII, Part A, Subpart III, Section 44701: “General requirements.” Under that section, Congress charges the FAA with promoting safe flight of civil aircraft in air commerce by prescribing regulations for practices, methods, and procedures the Administrator finds necessary for safety in air commerce. This regulation is within the scope of that authority because it addresses an unsafe condition that is likely to exist or develop on products identified in this rulemaking action.
This proposed AD is issued in accordance with authority delegated by the Executive Director, Aircraft Certification Service, as authorized by FAA Order 8000.51C. In accordance with that order, issuance of ADs is normally a function of the Compliance and Airworthiness Division, but during this transition period, the Executive Director has delegated the authority to issue ADs applicable to transport category airplanes to the Director of the System Oversight Division.
We determined that this proposed AD would not have federalism implications under Executive Order 13132. This proposed AD would not have a substantial direct effect 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.
For the reasons discussed above, I certify this proposed regulation:
(1) Is not a “significant regulatory action” under Executive Order 12866,
(2) Is not a “significant rule” under the DOT Regulatory Policies and Procedures (44 FR 11034, February 26, 1979),
(3) Will not affect intrastate aviation in Alaska, and
(4) Will not have a significant economic impact, positive or negative, on a substantial number of small entities under the criteria of the Regulatory Flexibility Act.
Air transportation, Aircraft, Aviation safety, Incorporation by reference, Safety.
Accordingly, under the authority delegated to me by the Administrator, the FAA proposes to amend 14 CFR part 39 as follows:
49 U.S.C. 106(g), 40113, 44701.
We must receive comments by November 30, 2018.
None.
This AD applies to The Boeing Company Model 737-100, -200, -200C, -300, -400, and -500 series airplanes, certificated in any category, as identified in Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 737-53A1360, dated June 21, 2018.
Air Transport Association (ATA) of America Code 53, Fuselage.
This AD was prompted by reports of cracking in the frame web, frame integral inboard chord, and fail-safe chord on multiple airplanes in multiple locations below the passenger floor, in addition to an evaluation by the design approval holder (DAH) indicating that the fuselage frame splices from station (STA) 380 to STA 520 and STA 727A to STA 907 between stringers S-13 and S-14 are subject to widespread fatigue damage (WFD). We are issuing this AD to address cracks in these locations, which could grow large enough to sever frames. Continued operation with multiple adjacent severed frames or a combination of a severed frame adjacent to fuselage skin cracks in chem-milled pockets could result in a loss of structural integrity or uncontrolled decompression.
Comply with this AD within the compliance times specified, unless already done.
For airplanes identified as Group 1 in Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 737-53A1360, dated June 21, 2018: Within 120 days after the effective date of this AD, inspect the airplane and do all applicable on-condition actions using a method approved in accordance with the procedures specified in paragraph (k) of this AD.
For airplanes identified as Groups 2 through 9 in Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 737-53A1360, dated June 21, 2018, except as specified in paragraph (i) of this AD: At the applicable times specified in paragraph 1.E., “Compliance,” of Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 737-53A1360, dated June 21, 2018, do all applicable actions identified as “RC” (required for compliance) in, and in accordance with, the Accomplishment Instructions of Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 737-53A1360, dated June 21, 2018.
(1) For purposes of determining compliance with the requirements of this AD: Where Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 737-53A1360, dated June 21, 2018, uses the phrase “the original issue date of this service bulletin,” this AD requires using “the effective date of this AD.”
(2) Where Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 737-53A1360, dated June 21, 2018, specifies contacting Boeing for repair instructions: This AD requires repair and applicable on-condition actions using a method approved in accordance with the procedures specified in paragraph (k) of this AD.
(3) Where Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 737-53A1360, dated June 21, 2018, specifies contacting Boeing for alternative inspections: This AD requires alternative inspections using a method approved in accordance with the procedures specified in paragraph (k) of this AD.
(4) For airplanes identified as Group 2 and Groups 4 through 9 in Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 737-53A1360, dated June 21, 2018, that have been modified to a cargo configuration: In addition to the actions required by paragraph (h) of this AD, the actions specified in Table 9, “Inspection of the Fuselage Frame Integral Inboard Chord and Web from STA 360 to STA 400, Right Side,” of Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 737-53A1360, dated June 21, 2018, must be done by doing all applicable actions identified as “RC” (required for compliance) in, and in accordance with, the Accomplishment Instructions of Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 737-53A1360, dated June 21, 2018, at the applicable compliance times specified in Table 9, “Inspection of the Fuselage Frame Integral Inboard Chord and Web from STA 360 to STA 400, Right Side,” of Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 737-53A1360, dated June 21, 2018, except as specified in paragraphs (i)(1) and (i)(2) of this AD.
(1) Accomplishment of a preventative modification specified in Part 7 of the Accomplishment Instructions of Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 737-53A1360, dated June 21, 2018, at a tooling hole location, terminates the repetitive inspections specified in Part 6 of the Accomplishment
(2) Accomplishment of an high frequency eddy current inspection specified in Part 9 of the Accomplishment Instructions of Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 737-53A1360, dated June 21, 2018, terminates the repetitive inspections specified in Part 2 of the Accomplishment Instructions of Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 737-53A1360, dated June 21, 2018, that are required by paragraph (h) of this AD, at the uppermost frame splice fastener location only.
(1) The Manager, Los Angeles ACO Branch, FAA, has the authority to approve AMOCs for this AD, if requested using the procedures found in 14 CFR 39.19. In accordance with 14 CFR 39.19, send your request to your principal inspector or local Flight Standards District Office, as appropriate. If sending information directly to the manager of the certification office, send it to the attention of the person identified in paragraph (l)(2) of this AD. Information may be emailed to:
(2) Before using any approved AMOC, notify your appropriate principal inspector, or lacking a principal inspector, the manager of the local flight standards district office/certificate holding district office.
(3) An AMOC that provides an acceptable level of safety may be used for any repair, modification, or alteration required by this AD if it is approved by the Boeing Commercial Airplanes Organization Designation Authorization (ODA) that has been authorized by the Manager, Los Angeles ACO Branch, FAA, to make those findings. To be approved, the repair method, modification deviation, or alteration deviation must meet the certification basis of the airplane, and the approval must specifically refer to this AD.
(4) Except as required by paragraph (i) of this AD: For service information that contains steps that are labeled as RC, the provisions of paragraphs (k)(4)(i) and (k)(4)(ii) of this AD apply.
(i) The steps labeled as RC, including substeps under an RC step and any figures identified in an RC step, must be done to comply with the AD. If a step or substep is labeled “RC Exempt,” then the RC requirement is removed from that step or substep. An AMOC is required for any deviations to RC steps, including substeps and identified figures.
(ii) Steps not labeled as RC may be deviated from using accepted methods in accordance with the operator's maintenance or inspection program without obtaining approval of an AMOC, provided the RC steps, including substeps and identified figures, can still be done as specified, and the airplane can be put back in an airworthy condition.
(1) For more information about this AD, contact Lu Lu, Aerospace Engineer, Airframe Section, FAA, Seattle ACO Branch, 2200 South 216th St., Des Moines, WA 98198; phone and fax: 206-231-3525; email:
(2) For information about AMOCs, contact George Garrido, Aerospace Engineer, Airframe Section, FAA, Los Angeles ACO Branch, 3960 Paramount Boulevard, Lakewood, CA 90712-4137; phone: 562-627-5232; fax: 562-627-5210; email:
(3) For service information identified in this AD, contact Boeing Commercial Airplanes, Attention: Contractual & Data Services (C&DS), 2600 Westminster Blvd., MC 110-SK57, Seal Beach, CA 90740-5600; telephone 562-797-1717; internet
U.S. Copyright Office, Library of Congress.
Notice of inquiry.
The U.S. Copyright Office is issuing a notice of inquiry regarding the Classics Protection and Access Act, title II of the recently enacted Orrin G. Hatch-Bob Goodlatte Music Modernization Act. In connection with the establishment of federal remedies for unauthorized uses of sound recordings fixed before February 15, 1972 (“Pre-1972 Sound Recordings”), Congress also established an exception for certain noncommercial uses of Pre-1972 Sound Recordings that are not being commercially exploited. To qualify for this exemption, a user must file a notice of noncommercial use after conducting a good faith, reasonable search to determine whether the Pre-1972 Sound Recording is being commercially exploited, and the rights owner of the sound recording must not object to the use within 90 days. To promulgate the regulations required by the new statute, the Office is soliciting comments regarding specific steps that a user should take to demonstrate she has made a good faith, reasonable search. The Office also solicits comments regarding the filing requirements for the user to submit a notice of noncommercial use and for a rights owner to submit a notice objecting to such use.
Initial written comments must be received no later than 11:59 p.m. Eastern Time on November 15, 2018. Written reply comments must be received no later than 11:59 p.m. Eastern Time on November 30, 2018. Rather than reserving time for potential extensions of time to file comments, commenting parties should be aware that the Office has already established what it believes to be the most reasonable deadlines consistent with the statutory deadlines by which it must promulgate the regulations described in this notice of inquiry.
For reasons of government efficiency, the Copyright Office is using the
Regan A. Smith, General Counsel and Associate Register of Copyrights, by email at
On October 11, 2018, the president signed into law the Orrin G. Hatch-Bob Goodlatte Music Modernization Act, H.R. 1551 (“MMA”). Title II of the MMA, the Classics Protection and Access Act, created chapter 14 of the copyright law, title 17, United States Code, which, among other things, extends remedies for copyright infringement to owners of sound recordings fixed before February 15, 1972 (“Pre-1972 Sound Recordings”). Under the provision, rights owners may be eligible to recover statutory damages
The MMA also creates a new mechanism for the public to obtain authorization to make noncommercial uses of Pre-1972 Sound Recordings that are not being commercially exploited. Under section 1401, a person may file a notice with the Copyright Office and propose a specific noncommercial use after taking steps to determine whether the recording is, at that time, being commercially exploited by or under the authority of the rights owner.
In response, the rights owner of the Pre-1972 Sound Recording may file a notice with the Copyright Office “opting out” of (
Under the Classics Protection and Access Act, the Copyright Office has 180 days to issue regulations identifying the “specific, reasonable steps that, if taken by a [noncommercial user of a Pre-1972 Sound Recording], are sufficient to constitute a good faith, reasonable search” of the Office's records and commercial services to support a conclusion that a relevant Pre-1972 Sound Recording is not being commercially exploited.
The Office must also issue regulations “establish[ing] the form, content, and procedures” for users to file Notices of Pre-1972 Noncommercial Use and rights owners to file Pre-1972 Opt-Out Notices.
The Copyright Office seeks public input regarding the “specific, reasonable steps” that should be sufficient for a user to undertake to satisfy the requirement to conduct a “good faith, reasonable search” and qualify for the noncommercial use safe harbor.
Requiring a “good faith, reasonable search” to determine whether a work is being commercially exploited is not foreign to copyright law. Under the section 108 exception for libraries and archives, once a published work is in its last twenty years of copyright protection, a library or archives may reproduce, distribute, display, or perform that work, for purposes of preservation, scholarship, or research, provided the institution has determined after “reasonable investigation” that the work is not currently subject to normal commercial exploitation.
In this notice of inquiry, the Office seeks practical sources and other information that would allow it to enumerate a list of reasonable steps that a user should undertake as part of a good faith, reasonable search, including services that should be searched. The
1. What would constitute a reasonable search of the Office's database of Pre-1972 Schedules, which will index information including the name of the rights owner, title, and featured artist for each sound recording filed on a schedule?
2. Please suggest specific “services offering a comprehensive set of sound recordings for sale or streaming” that users should be asked to reasonably search before qualifying for the safe harbor.
3. Which criteria should be used to identify music streaming services that should be searched, now and in the future? For example, one publication recently analyzed search requests for music providers, and determined that the most frequently searched services were YouTube Music, Amazon Music, Apple Music, Pandora, and Spotify.
4. Is it reasonable to expect a user's search to encompass music distribution services, such as CD Baby, TuneCore, or The Orchard?
5. Are there other sources to which the Office should look that may demonstrate commercialization of physical copies of recordings,
6. Are there other specialized services or salesfronts regarding particular genres or eras within the category of Pre-1972 Sound Recordings that should be considered by the Office?
7. How many sources should a user be required to search before qualifying for the safe harbor? In responding, please consider that the Office must promulgate a “reasonable” list of steps, but in a way that does not overlook commercialization of Pre-1972 sound recordings.
8. Please describe specific steps that should constitute a reasonable search for a recording on an identified service. Should the steps be service-specific or would a single list of steps be adequate for any identified source? Is the description of a qualifying search described by the 2008 bill referenced above useful in defining whether a user has conducted a reasonable search to determine whether a work is being commercially exploited?
The Office also seeks written comments on how it should “establish the form, content, and procedures” for users to file Notices of Pre-1972 Noncommercial Use and rights owners to file Pre-1972 Opt-Out Notices. Specifically:
1. Should the Office provide guidelines as to what constitutes a “noncommercial” use, and if so, what? In answering, consider that “merely recovering costs of production and distribution of a sound recording resulting from a use otherwise permitted under this subsection does not itself necessarily constitute a commercial use of the sound recording,” and “the fact that a person engaging in the use of a sound recording also engages in commercial activities does not itself necessarily render the use commercial.”
2. To what extent should a user be required to specify the nature of the use, such as the expected audience, duration of the use, and whether it will be online or limited to a particular geographic area?
3. How should the user be required to certify or describe the steps taken for a search to constitute a “good faith, reasonable search”? How detailed should any description be? In responding, the Office encourages commenters to consider other forms and procedures offered by the Office, which reflect operational considerations by the Office, as well as the resources described above.
Depending on the feedback received, the Office will either issue an interim rule, or a notice of proposed rulemaking with further request for comment.
Postal Regulatory Commission.
Notice of proposed rulemaking.
The Commission is acknowledging a recent filing requesting the Commission initiate a rulemaking proceeding to consider changes to analytical principles relating to periodic reports (Proposal Eight). This document 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.
On October 5, 2018, the Postal Service filed a petition pursuant to 39 CFR 3050.11 requesting that the Commission initiate a rulemaking proceeding to consider changes to analytical principles relating to periodic reports.
The Postal Service states that it developed its current mail processing letter cost models when cancellation equipment had limited functionality.
The Postal Service states that due to advances in Optical Character Recognition (OCR) technology, its Advanced Facer Canceller System (AFCS) is now able to read addresses and isolate locally-processed mail from mail destinating in the service territory of other processing facilities.
The Postal Service states that modification 1 aligns the current operational flows of automation pre-barcoded Mixed AADC (MAADC) mail with modeled automation mail.
The Postal Service states that the current letter models do not account for mechanical rejects that flow to manual operations.
The Postal Service suggests that the current Marketing Mail Letters cost model, calculating the barcode cost avoidance as the difference between modeled (Non-Automation) Machinable MAADC letters and Automation MAADC letters, “conflates the value of the barcode with intrinsic differences between non-barcoded and automation mail.”
The Commission establishes Docket No. RM2019-1 for consideration of matters raised by the Petition. More information on the Petition may be accessed via the Commission's website at
1. The Commission establishes Docket No. RM2019-1 for consideration of the matters raised by the Petition of the United States Postal Service for the Initiation of a Proceeding to Consider Proposed Changes in Analytical Principles (Proposal Eight), filed October 5, 2018.
2. Comments by interested persons in this proceeding are due no later than November 9, 2018.
3. Pursuant to 39 U.S.C. 505, the Commission appoints Katalin K. Clendenin to serve as an officer of the Commission (Public Representative) to represent the interests of the general public in this docket.
4. The Secretary shall arrange for publication of this Order in the
By the Commission.
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
Proposed rule.
EPA is proposing significant new use rules (SNURs) under the Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA) for 13 chemical substances which are the subject of premanufacture notices (PMNs). This action would require persons to notify EPA at least 90 days before commencing manufacture (defined by statute to include import) or processing of any of these 13 chemical substances for an activity that is designated as a significant new use by this proposed rule. If this proposed rule
Comments must be received on or before November 15, 2018.
Submit your comments, identified by docket identification (ID) number EPA-HQ-OPPT-2017-0575], by one of the following methods:
•
•
•
Additional instructions on commenting or visiting the docket, along with more information about dockets generally, is available at
You may be potentially affected by this action if you manufacture, process, or use the chemical substances contained in this proposed rule. The following list of North American Industrial Classification System (NAICS) codes is not intended to be exhaustive, but rather provides a guide to help readers determine whether this document applies to them. Potentially affected entities may include:
• Manufacturers or processors of one or more subject chemical substances (NAICS codes 325 and 324110),
This action may also affect certain entities through pre-existing import certification and export notification rules under TSCA. Chemical importers are subject to the TSCA section 13 (15 U.S.C. 2612) import certification requirements promulgated at 19 CFR 12.118 through 12.127 and 19 CFR 127.28. Chemical importers must certify that the shipment of the chemical substance complies with all applicable rules and orders under TSCA. Importers of chemicals subject to these proposed SNURs would need to certify their compliance with the SNUR requirements should these proposed rules be finalized. The EPA policy in support of import certification appears at 40 CFR part 707, subpart B. In addition, pursuant to 40 CFR 721.20, any persons who export or intend to export a chemical substance that is the subject of this proposed rule on or after November 15, 2018 are subject to the export notification provisions of TSCA section 12(b) (15 U.S.C. 2611(b)) and must comply with the export notification requirements in 40 CFR part 707, subpart D.
1.
2.
EPA is proposing these SNURs under TSCA section 5(a)(2) for 13 chemical substances which were the subjects of PMNs P-16-192, P-16-354 and P-16-355, P-16-380 through P-16-385, P-16-483 and P-16-484, P-16-575, and P-16-581. These proposed SNURs would require persons who intend to manufacture or process any of these chemical substances for an activity that is designated as a significant new use to notify EPA at least 90 days before commencing that activity.
The record for the proposed SNURs on these chemicals was established as docket EPA-HQ-OPPT-2017-0575. That record includes information considered by the Agency in developing these proposed SNURs.
Section 5(a)(2) of TSCA (15 U.S.C. 2604(a)(2)) authorizes EPA to determine that a use of a chemical substance is a “significant new use.” EPA must make this determination by rule after considering all relevant factors, including the four bulleted TSCA section 5(a)(2) factors listed in Unit III. Once EPA determines that a use of a chemical substance is a significant new use, TSCA section 5(a)(1)(B)(i) (15 U.S.C. 2604(a)(1)(B)(i)) requires persons to submit a significant new use notice (SNUN) to EPA at least 90 days before they manufacture or process the chemical substance for that use. TSCA prohibits such manufacturing or processing from commencing until EPA has conducted a review of the SNUN, made an appropriate determination on the SNUN, and taken such actions as are required in association with that determination (15 U.S.C. 2604(a)(1)(B)(ii)). As described in Unit V., the general SNUR provisions are found at 40 CFR part 721, subpart A.
General provisions for SNURs appear in 40 CFR part 721, subpart A. These provisions describe persons subject to the rule, recordkeeping requirements, exemptions to reporting requirements, and applicability of the rule to uses occurring before the effective date of the rule. Provisions relating to user fees appear at 40 CFR part 700. Pursuant to § 721.1(c), persons subject to these SNURs must comply with the same SNUN requirements and EPA regulatory procedures as submitters of PMNs under TSCA section 5(a)(1)(A) (15 U.S.C. 2604(a)(1)(A)). In particular, these requirements include the information submission requirements of TSCA sections 5(b) and 5(d)(1) (15 U.S.C. 2604(b) and 2604(d)(1)), the exemptions authorized by TSCA sections 5(h)(1), 5(h)(2), 5(h)(3), and 5(h)(5) and the regulations at 40 CFR part 720. Once EPA receives a SNUN, EPA must either
Section 5(a)(2) of TSCA states that EPA's determination that a use of a chemical substance is a significant new use must be made after consideration of all relevant factors, including:
• The projected volume of manufacturing and processing of a chemical substance.
• The extent to which a use changes the type or form of exposure of human beings or the environment to a chemical substance.
• The extent to which a use increases the magnitude and duration of exposure of human beings or the environment to a chemical substance.
• The reasonably anticipated manner and methods of manufacturing, processing, distribution in commerce, and disposal of a chemical substance.
In addition to these factors enumerated in TSCA section 5(a)(2), the statute authorizes EPA to consider any other relevant factors.
To determine what would constitute significant new uses for the chemical substances that are the subject of these SNURs, EPA considered relevant information about the toxicity of the chemical substances, and potential human exposures and environmental releases that may be associated with the conditions of use of the substances, in the context of the four bulleted TSCA section 5(a)(2) factors listed in this unit.
EPA is proposing significant new use and recordkeeping requirements for 13 chemical substances in 40 CFR part 721, subpart E. In this unit, EPA provides the following information for each chemical substance:
• PMN number.
• Chemical name (generic name, if the specific name is claimed as CBI).
• Chemical Abstracts Service (CAS) Registry number (if assigned for non-confidential chemical identities).
• Basis for the SNUR.
• Information identified by EPA that would help characterize the potential health and/or environmental effects of the chemical substances if a manufacturer or processor is considering submitting a SNUN for a significant new use designated by the SNUR.
This information may include testing not required to be conducted but which would help characterize the potential health and/or environmental effects of the PMN substance. Any recommendation for information identified by EPA was made based on EPA's consideration of available screening-level data, if any, as well as other available information on appropriate testing for the chemical substance. Further, any such testing identified by EPA that includes testing on vertebrates was made after consideration of available toxicity information, computational toxicology and bioinformatics, and high-throughput screening methods and their prediction models. EPA also recognizes that whether testing/further information is needed will depend on the specific exposure and use scenario in the SNUN. EPA encourages all SNUN submitters to contact EPA to discuss any potential future testing. See Unit VII. for more information.
• CFR citation assigned in the regulatory text section of these proposed rules.
The regulatory text section of these proposed rules specifies the activities designated as significant new uses. Certain new uses, including production volume limits and other uses designated in the proposed rules, may be claimed as CBI.
The chemical substances that are the subject of these proposed SNURs are undergoing premanufacture review. EPA has initially determined under TSCA section 5(a)(2), 15 U.S.C. 2604(a)(2), that certain changes from the conditions of use described in the PMNs could result in changes in the type or form of exposure to the chemical substances and/or increased exposures to the chemical substances and/or changes in the reasonably anticipated manner and methods of manufacturing, processing, distribution in commerce, and disposal of the chemical substances. Consequently, EPA is proposing to designate these changes as significant new uses.
1. Manufacture of the PMN substance in an amorphous form.
The proposed SNUR would designate as a “significant new use” the absence of this protective measure.
1. No release of a manufacturing, processing, or use stream associated with any use of the substances, other than the confidential chemical intermediate use described in the PMNs, into the waters of the United States exceeding a surface water concentration of 1 ppb; and
2. No manufacturing, processing or use of the PMN substances resulting in inhalation exposures to the substances.
The proposed SNUR would designate as a “significant new use” the absence of these protective measures.
1. No manufacturing, processing or use of the PMN substances resulting in inhalation exposures to the substances; and
2. No release of a manufacturing, processing, or use stream associated with any use of the substances exceeding a surface water concentration of 16 ppb.
The proposed SNUR would designate as a “significant new use” the absence of these protective measures.
1. No use of the substances other than the confidential use described in the PMNs;
2. No release of a manufacturing, processing, or use stream associated with any use of the substances exceeding a surface water concentration of 34 ppb; and
3. No manufacturing, processing or use of the PMN substances without the engineering controls described in the PMNs to limit exposure to dust.
The proposed SNUR would designate as a “significant new use” the absence of these protective measures.
1. No manufacture, processing, or use of the PMN substance that results in inhalation exposures to the substance.
The proposed SNUR would designate as a “significant new use” the absence of this protective measure.
1. No use of the substance other than the uses described in the PMN; and
2. No manufacture, processing, or use with particle size less than 10 micrometers.
The proposed SNUR would designate as a “significant new use” the absence of these protective measures.
During review of the PMNs submitted for the chemical substances that are the subject of these proposed SNURs and as further discussed in Unit IV, EPA identified certain reasonably foreseen changes from the conditions of use identified in the PMNs and determined that those changes could result in changes in the type or form of exposure to the chemical substances and/or increased exposures to the chemical substances and/or changes in the reasonably anticipated manner and methods of manufacturing, processing, distribution in commerce, and disposal of the chemical substances.
EPA is proposing SNURs for 13 specific chemical substances which are undergoing premanufacture review because the Agency wants to achieve the following objectives with regard to the significant new uses that would be designated in this proposed rule:
• EPA would have an opportunity to review and evaluate data submitted in a SNUN before the notice submitter begins manufacturing or processing a listed chemical substance for the described significant new use.
• EPA would be obligated to make a determination under TSCA section 5(a)(3) regarding the use described in the SNUN, under the conditions of use. The Agency will either determine under section 5(a)(3)(C) that the significant new use is not likely to present an unreasonable risk, including an unreasonable risk to a potentially exposed or susceptible subpopulation identified as relevant by the Administrator under the conditions of use, or make a determination under section 5(a)(3)(A) or (B) and take the required regulatory action associated with the determination, before manufacture or processing for the significant new use of the chemical substance can occur.
Issuance of a proposed SNUR for a chemical substance does not signify that the chemical substance is listed on the TSCA Inventory. Guidance on how to determine if a chemical substance is on the TSCA Inventory is available on the internet at
To establish a significant new use, EPA must determine that the use is not ongoing. The chemical substances subject to this proposed rule were undergoing premanufacture review at the time of signature of this proposed rule and were not on the TSCA Inventory. In cases where EPA has not received a notice of commencement (NOC) and the chemical substance has not been added to the TSCA Inventory, no person may commence such activities without first submitting a PMN. Therefore, for the chemical substances subject to this proposed SNUR, EPA concludes that the proposed significant new uses are not ongoing.
EPA designates October 10, 2018, as the cutoff date for determining whether the new use is ongoing. The objective of EPA's approach is to ensure that a person cannot defeat a SNUR by initiating a significant new use before the effective date of the final rule.
Persons who begin commercial manufacture or processing of the chemical substances for a significant new use identified on or after that date would have to cease any such activity upon the effective date of the final rule. To resume their activities, these persons would have to first comply with all applicable SNUR notification requirements and EPA would have to take action under section 5 allowing manufacture or processing to proceed.
EPA recognizes that TSCA section 5 does not require development of any particular new information (
In the absence of a rule, order, or consent agreement under TSCA section 4 covering the chemical substance, persons are required only to submit information in their possession or control and to describe any other information known to or reasonably ascertainable by them (see § 720.50). However, upon review of PMNs and SNUNs, the Agency has the authority to require appropriate testing. Unit IV. lists potentially useful information for all SNURs listed here. Descriptions are provided for informational purposes. The potentially useful information identified in Unit IV. will be useful to EPA's evaluation in the event that someone submits a SNUN for the significant new use. Companies who are considering submitting a SNUN are encouraged, but not required, to develop the information on the substance, which may assist with EPA's analysis of the SNUN.
EPA strongly encourages persons, before performing any testing, to consult with the Agency pertaining to protocol selection. Furthermore, pursuant to TSCA section 4(h), which pertains to reduction of testing in vertebrate animals, EPA encourages consultation with the Agency on the use of alternative test methods and strategies (also called New Approach Methodologies, or NAMs), if available, to generate the recommended test data. EPA encourages dialog with Agency representatives to help determine how best the submitter can meet both the
The potentially useful information described in Unit IV. may not be the only means of providing information to evaluate the chemical substance associated with the significant new uses. However, submitting a SNUN without any test data may increase the likelihood that EPA will take action under TSCA section 5(e) or 5(f). EPA recommends that potential SNUN submitters contact EPA early enough so that they will be able to conduct the appropriate tests.
SNUN submitters should be aware that EPA will be better able to evaluate SNUNs which provide detailed information on the following:
• Human exposure and environmental release that may result from the significant new use of the chemical substances.
• Information on risks posed by the chemical substances compared to risks posed by potential substitutes.
According to § 721.1(c), persons submitting a SNUN must comply with the same notification requirements and EPA regulatory procedures as persons submitting a PMN, including submission of test data on health and environmental effects as described in § 720.50. SNUNs must be submitted on EPA Form No. 7710-25, generated using e-PMN software, and submitted to the Agency in accordance with the procedures set forth in § 720.40 and § 721.25. E-PMN software is available electronically at
EPA has evaluated the potential costs of establishing SNUN requirements for potential manufacturers and processors of the chemical substances subject to this proposed rule. EPA's complete economic analysis is available in the docket under docket ID number EPA-HQ-OPPT-2017-0575.
This proposed rule would establish SNURs for 13 new chemical substances that were the subject of PMNs. The Office of Management and Budget (OMB) has exempted these types of actions from review under Executive Order 12866, entitled
According to PRA, 44 U.S.C. 3501
The information collection requirements related to this action have already been approved by OMB pursuant to PRA under OMB control number 2070-0012 (EPA ICR No. 574). This action does not impose any burden requiring additional OMB approval. If an entity were to submit a SNUN to the Agency, the annual burden is estimated to average between 30 and 170 hours per response. This burden estimate includes the time needed to review instructions, search existing data sources, gather and maintain the data needed, and complete, review, and submit the required SNUN.
Send any comments about the accuracy of the burden estimate, and any suggested methods for minimizing respondent burden, including through the use of automated collection techniques, to the Director, Collection Strategies Division, Office of Environmental Information (2822T), Environmental Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave. NW, Washington, DC 20460-0001. Please remember to include the OMB control number in any correspondence, but do not submit any completed forms to this address.
On February 18, 2012, EPA certified pursuant to RFA section 605(b) (5 U.S.C. 605(b)), that promulgation of a SNUR does not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities where the following are true:
1. A significant number of SNUNs would not be submitted by small entities in response to the SNUR.
2. The SNUN submitted by any small entity would not cost significantly more than $9,816.
A copy of that certification is available in the docket for this action.
This proposed rule is within the scope of the February 18, 2012 certification. Based on the Economic Analysis discussed in Unit XI. and EPA's experience promulgating SNURs (discussed in the certification), EPA believes that the following are true:
• A significant number of SNUNs would not be submitted by small entities in response to the SNUR.
• Submission of the SNUN would not cost any small entity significantly more than $9.816.
Therefore, the promulgation of the SNUR would not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities.
Based on EPA's experience with proposing and finalizing SNURs, State, local, and Tribal governments have not been impacted by these rulemakings, and EPA does not have any reasons to believe that any State, local, or Tribal government will be impacted by this proposed rule. As such, EPA has determined that this proposed rule does not impose any enforceable duty, contain any unfunded mandate, or otherwise have any effect on small governments subject to the requirements of UMRA sections 202, 203, 204, or 205 (2 U.S.C. 1502, 1503, 1504, or 1505
This action would not have a substantial direct effect on 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, as specified in Executive Order 13132, entitled “Federalism” (64 FR 43255, August 10, 1999).
This proposed rule would not have Tribal implications because it is not expected to have substantial direct effects on Indian Tribes. This proposed rule would not significantly nor uniquely affect the communities of Indian Tribal governments, nor does it involve or impose any requirements that affect Indian Tribes. Accordingly, the requirements of Executive Order 13175, entitled “Consultation and Coordination with Indian Tribal Governments” (65 FR 67249, November 9, 2000), do not apply to this proposed rule.
This action is not subject to Executive Order 13045, entitled “Protection of Children from Environmental Health Risks and Safety Risks” (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997), because this is not an economically significant regulatory action as defined by Executive Order 12866, and this action does not address environmental health or safety risks disproportionately affecting children.
This proposed rule is not subject to Executive Order 13211, entitled “Actions Concerning Regulations That Significantly Affect Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use” (66 FR 28355, May 22, 2001), because this action is not expected to affect energy supply, distribution, or use and because this action is not a significant regulatory action under Executive Order 12866.
In addition, since this action does not involve any technical standards, NTTAA § 12(d) (Pub. L. 104-113, 12(d)), does not apply to this action.
This action does not entail special considerations of environmental justice related issues as delineated by Executive Order 12898, entitled “Federal Actions to Address Environmental Justice in Minority Populations and Low-Income Populations” (59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994).
Environmental protection, Chemicals, Hazardous substances, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.
Therefore, it is proposed that 40 CFR part 721 is amended as follows:
15 U.S.C. 2604, 2607, and 2625(c).
(a)
(1) The chemical substance generically identified as silanized amorphous silica (P-16-192) is subject to reporting under this section for the significant new uses described in paragraph (a)(2) of this section.
(2) The significant new uses are:
(i)
(ii) [Reserved]
(b)
(1)
(2)
(a)
(1) The chemical substances identified generically as esteramine (PMN P-16-354 and P-16-355) are subject to reporting under this section for the significant new uses described in paragraph (a)(2) of this section.
(2) The significant new uses are:
(i)
(ii) [Reserved]
(b)
(1)
(2)
(a)
(1) The chemical substance generically identified as formic acid, compds. with hydrolyzed bisphenol A-epichlorohydrin-polyethylene glycol ether with bisphenol A (2:1) polymer-N1-(1,3-dimethylbutylidene)-N2-[2-[(1, 3-dimethylbutylidene)amino]ethyl]-1,2-ethanediamine-dialdehyde-2-(methylamino)ethanol reaction products acetates (salts), (P-16-380) is subject to reporting under this section for the significant new uses described in paragraph (a)(2) of this section.
(2) The significant new uses are:
(i)
(ii)
(b)
(1)
(2)
(a)
(1) The chemical substance generically as propanoic acid, 2-hydroxy-, compds. with hydrolyzed bisphenol A-epichlorohydrin-polyethylene glycol ether with bisphenol A (2:1) polymer-N1-(1,3-dimethylbutylidene)-N2-[2-[(1, 3-dimethylbutylidene)amino]ethyl]-1,2-ethanediamine-dialdehyde-2-(methylamino)ethanol reaction products formates (salts), (P-16-381) is subject to reporting under this section for the significant new uses described in paragraph (a)(2) of this section.
(2) The significant new uses are:
(i)
(ii)
(b)
(1)
(2)
(a)
(1) The chemical substance generically identified as formic acid, compds. with hydrolyzed bisphenol A-epichlorohydrin-polyethylene glycol ether with bisphenol A (2:1) polymer-N1-(1,3-dimethylbutylidene)-N2-[2-[(1, 3-dimethylbutylidene)amino]ethyl]-1,2-ethanediamine-dialdehyde-2-(methylamino)ethanol reaction products sulfamates (salts), (P-16-382) is subject to reporting under this section for the significant new uses described in paragraph (a)(2) of this section.
(2) The significant new uses are:
(i)
(ii)
(b)
(1)
(2)
(a)
(1) The chemical substance generically identified as formic acid, compds. with hydrolyzed bisphenol A-epichlorohydrin-polyethylene glycol ether with bisphenol A (2:1) polymer-N1-(1,3-dimethylbutylidene)-N2-[2-[(1, 3-dimethylbutylidene)amino]ethyl]-1,2-ethanediamine-dialdehyde-2-(methylamino)ethanol reaction products acetates (salts), (P-16-383) is subject to reporting under this section for the significant new uses described in paragraph (a)(2) of this section.
(2) The significant new uses are:
(i)
(ii)
(b)
(1)
(2)
(a)
(1) The chemical substance generically identified as propanoic acid, 2-hydroxy-, compds. with hydrolyzed bisphenol A-epichlorohydrin-polyethylene glycol ether with bisphenol A (2:1) polymer-N1-(1,3-dimethylbutylidene)-N2-[2-[(1, 3-dimethylbutylidene)amino] ethyl]-1,2-ethanediamine-dialdehyde-2-(methylamino)ethanol reaction products formates (salts), (P-16-384) is subject to reporting under this section for the significant new uses described in paragraph (a)(2) of this section.
(2) The significant new uses are:
(i)
(ii)
(b)
(1)
(2)
(a)
(1) The chemical substance generically identified as formic acid, compds. with hydrolyzed bisphenol A-epichlorohydrin-polyethylene glycol ether with bisphenol A (2:1) polymer-N1-(1,3-dimethylbutylidene)-N2-[2-[(1, 3-dimethylbutylidene)amino]ethyl]-1,2-ethanediamine-dialdehyde-2-(methylamino)ethanol reaction products sulfamates (salts), (P-16-385) is subject to reporting under this section for the significant new uses described in paragraph (a)(2) of this section.
(2) The significant new uses are:
(i)
(ii)
(b)
(1)
(2)
(a)
(2) The significant new uses are:
(i)
(ii)
(b)
(1)
(2)
(3)
(a)
(1) The chemical substance identified generically as inorganic acids, metal salts, compds. with substituted aromatic heterocycle, (PMN P-16-484) is subject to reporting under this section for the significant new uses described in paragraph (a)(2) of this section.
(2) The significant new uses are:
(i)
(ii)
(b)
(1)
(2)
(3)
(a)
(1) The chemical substance identified as glucosyltransferase, International Union of Biochemistry and Molecular Biology Number: 2.4.1.5 (PMN P-16-575, CAS No. 9032-14-8) is subject to reporting under this section for the significant new uses described in paragraph (a)(2) of this section.
(2) The significant new uses are:
(i)
(ii) [Reserved]
(b)
(1)
(2)
(a)
(2) The significant new uses are:
(i)
(ii) [Reserved]
(b)
(1)
(2)
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 November 15, 2018 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),
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 findings from this study will identify lessons learned and best practices for operating mandatory E&T programs.
U.S. Commission on Civil Rights.
Announcement of meeting.
Notice is hereby given, pursuant to the provisions of the rules and regulations of the U.S. Commission on Civil Rights (Commission) and the Federal Advisory Committee Act (FACA) that a meeting of the Nevada Advisory Committee (Committee) to the Commission will be held at 1 p.m. (Pacific Time) Wednesday, November 7, 2018, the purpose of meeting is for the Committee to discuss potential findings and recommendations for report on policing practices and mental health.
The meeting will be held on Wednesday, November 7, 2018, at 1 p.m. PT.
Public Call Information:
Ana Victoria Fortes (DFO) at
This meeting is available to the public through the following toll-free call-in number: 877-260-1479, conference ID number: 1123093. Any interested member of the public may call this number and listen to the meeting. Callers can expect to incur charges for calls they initiate over wireless lines, and the Commission will not refund any incurred charges. Callers will incur no charge for calls they initiate over land-line connections to the toll-free telephone number. Persons with hearing impairments may also follow the proceedings by first calling the Federal Relay Service at 1-800-877-8339 and providing the Service with the conference call number and conference ID number.
Members of the public are entitled to make comments during the open period
Records and documents discussed during the meeting will be available for public viewing prior to and after the meeting at
U.S. Census Bureau, Commerce.
Notice.
The Department of Commerce, as part of its continuing effort to reduce paperwork and respondent burden, invites the general public and other Federal agencies to take this opportunity to comment on proposed and/or continuing information collections, as required by the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995.
To ensure consideration, written comments must be submitted on or before December 17, 2018.
Please direct all written comments to Jennifer Jessup, Departmental Paperwork Clearance Officer, Department of Commerce, Room 6616, 14th and Constitution Avenue NW, Washington, DC 20230 (or via the internet at
Requests for additional information or copies of the information collection instrument(s) and instructions should be directed to Robin A. Pennington, Rm. 2H465, U.S. Census Bureau, Decennial Census Management Division, Washington, DC 20233 or via email to
Since its founding, the U.S. Census Bureau has balanced the demands of a growing country for information about its people and economy, with concerns for respondents' privacy and the time and effort it takes respondents to answer questions. Beginning with the 1810 Census, Congress added questions to support a range of public concerns and uses, and over the course of a century, federal agencies requested to add questions about agriculture, industry, and commerce, as well as individuals' occupation, ancestry, marital status, disabilities, place of birth and other topics. In 1940, the U.S. Census Bureau introduced the long-form census in order to ask more detailed questions to only a sample of the public.
In the early 1990s, the demand for current, nationally consistent data from a wide variety of users led federal government policymakers to consider the feasibility of collecting social, economic, and housing data continuously throughout the decade. The benefits of providing current data, along with the anticipated decennial census benefits in cost savings, planning, improved census coverage, and more efficient operations, led the U.S. Census Bureau to plan the implementation of the continuous measurement survey, later called the American Community Survey (ACS). After years of testing the ACS, which is the current embodiment of the long form of the decennial census, the survey launched in 2005. Each year a sample of approximately 3.5 million households and about 200,000 persons living in group quarters in the mainland United States and Puerto Rico are selected to participate in the ACS.
In 2020, the ACS will change the race and ethnicity questions to match the 2020 Census. This change will make the ACS consistent with 2020 Census data on this topic. The ACS will also change the instruction for reporting babies' ages to match the 2020 Census. Ongoing research suggests the instructions for reporting infants creates challenges for some respondents. Cognitive testing demonstrated the wording for the age instruction is unclear and confusing to respondents. Details about all of the questions planned for the 2020 Census and the American Community Survey are available at
The ACS self-response rates in 2010, a decennial census year, were higher than usual in the first few months of the year, but were lower than usual in the spring and summer months, when the 2010 decennial census was underway. The increased self-response rates early in the year were attributed to decennial census communications while the decreased rates later in the year were attributed to respondent confusion, as respondents had already filled out their decennial census form and did not understand that the ACS was a separate data collection. Prior research suggests that during a decennial census year, ACS mail materials such as envelopes and letters should be revised to distinguish the ACS from the Census. For the 2020 data collection year, we are considering modifying the mail package contents, Field Representative flyers, scripts for the Interactive Voice Recognition system, frequently asked questions, and the ACS website to better communicate to respondents that the ACS is a separate data collection from the 2020 Census and that respondents selected for the ACS should complete both the ACS and the 2020 Census.
To encourage self-response in the ACS, the Census Bureau sends up to five mailings to an address selected to be in the sample. The first mailing, sent to all mailable addresses in the sample, includes an invitation to participate in the ACS online and states that a paper questionnaire will be sent in a few weeks to those unable to respond online. Subsequent mailings serve as a reminder to respond to the survey, with a paper questionnaire included in the third mailing for those households that prefer to respond by mailing back the questionnaire. The Census Bureau may ask those who begin filling out the survey online to provide an email address, which would be used to send an email reminder to households that did not complete the online form. The reminder asks them to log back in to finish responding to the survey.
Some addresses are deemed unmailable because the address is incomplete or directs mail only to a post office box. The Census Bureau currently collects data for these housing units using Computer-Assisted Personal Interviewing. In July 2019, the ACS plans to make the online survey available to all housing units in the 50 states and the District of Columbia, including those with unmailable addresses. Residents in housing units with unmailable addresses will still be contacted by Census Bureau Field Representatives, but they will now be given the option to complete the survey online or by personal interview.
Comments are invited on: (a) Whether the proposed collection of information is 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 (including hours and cost) 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.
Comments submitted in response to this notice will be summarized and/or included in the request for OMB approval of this information collection; they also will become a matter of public record.
U.S. Census Bureau, Commerce.
Notice.
The Department of Commerce, as part of its continuing effort to reduce paperwork and respondent burden, invites the general public and other Federal agencies to take this opportunity to comment on proposed and/or continuing information collections, as required by the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995.
To ensure consideration, written comments must be submitted on or before December 17, 2018.
Direct all written comments to Jennifer Jessup, Departmental Paperwork Clearance Officer, Department of Commerce, Room 6616, 14th and Constitution Avenue NW, Washington, DC 20230 (or via the internet at
Requests for additional information or copies of the information collection instrument(s) and instructions should be directed to Jennifer Childs, Census Bureau, Washington, DC 20233; (301) 763-4932 (or via the internet at
The U.S. Census Bureau plans to request an extension of the current OMB approval to conduct a series of studies to research and evaluate how to improve data collection activities for data collection programs at the Census Bureau. These studies will explore how the Census Bureau can improve efficiency, data quality, and response rates and reduce respondent burden in future census and survey operations, evaluations and experiments.
This information collection will operate as a generic clearance. The estimated number of respondents and annual reporting hours requested cover both the known and yet to be determined tests. A generic clearance is needed for these tests because though each share similar methodology, the exact number of tests and the explicit details of each test to be performed has yet to be determined. Once information collection plans are defined, they will be submitted on an individual basis in order to keep OMB informed as these tests progress.
The Census Bureau plans to test the use of new and improved data collection techniques for self-enumeration and interviewer data-collection tasks surrounding and following the ongoing census and survey operations. The research and evaluation may include: Developing alternative enumeration or follow-up questionnaires; usability issues; conducting interviews or debriefings; and non-English language training and interviews. To study enumeration, the Census Bureau may conduct the enumeration directly with a household member or knowledgeable respondent. The questions asked in these studies will be typical census or survey questions and questions related to that content, along with potential attitudinal and satisfaction debriefing questions.
The information will be collected through observations, self-response, face-face interviews, and/or telephone interviews.
Comments are invited on: (a) Whether the proposed collection of information is 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 (including hours and cost) 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.
Comments submitted in response to this notice will be summarized and/or included in the request for OMB approval of this information collection; they also will become a matter of public record.
Notice of issuance of an amended Export Trade Certificate of Review to Florida Citrus Exports, L.C. (FCE), Application No. 94-6A007.
The Secretary of Commerce, through the Office of Trade and Economic Analysis (OTEA), issued an amended Export Trade Certificate of Review to FCE on October 4, 2018. A previous amended Export Trade Certificate of Review was issued to FCE on July 17, 2017, and a notice of its issuance was published in the
Joseph Flynn, Director, Office of Trade and Economic Analysis, International Trade Administration, (202) 482-5131 (this is not a toll-free number) or email at
Title III of the Export Trading Company Act of 1982 (15 U.S.C. Sections 4001-21) (the Act) authorizes the Secretary of Commerce to issue Export Trade Certificates of Review. An Export Trade Certificate of Review protects the holder and the members identified in the Certificate from State and Federal government antitrust actions and from private treble damage antitrust actions for the export conduct specified in the Certificate and carried out in compliance with its terms and conditions. The regulations implementing Title III are found at 15 CFR part 325 (2018). OTEA is issuing this notice pursuant to 15 CFR 325.6(b), which requires the Secretary of Commerce to publish a summary of the certification in the
FCE's Export Trade Certificate of Review has been amended to add the following Member of the Certificate within the meaning of section 325.2(1) of the Regulations (15 CFR 325.2(1)): Egan Fruit Packing, LLC.
FCE's Export Trade Certificate of Review Membership, as amended, is listed below:
The effective date of the amended certificate is April 17, 2018, the date on which FCE's application to amend was deemed submitted.
Enforcement and Compliance, International Trade Administration, Department of Commerce.
Applicable October 10, 2018.
Nicholas Czajkowski or Robert Brown at (202) 482-1395 or (202) 482-3702, respectively, AD/CVD Operations, Enforcement and Compliance, International Trade Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce, 1401 Constitution Avenue NW, Washington, DC 20230.
On September 20, 2018, the U.S. Department of Commerce (Commerce) received a countervailing duty petition (CVD Petition) concerning imports of refillable stainless steel kegs (kegs) from the People's Republic of China (China), filed in proper form on behalf of the American Keg Company LLC (the petitioner), a domestic producer of kegs.
On September 25, 2018, Commerce requested supplemental information pertaining to certain aspects of the Petition in two separate supplemental questionnaires, one addressing the programs alleged as countervailable subsidies, and one primarily addressing scope clarification issues.
In accordance with section 702(b)(1) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (the Act), the petitioner alleges that the Government of China (GOC) is providing countervailable subsidies, within the meaning of sections 701 and 771(5) of the Act, to producers of kegs in China and that imports of such products are materially injuring, or threatening material injury to, the domestic kegs industry in the United States. Consistent with section 702(b)(1) of the Act and 19 CFR 351.202(b), for those alleged programs on which we are initiating a CVD investigation, the Petition is accompanied by information reasonably available to the petitioner supporting its allegations.
Commerce finds that the petitioner filed the Petition on behalf of the domestic industry because the petitioner is an interested party as defined in section 771(9)(E) of the Act. Commerce also finds that the petitioner demonstrated sufficient industry support necessary for the initiation of the requested CVD investigation.
Because the Petition was filed on September 20, 2018, the period of investigation is January 1, 2017, through December 31, 2017.
The product covered by this investigation is kegs from China. For a full description of the scope of these investigations,
During our review of the Petition, we contacted the petitioners regarding the proposed scope to ensure that the scope language in the Petitions is an accurate reflection of the products for which the domestic industry is seeking relief.
As discussed in the Preamble to Commerce's regulations, we are setting aside a period for interested parties to raise issues regarding product coverage (scope).
Commerce requests that any factual information parties consider relevant to the scope of the investigation be submitted during this period. However, if a party subsequently finds that additional factual information pertaining to the scope of the investigation may be relevant, the party may contact Commerce and request permission to submit the additional information. All such submissions must be filed on the records of the concurrent AD and CVD investigations.
All submissions to Commerce must be filed electronically using Enforcement and Compliance's Antidumping Duty and Countervailing Duty Centralized Electronic Service System (ACCESS).
Pursuant to sections 702(b)(4)(A)(i) and (ii) of the Act, Commerce notified representatives of the GOC of the receipt of the Petition and provided them the opportunity for consultations with respect to the CVD Petition.
Section 702(b)(1) of the Act requires that a petition be filed on behalf of the domestic industry. Section 702(c)(4)(A) of the Act provides that a petition meets this requirement if the domestic producers or workers who support the petition account for: (i) At least 25 percent of the total production of the domestic like product; and (ii) more than 50 percent of the production of the domestic like product produced by that portion of the industry expressing support for, or opposition to, the petition. Moreover, section 702(c)(4)(D) of the Act provides that, if the petition does not establish support of domestic producers or workers accounting for more than 50 percent of the total production of the domestic like product, Commerce shall: (i) Poll the industry or rely on other information in order to determine if there is support for the petition; or (ii) if there is a large number of producers in the domestic industry, determine industry support using any statistically valid sampling method to poll the “industry.”
Section 771(4)(A) of the Act defines the “industry” as the producers as a whole of a domestic like product. Thus, to determine whether a petition has the requisite industry support, the statute directs Commerce to look to producers and workers who produce the domestic like product. The International Trade Commission (ITC), which is responsible for determining whether “the domestic industry” has been injured, must also determine what constitutes a domestic like product in order to define the industry. While both Commerce and the ITC must apply the same statutory definition regarding the domestic like product,
Section 771(10) of the Act defines the domestic like product as “a product which is like, or in the absence of like, most similar in characteristics and uses with, the article subject to an investigation under this title.” Thus, the reference point from which the domestic like product analysis begins is “the article subject to an investigation” (
With regard to the domestic like product, the petitioner does not offer a definition of the domestic like product distinct from the scope of the investigation.
In determining whether the petitioner has standing under section 702(c)(4)(A) of the Act, we considered the industry support data contained in the Petition with reference to the domestic like product as defined in the “Scope of the Investigation,” in the Appendix to this notice. To establish industry support, the petitioner provided its own production of the domestic like product in 2017.
Our review of the data provided in the Petition, the General Issues Supplement, and other information readily available to Commerce indicates that the petitioner has established industry support for the Petition.
Commerce finds that the petitioner filed the Petition on behalf of the domestic industry because it is an interested party as defined in section 771(9)(C) of the Act, and it has demonstrated sufficient industry support with respect to the CVD investigation that it is requesting that Commerce initiate.
Because China is a “Subsidies Agreement Country” within the meaning of section 701(b) of the Act, section 701(a)(2) of the Act applies to this investigation. Accordingly, the ITC must determine whether imports of the subject merchandise from China materially injure, or threaten material injury to, a U.S. industry.
The petitioner alleges that imports of the subject merchandise are benefitting from countervailable subsidies and that such imports are causing, or threaten to cause, material injury to the U.S. industry producing the domestic like product. In addition, the petitioner alleges that subject imports exceed the negligibility threshold provided for under section 771(24)(A) of the Act.
The petitioner contends that the industry's injured condition is illustrated by a significant volume of subject imports and an increasing share of subject imports relative to total imports; underselling and price depression or suppression; recent declines in production and capacity utilization; negative impact on the domestic industry's investment, cash flows, and inventories; decline in the domestic industry's financial performance; and lost sales and revenues.
Based on the examination of the Petition, we find that the Petition meets the requirements of section 702 of the Act. Therefore, we are initiating a CVD investigation to determine whether imports of kegs from China benefit from countervailable subsidies conferred by the GOC. In accordance with section 703(b)(1) of the Act and 19 CFR 351.205(b)(1), unless postponed, we will make our preliminary determination no later than 65 days after the date of this initiation.
Based on our review of the Petition, we find that there is sufficient information to initiate a CVD investigation on 21 of the 24 subsidy programs alleged in the petition. For a full discussion of the basis for our decision to initiate or not on each program,
The petitioner named 26 producers/exporters as accounting for the majority of exports of kegs to the United States from China.
Exporters and producers of kegs from China that do not receive Q&V questionnaires by mail may still submit a response to the Q&V questionnaire and can obtain a copy of the Q&V questionnaire from the Enforcement and Compliance website, at the URL given above. Responses to the Q&V questionnaire must be submitted by the relevant Chinese exporters/producers no later than 5:00 p.m. ET on October 24, 2018, which is two weeks from the signature date of this notice. All Q&V responses must be filed electronically via ACCESS. We intend to finalize our decisions regarding respondent selection within 20 days of publication of this notice.
Interested parties must submit applications for disclosure under APO in accordance with 19 CFR 351.305(b). Instructions for filing such applications may be found on the Commerce's website at
In accordance with section 702(b)(4)(A)(i) of the Act and 19 CFR 351.202(f), copies of the public version of the Petition have been provided to the GOC
We will notify the ITC of our initiation, as required by section 702(d) of the Act.
The ITC will preliminarily determine, within 45 days after the date on which the Petition was filed, whether there is a reasonable indication that imports of kegs from China are materially injuring, or threatening material injury to, a U.S. industry.
Factual information is defined in 19 CFR 351.102(b)(21) as: (i) Evidence submitted in response to questionnaires; (ii) evidence submitted in support of allegations; (iii) publicly available information to value factors under 19 CFR 351.408(c) or to measure the adequacy of remuneration under 19 CFR 351.511(a)(2); (iv) evidence placed on the record by Commerce; and (v) evidence other than factual information described in (i)-(iv). 19 CFR 351.301(b) requires any party, when submitting factual information, to specify under which subsection of 19 CFR 351.102(b)(21) the information is being submitted
Parties may request an extension of time limits before the expiration of a time limit established under 19 CFR 351.301, or as otherwise specified by the Secretary. In general, an extension request will be considered untimely if it is filed after the expiration of the time limit established under 19 CFR 351.301. For submissions that are due from multiple parties simultaneously, an extension request will be considered untimely if it is filed after 10:00 a.m. ET on the due date. Under certain circumstances, we may elect to specify a different time limit by which extension requests will be considered untimely for submissions which are due from multiple parties simultaneously. In such a case, we will inform parties in the letter or memorandum setting forth the deadline (including a specified time) by which extension requests must be filed to be considered timely. An extension request must be made in a separate, stand-alone submission; under limited circumstances we will grant untimely-filed requests for the extension of time limits. Parties should review
Any party submitting factual information in an AD or CVD proceeding must certify to the accuracy and completeness of that information.
Interested parties must submit applications for disclosure under APO in accordance with 19 CFR 351.305. On January 22, 2008, Commerce published
This notice is issued and published pursuant to sections 702 and 777(i) of the Act and 19 CFR 351.203(c).
The merchandise covered by this investigation are kegs, vessels, or containers that are approximately cylindrical in shape, made from stainless steel (
“Unassembled” or “unfinished” refillable stainless steel kegs include drawn stainless steel cylinders that have been welded to form the body of the keg and welded to an upper (top) chime and/or lower (bottom) chime. Unassembled refillable stainless steel kegs may or may not be welded to a neck, may or may not have a valve assembly attached, and may be otherwise complete except for testing, certification, and/or marking.
Subject merchandise also includes refillable stainless steel kegs that have been further processed in a third country, including but not limited to, attachment of necks, collars, spears or valves, heat treatment, pickling, passivation, painting, testing, certification or any other processing that would not otherwise remove the merchandise from the scope of the investigation if performed in the country of manufacture of the in-scope refillable stainless steel keg.
Specifically excluded are the following:
(1) Vessels or containers that are not approximately cylindrical in nature (
(2) stainless steel kegs, vessels, or containers that have either a “ball lock” valve system or a “pin lock” valve system (commonly known as “Cornelius,” “corny” or “ball lock” kegs);
(3) necks, spears, couplers or taps, collars, and valves that are not imported with the subject merchandise; and
(4) stainless steel kegs that are filled with beer, wine, or other liquid and that are designated by the Commissioner of Customs as Instruments of International Traffic within the meaning of section 332(a) of the
The merchandise covered by this investigation are currently classified in the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States (HTSUS) under subheadings 7310.10.0010, 7310.00.0050, 7310.29.0025, and 7310.29.0050.
These HTSUS subheadings are provided for convenience and customs purposes; the written description of the scope of this investigation is dispositive.
Enforcement and Compliance, International Trade Administration, Department of Commerce.
Applicable October 10, 2018.
Thomas Schauer at (202) 482-0410 and Aimee Phelan at (202) 482-0697 (the
On September 20, 2018, the U.S. Department of Commerce (Commerce) received antidumping duty (AD) Petitions concerning imports of refillable stainless steel kegs (kegs) from China, Germany, and Mexico, filed in proper form on behalf of the American Keg Company LLC (the petitioner), a domestic producer of kegs.
From September 25, to October 1, 2018, we requested information from the petitioner pertaining to the scope of the investigations and certain allegations contained within the petitions.
In accordance with section 732(b) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (the Act), the petitioner alleges that imports of kegs from China, Germany, and Mexico are being, or are likely to be, sold in the United States at less than fair value within the meaning of section 731 of the Act, and that such imports are materially injuring, or threatening material injury to, the domestic industry producing kegs in the United States. Consistent with section 732(b)(1) of the Act, the Petitions are accompanied by information reasonably available to the petitioner supporting its allegations.
Commerce finds that the petitioner filed the Petitions on behalf of the domestic industry because the petitioner is an interested party as defined in section 771(9)(C) of the Act. Commerce also finds that the petitioner demonstrated sufficient industry support with respect to the initiation of the AD investigations that the petitioner is requesting.
Because the Petitions were filed on September 20, 2018, pursuant to 19 CFR 351.204(b)(1), the period of investigation (POI) for the Germany and Mexico investigations is July 1, 2017, through June 30, 2018. Because China is a non-market economy (NME) country, pursuant to 19 CFR 351.204(b)(1), the POI is January 1, 2018, through June 30, 2018.
The product covered by these investigations are kegs from China, Germany, and Mexico. For a full description of the scope of these investigations,
During our review of the Petitions, we contacted the petitioners regarding the proposed scope to ensure that the scope language in the Petitions is an accurate reflection of the products for which the domestic industry is seeking relief.
As discussed in the preamble to Commerce's regulations, we are setting aside a period for interested parties to raise issues regarding product coverage (scope).
Commerce requests that any factual information parties consider relevant to the scope of the investigations be submitted during this period. However, if a party subsequently finds that additional factual information pertaining to the scope of the investigations may be relevant, the party may contact Commerce and request permission to submit the additional
All submissions to Commerce must be filed electronically using Enforcement and Compliance's Antidumping Duty and Countervailing Duty Centralized Electronic Service System (ACCESS).
Commerce is providing interested parties an opportunity to comment on the appropriate physical characteristics of kegs to be reported in response to Commerce's AD questionnaires. This information will be used to identify the key physical characteristics of the subject merchandise in order to report the relevant factors of production accurately, as well as, to develop appropriate product-comparison criteria.
Interested parties may provide any information or comments that they feel are relevant to the development of an accurate list of physical characteristics. Specifically, they may provide comments as to which characteristics are appropriate to use as: (1) General product characteristics, and (2) product comparison criteria. We note that it is not always appropriate to use all product characteristics as product comparison criteria. We base product comparison criteria on meaningful commercial differences among products. In other words, although there may be some physical product characteristics utilized by manufacturers to describe kegs, it may be that only a select few product characteristics take into account commercially meaningful physical characteristics. In addition, interested parties may comment on the order in which the physical characteristics should be used in matching products. Generally, Commerce attempts to list the most important physical characteristics first and the least important characteristics last.
In order to consider the suggestions of interested parties in developing and issuing the AD questionnaires, all product characteristics comments must be filed by 5:00 p.m. ET on October 30, 2018, which is 20 calendar days from the signature date of this notice.
Section 732(b)(1) of the Act requires that a petition be filed on behalf of the domestic industry. Section 732(c)(4)(A) of the Act provides that a petition meets this requirement if the domestic producers or workers who support the petition account for: (i) At least 25 percent of the total production of the domestic like product; and (ii) more than 50 percent of the production of the domestic like product produced by that portion of the industry expressing support for, or opposition to, the petition. Moreover, section 732(c)(4)(D) of the Act provides that, if the petition does not establish support of domestic producers or workers accounting for more than 50 percent of the total production of the domestic like product, Commerce shall: (i) Poll the industry or rely on other information in order to determine if there is support for the petition, as required by subparagraph (A); or (ii) determine industry support using a statistically valid sampling method to poll the “industry.”
Section 771(4)(A) of the Act defines the “industry” as the producers as a whole of a domestic like product. Thus, to determine whether a petition has the requisite industry support, the statute directs Commerce to look to producers and workers who produce the domestic like product. The International Trade Commission (ITC), which is responsible for determining whether “the domestic industry” has been injured, must also determine what constitutes a domestic like product in order to define the industry. While both Commerce and the ITC must apply the same statutory definition regarding the domestic like product,
Section 771(10) of the Act defines the domestic like product as “a product which is like, or in the absence of like, most similar in characteristics and uses with, the article subject to an investigation under this title.” Thus, the reference point from which the domestic like product analysis begins is “the article subject to an investigation” (
With regard to the domestic like product, the petitioner does not offer a definition of the domestic like product distinct from the scope of the investigations.
In determining whether the petitioner has standing under section 732(c)(4)(A) of the Act, we considered the industry support data contained in the Petitions with reference to the domestic like product as defined in the “Scope of the Investigation,” in the Appendix to this notice. To establish industry support, the petitioner provided its own production of the domestic like product in 2017.
Our review of the data provided in the Petitions, the General Issues Supplement, and other information readily available to Commerce indicates that the petitioner has established industry support for the Petitions.
Commerce finds that the petitioner filed the Petitions on behalf of the domestic industry because it is an interested party as defined in section 771(9)(C) of the Act, and it has demonstrated sufficient industry support with respect to the AD investigations that it is requesting that Commerce initiate.
The petitioner alleges that the U.S. industry producing the domestic like product is being materially injured, or is threatened with material injury, by reason of the imports of the subject merchandise sold at less than normal value (NV). In addition, the petitioner alleges that subject imports exceed the negligibility threshold provided for under section 771(24)(A) of the Act.
The petitioner contends that the industry's injured condition is illustrated by a significant volume of subject imports and an increasing share of subject imports relative to total imports; underselling and price depression or suppression; recent declines in production and capacity utilization; negative effects on the domestic industry's investment, cash flows, and inventories; decline in the domestic industry's financial performance; and lost sales and revenues.
The following is a description of the allegations of sales at less than fair value that are the basis for Commerce's decision to initiate AD investigations of imports of kegs from China, Germany, and Mexico. The sources of data for the deductions and adjustments relating to U.S. price and NV are discussed in greater detail in the country-specific AD Initiation Checklists.
For China, the petitioner based U.S. export price (EP) on a price quote for kegs produced in, and exported from China and offered for sale in the United States.
For Germany and Mexico, the petitioner was unable to obtain home market or third-country prices for kegs; therefore, the petitioner calculated NV based on constructed value (CV) pursuant to section 773(a)(4) of the Act.
With respect to China, Commerce considers China to be an NME country.
The petitioner claims that Brazil is an appropriate surrogate country for China because it is a market economy country that is at a level of economic development comparable to that of China and it is a significant producer of comparable merchandise.
Interested parties will have the opportunity to submit comments regarding surrogate country selection and, pursuant to 19 CFR 351.301(c)(3)(i), will be provided an opportunity to submit publicly available information to value FOPs within 30 days before the scheduled date of the preliminary determination.
Based on its assertion that information regarding the FOPs and volume of inputs consumed by Chinese producers/exporters of kegs was not reasonably available, the petitioner used its own consumption rates for
For Germany and Mexico, pursuant to section 773(a)(4) of the Act, the petitioner calculated cost of manufacture (COM) using its own input FOPs and usage rates for raw materials, labor, energy, packing, and a scrap offset.
Based on the data provided by the petitioner, there is reason to believe that imports of kegs from China, Germany, and Mexico are being, or are likely to be, sold in the United States at less than fair value. Based on comparisons of EP to NV in accordance with sections 772 and 773 of the Act, the estimated dumping margins for kegs for each of the countries covered by this initiation are as follows: (1) China—204.42 percent;
Based upon the examination of the Petitions, we find that the Petitions meet the requirements of section 732 of the Act. Therefore, we are initiating AD investigations to determine whether imports of kegs from China, Germany, and Mexico are being, or are likely to be, sold in the United States at less than fair value. In accordance with section 733(b)(1)(A) of the Act and 19 CFR 351.205(b)(1), unless postponed, we will make our preliminary determination no later than 140 days after the date of this initiation.
The petitioner identified 26 producers/exporters as accounting for the majority of exports of kegs to the United States from China.
The petitioner identified three and five producers/exporters as accounting for the majority of exports of kegs to the United States from Germany and Mexico, respectively.
Exporters and producers of kegs from China, Germany, and Mexico that do not receive Q&V questionnaires by mail may still submit a response to the Q&V questionnaire and can obtain a copy of the Q&V questionnaire from the Enforcement and Compliance website, at
In order to obtain separate-rate status in an NME investigation, exporters and producers must submit a separate-rate application.
Commerce will calculate combination rates for certain respondents that are eligible for a separate rate in an NME investigation. The Separate Rates and Combination Rates Bulletin states:
{w}hile continuing the practice of assigning separate rates only to exporters, all separate rates that the Department will now assign in its NME Investigation will be specific to those producers that supplied the exporter during the period of investigation. Note, however, that one rate is calculated for the exporter and all of the producers which supplied subject merchandise to it during the period of investigation. This practice applies both to mandatory respondents receiving an individually calculated separate rate as well as the pool of non-investigated firms receiving the weighted-average of the individually calculated rates. This practice is referred to as the application of “combination rates” because such rates apply to specific combinations of exporters and one or more producers. The cash-deposit rate assigned to an exporter will apply only to merchandise both exported by the firm in question
In accordance with section 732(b)(3)(A) of the Act and 19 CFR 351.202(f), copies of the public version of the Petitions have been provided to the governments of China, Germany, and Mexico
We will notify the ITC of our initiation, as required by section 732(d) of the Act.
The ITC will preliminarily determine, within 45 days after the date on which the Petitions were filed, whether there is a reasonable indication that imports of kegs from China, Germany, and/or Mexico are materially injuring or threatening material injury to a U.S. industry. A negative ITC determination will result in the investigations being terminated with respect to that country.
Factual information is defined in 19 CFR 351.102(b)(21) as: (i) Evidence submitted in response to questionnaires; (ii) evidence submitted in support of allegations; (iii) publicly available information to value factors under 19 CFR 351.408(c) or to measure the adequacy of remuneration under 19 CFR 351.511(a)(2); (iv) evidence placed on the record by Commerce; and (v) evidence other than factual information described in (i)-(iv). 19 CFR 351.301(b) requires any party, when submitting factual information, to specify under which subsection of 19 CFR 351.102(b)(21) the information is being submitted
Parties may request an extension of time limits before the expiration of a time limit established under 19 CFR 351.301, or as otherwise specified by the Secretary. In general, an extension request will be considered untimely if it is filed after the expiration of the time limit established under 19 CFR 351.301. For submissions that are due from multiple parties simultaneously, an extension request will be considered untimely if it is filed after 10:00 a.m. ET on the due date. Under certain circumstances, we may elect to specify a different time limit by which extension requests will be considered untimely for submissions which are due from multiple parties simultaneously. In such a case, we will inform parties in a letter or memorandum of the deadline (including a specified time) by which extension requests must be filed to be considered timely. An extension request must be made in a separate, stand-alone submission; under limited circumstances we will grant untimely-filed requests for the extension of time limits. Parties should review
Any party submitting factual information in an AD or CVD proceeding must certify to the accuracy and completeness of that information.
Interested parties must submit applications for disclosure under APO in accordance with 19 CFR 351.305(b). On January 22, 2008, Commerce published
This notice is issued and published pursuant to sections 732(c)(2) and 777(i) of the Act, and 19 CFR 351.203(c).
The merchandise covered by these investigations are kegs, vessels, or containers that are approximately cylindrical in shape, made from stainless steel (
“Unassembled” or “unfinished” refillable stainless steel kegs include drawn stainless steel cylinders that have been welded to form the body of the keg and welded to an upper (top) chime and/or lower (bottom) chime. Unassembled refillable stainless steel kegs may or may not be welded to a neck, may or may not have a valve assembly attached, and may be otherwise complete except for testing, certification, and/or marking.
Subject merchandise also includes refillable stainless steel kegs that have been further processed in a third country, including but not limited to, attachment of necks, collars, spears or valves, heat treatment, pickling, passivation, painting, testing, certification or any other processing that would not otherwise remove the merchandise from the scope of the investigations if performed in the country of manufacture of the in-scope refillable stainless steel keg.
Specifically excluded are the following:
(1) Vessels or containers that are not approximately cylindrical in nature (
(2) stainless steel kegs, vessels, or containers that have either a “ball lock” valve system or a “pin lock” valve system (commonly known as “Cornelius,” “corny” or “ball lock” kegs);
(3) necks, spears, couplers or taps, collars, and valves that are not imported with the subject merchandise; and
(4) stainless steel kegs that are filled with beer, wine, or other liquid and that are designated by the Commissioner of Customs as Instruments of International Traffic within the meaning of section 332(a) of the
The merchandise covered by these investigations are currently classified in the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States (HTSUS) under subheadings 7310.10.0010, 7310.00.0050, 7310.29.0025, and 7310.29.0050.
These HTSUS subheadings are provided for convenience and customs purposes; the written description of the scope of these investigations is dispositive.
Enforcement and Compliance, International Trade Administration, Department of Commerce.
The Department of Commerce (Commerce) preliminarily determines that companies covered by the administrative review and new shipper reviews did not make sales of subject merchandise at prices below normal value. We invite interested parties to comment on these preliminary results.
Applicable October 16, 2018.
Bryan Hansen at (202) 482-3683 (Hubei Nature), Joshua Poole (202) 482-1293 (Anhui Luan), or Hermes Pinilla (202) 482-3477 (Kunshan Xinrui), AD/CVD Operations, Office I, Enforcement and Compliance, International Trade Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce, 1401 Constitution Avenue NW, Washington, DC 20230.
Commerce is conducting an administrative review and new shipper reviews of the antidumping duty order on freshwater crawfish tail meat from the People's Republic of China (China). The period of review (POR) for the administrative review and the aligned new shipper reviews is September 1, 2016, through August 31, 2017. The administrative review covers one mandatory respondent, Hubei Nature Agriculture Industry Co., Ltd. (Hubei Nature). The new shipper reviews cover Anhui Luan Hongyuan Foodstuffs Co., Ltd. (Anhui Luan) and Kunshan Xinrui Trading Co., Ltd. (Kunshan Xinrui). Commerce preliminarily determines that sales of subject merchandise by Hubei Nature have not been made at prices below normal value. Commerce also preliminarily determines that sales of subject merchandise by Anhui Luan and Kunshan Xinrui have not been made at prices below normal value.
The merchandise subject to the antidumping duty order is freshwater crawfish tail meat, which is currently classified in the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States (HTSUS) under subheadings 1605.40.10.10, 1605.40.10.90, 0306.19.00.10, and 0306.29.00.00. On February 10, 2012, Commerce added HTSUS classification number 0306.29.01.00 to the scope description pursuant to a request by U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP). On September 21, 2018, Commerce added HTSUS classification numbers 0306.39.0000 and 0306.99.0000 to the scope description pursuant to a request by CBP. While the HTSUS numbers are provided for convenience and customs purposes, the written description is dispositive. A full description of the scope of the order is contained in the Preliminary Decision Memorandum.
Pursuant to 19 CFR 351.213(d)(1), Commerce will rescind an administrative review, in whole or in part, if the parties that requested a review withdraw the request within 90 days of the date of publication of the notice of initiation.
The petitioners, the Crawfish Processors Alliance, withdrew their review request for six of the 12 companies for which a review was requested.
Three companies that received a separate rate in previous segments of the proceeding and are subject to this review reported that they did not have any exports of subject merchandise during the POR.
Commerce preliminarily determines that seven respondents are eligible to receive separate rates in these reviews.
Commerce preliminarily determines that the respondents not selected for individual examination, Weishan Hongda Aquatic Food Co., Ltd. (Weishan Hongda), Xiping Opeck Food Co., Ltd. (Xiping Opeck), Xuzhou Jinjiang Foodstuffs Co., Ltd. (Xuzhou Jinjiang), and Yancheng Hi-King Agriculture Developing Co., Ltd. (Yancheng Hi-King) are eligible to receive a separate rate in the administrative review.
Commerce's policy regarding conditional review of the China-wide entity applies to this administrative review.
As provided in section 782(i) of the Act, we verified the information provided by Hubei Nature in the administrative review and Kunshan Xinrui in the new shipper review of freshwater crawfish tail meat from China using standard verification procedures, including on-site inspection of the producer's and exporter's facilities and examination of relevant sales and financial records. Our verification results are outlined in the verification reports for Hubei Nature and Kunshan Xinrui dated concurrently with this notice.
Commerce is conducting these reviews in accordance with section 751(a)(1)(B), and 751(a)(2)(B) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (the Act), and 19 CFR 351.214. Export price is calculated in accordance with section 772(c) of the Act. Because China is a non-market economy within the meaning of section 771(18) of the Act, normal value has been calculated in accordance with section 773(c) of the Act.
For a full description of the methodology underlying our conclusions,
Commerce preliminarily determines that the following weighted-average dumping margins exist for the administrative review covering the period September 1, 2016, through August 31, 2017:
As a result of the new shipper reviews, Commerce preliminarily determines that the following dumping margins exist covering the period September 1, 2016, through August 31, 2017:
We intend to disclose calculations performed in these preliminary results to parties within five days after public announcement of the preliminary results.
Pursuant to 19 CFR 351.309(c)(ii), interested parties may submit case briefs no later than 30 days after the date of
Interested parties who wish to request a hearing must submit a written request to the Assistant Secretary for Enforcement and Compliance, U.S. Department of Commerce, filed electronically using ACCESS. An electronically filed document must be received successfully in its entirety by ACCESS by 5:00 p.m. Eastern Time within 30 days after the date of publication of this notice.
Unless the deadline is extended, Commerce intends to issue the final results of these reviews, including the results of its analysis of issues raised by parties in their comments, within 120 days after the publication of these preliminary results, pursuant to section 751(a)(3)(A) of the Act and 19 CFR 351.213(h).
Upon issuing the final results, Commerce will determine, and U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) shall assess, antidumping duties on all appropriate entries covered by these reviews.
For entries that were not reported in the U.S. sales databases submitted by exporters individually examined during this review, Commerce will instruct CBP to liquidate such entries at the China-wide rate. If Commerce determines that an exporter under review had no shipments of the subject merchandise, any suspended entries that entered under that exporter's case number (
For the companies for which the review is rescinded, Commerce will instruct CBP to assess antidumping duties at the rate equal to the cash deposit of estimated antidumping duties required at the time of entry, or withdrawal from warehouse, for consumption, in accordance with 19 CFR 351.212(c)(1)(i). We intend to issue assessment instructions to CBP 15 days after the date of publication of the final results of these reviews.
The following cash deposit requirements will be effective upon publication of the final results of these reviews for shipments of the subject merchandise from China entered, or withdrawn from warehouse, for consumption on or after the publication date, as provided by section 751(a)(2)(C) of the Act: (1) For the subject merchandise exported by the companies listed above that have separate rates, the cash deposit rate will be zero (2) for previously investigated or reviewed Chinese and non-Chinese exporters not listed above that received a separate rate in a prior segment of this proceeding, the cash deposit rate will continue to be the existing exporter-specific rate; (3) for all Chinese exporters of subject merchandise that have not been found to be entitled to a separate rate, the cash deposit rate will be that for the China-wide entity; and (4) for all non-Chinese exporters of subject merchandise which have not received their own rate, the cash deposit rate will be the rate applicable to the Chinese exporter that supplied that non-Chinese exporter. These deposit requirements, when imposed, shall remain in effect until further notice.
This notice serves as a preliminary reminder to importers of their responsibility under 19 CFR 351.402(f)(2) to file a certificate regarding the reimbursement of antidumping duties prior to liquidation of the relevant entries during these PORs. Failure to comply with this requirement could result in Commerce's presumption that reimbursement of antidumping duties occurred and the subsequent assessment of double antidumping duties.
This notice also serves as a reminder to parties subject to administrative protective order (APO) of their responsibility concerning the disposition of proprietary information disclosed under APO in accordance with 19 CFR 351.305(a)(3). 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 the terms of an APO is a sanctionable violation. Commerce is issuing and publishing the preliminary results of these reviews in accordance with sections 751(a)(1), 751(a)(2)(B)(iv), 751(a)(3), 777(i) of the Act, and 19 CFR 351.213, 351.214 and 351.221(b)(4).
Enforcement and Compliance, International Trade Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce.
The Department of Commerce (Commerce) determines that Shin Yang Steel Co., Ltd. (Shin Yang), a producer/exporter of merchandise subject to this administrative review, made sales of subject merchandise at less than normal value during the period of review (POR) May 1, 2016, to April 30, 2017.
Applicable October 16, 2018.
Scott Hoefke, AD/CVD Operations, Office VI, Enforcement and Compliance, International Trade Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce, 1401 Constitution Avenue NW, Washington, DC 20230; telephone: (202) 482-4947.
On June 12, 2018, Commerce published its preliminary results of the administrative review of certain circular welded carbon steel pipes and tubes from Taiwan.
On January 23, 2018, Commerce exercised its discretion to toll all deadlines for the duration of the closure of the Federal Government from January 20, 2018, through January 22, 2018.
The merchandise subject to the order is certain circular welded carbon steel pipes and tubes from Taiwan. The product is currently classified under the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States (HTSUS) item numbers 7306.30.5025, 7306.30.5032, 7306.30.5040, and 7306.30.5055. Although the HTSUS numbers are provided for convenience and customs purposes, the written product description remains dispositive.
Analysis of Comments Received and Changes Since the Preliminary Results
We made no changes to the
In the
As a result of this review, we determine that the following weighted-average dumping margin exists for the period May 1, 2016, through April 30, 2017:
Commerce shall determine, and CBP shall assess, antidumping duties on all appropriate entries covered by this review pursuant to section 751(a)(2)(C) of the Act and 19 CFR 351.212(b).
For Shin Yang, because its weighted-average dumping margin is not zero or
As noted in the “Final Determination of No Shipments” section, above, Commerce will instruct CBP to liquidate any existing entries of merchandise produced by Yieh Hsing but exported by other parties, at the rate for the intermediate reseller, if available, or at the all-others rate.
The following cash deposit requirements will be effective for all shipments of subject merchandise entered, or withdrawn from warehouse, for consumption on or after the publication date of the final results of this administrative review, as provided for by section 751(a)(2)(C) of the Act: (1) The cash deposit rates for the companies listed in these final results will be equal to the rates established in the final results of this review; (2) for merchandise exported by producers or exporters not covered in this review but covered in a prior segment of this proceeding, the cash deposit rate will continue to be the company-specific rate published for the most recently completed segment in which the company was reviewed; (3) if the exporter is not a firm covered in this review or the original less-than-fair-value (LTFV) investigation, but the producer is, the cash deposit rate will be the rate established for the most recently completed segment of this proceeding for the producer of the subject
This notice serves as a final reminder to importers of their responsibility under 19 CFR 351.402(f)(2) 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 Commerce's presumption that reimbursement of antidumping duties occurred and the subsequent assessment of double antidumping duties.
This notice also serves as the only reminder to parties subject to administrative protective order (APO) of their responsibility concerning the disposition 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 the terms of an APO is a sanctionable violation.
We are issuing and publishing this notice in accordance with sections 751(a)(1) and 777(i)(1) of the Act and 19 CFR 351.213(h).
Enforcement and Compliance, International Trade Administration, Department of Commerce.
On September 17, 2018, the United States Court of International Trade (CIT or Court) sustained the Department of Commerce's (Commerce) remand redetermination pertaining to the less-than-fair-value (LTFV) investigation of xanthan gum from the People's Republic of China (China). Because of the CIT's final decision, we are notifying the public that the CIT's decision is not in harmony with Commerce's final determination in the LTFV investigation of xanthan gum from China. Pursuant to the CIT's final judgment, Neimenggu Fufeng Biotechnologies Co., Ltd. (aka Inner Mongolia Fufeng Biotechnologies Co., Ltd.) and Shandong Fufeng Fermentation, Co., Ltd. (collectively, Fufeng) are being excluded from the order.
September 27, 2018.
Stephen Bailey, AD/CVD Operations, Office IV, Enforcement and Compliance, International Trade Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce, 1401 Constitution Avenue NW, Washington, DC 20230; telephone: (202) 482-0193.
The litigation in this case relates to Commerce's final determination in the antidumping duty investigation covering xanthan gum from China,
In its decision in
Because there is now a final court decision, Commerce is amending the
Pursuant to section 735(a)(4) of the Act, Commerce “shall disregard any weighted average dumping margin that is
We note, however, pursuant to
Lastly, we note that, at this time, Commerce remains enjoined by Court order from liquidating entries that: (1) Were produced and exported by Fufeng, and were entered, or withdrawn from warehouse, for consumption during the period July 19, 2013, through June 30, 2014; (2) were produced and exported by Fufeng, and were entered, or withdrawn from warehouse, for consumption during the period July 1, 2014, through June 30, 2015, by East West Technologies Inc.; and (3) were produced and exported by Fufeng, and were entered, or withdrawn from warehouse, for consumption during the period July 1, 2014, through June 30, 2015, by LABH Inc., designated as Entry No. 22703189153, with an entry date of July 7, 2014, and Fufeng's Invoice No. MEU14088. These entries will remain enjoined pursuant to the terms of the injunction during the pendency of any appeals process.
This notice is issued and published in accordance with sections 516A(c)(1) and (e) of the Act.
Enforcement and Compliance, International Trade Administration, Department of Commerce.
The Department of Commerce (Commerce) and the U.S. International Trade Commission (ITC) determined that revocation of the antidumping duty (AD) order on large power transformers
Applicable October 16, 2018.
Brian Davis, AD/CVD Operations, Office VI, Enforcement and Compliance, International Trade Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce, 1401 Constitution Avenue NW, Washington, DC 20230; telephone: (202) 482-7924.
On August 31, 2012, Commerce published in the
Commerce conducted this sunset review on an expedited basis, pursuant to section 751(c)(3)(B) of the Act and 19 CFR 351.218(e)(1)(ii)(C)(2), because it received a complete, timely, and adequate response from a domestic interested party but no substantive responses from respondent interested parties. As a result of this sunset review, Commerce determined that revocation of the AD order on LPTs from Korea would likely lead to a continuation or recurrence of dumping and, therefore, notified the ITC of the magnitude of the margins likely to prevail should the order be revoked.
On October 2, 2018, the ITC published its determination that revocation of the AD order on LPTs would likely lead to a continuation or recurrence of material injury to an industry in the United States within a reasonably foreseeable time, pursuant to section 751(c) of the Act.
The scope of this order covers large liquid dielectric power transformers (LPTs) having a top power handling capacity greater than or equal to 60,000 kilovolt amperes (60 megavolt amperes), whether assembled or unassembled, complete or incomplete.
Incomplete LPTs are subassemblies consisting of the active part and any other parts attached to, imported with or invoiced with the active parts of LPTs. The “active part” of the transformer consists of one or more of the following when attached to or otherwise assembled with one another: The steel core or shell, the windings, electrical insulation between the windings, the mechanical frame for an LPT.
The product definition encompasses all such LPTs regardless of name designation, including but not limited to step-up transformers, step-down transformers, autotransformers, interconnection transformers, voltage regulator transformers, rectifier transformers, and power rectifier transformers.
The LPTs subject to this order are currently classifiable under subheadings 8504.23.0040, 8504.23.0080 and 8504.90.9540 of the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States (HTSUS). Although the HTSUS subheadings are provided for convenience and customs purposes, the written description of the scope of this order is dispositive.
As a result of the determinations by Commerce and the ITC that revocation of the AD order would likely lead to a continuation or recurrence of dumping and material injury to an industry in the United States, pursuant to section 751(d)(2) of the Act and 19 CFR 351.218(a), Commerce hereby orders the continuation of the AD order on LPTs from Korea.
CBP will continue to collect antidumping duty cash deposits at the rates in effect at the time of entry for all imports of subject merchandise. The effective date of the continuation of this order will be the date of publication in the
This sunset review and this notice are in accordance with sections 751(c) and 752(d)(2) of the Act and published pursuant to section 777(i)(1) of the Act and 19 CFR 351.218(f)(4).
National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), Commerce.
Notice; request for comments.
The Assistant Regional Administrator for Sustainable Fisheries, Greater Atlantic Region, NMFS, has made a preliminary determination that an Exempted Fishing Permit renewal application from the Commercial Fisheries Research Foundation contains all of the required information and warrants further consideration. This permit would facilitate research on the abundance and distribution of juvenile American lobster and Jonah crab along the northwest Atlantic coast. Regulations under the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act and the Atlantic Coastal Fisheries Cooperative Management Act require publication of this notice to provide interested parties the opportunity to comment on applications for proposed Exempted Fishing Permits.
Comments must be received on or before October 31, 2018.
You may submit written comments by any of the following methods:
•
•
Laura Hansen, NOAA Affiliate, 978-281-9225,
The Commercial Fisheries Research Foundation (CFRF) submitted a complete application to renew an existing Exempted Fishing Permit (EFP) on September 20, 2018, to conduct fishing activities that the regulations would otherwise restrict. The EFP would authorize 17 vessels to continue a study using ventless lobster traps to survey the abundance and distribution of juvenile American lobster and Jonah crab in regions and times of year not covered by traditional surveys. Overall, this EFP proposes to use 54 ventless lobster traps throughout Lobster Conservation Management Areas (LCMA) 2, 3, 4, and 5; covering statistical areas 514, 515, 521, 522, 525, 526, 533, 534, 537, 538, 539, 541, 542, 543, 561, 562, 613, 615, 616, 622, 623, 624, 626, 627, 628, 629, 632, 633, 634, 636, 637, 638, and 640. Maps depicting these areas are available on request. The study is designed to aid and inform management by addressing the questions of changing reproduction and recruitment dynamics of lobster, and developing a foundation of knowledge for data poor Jonah crab fishery.
Funding for this study has been awarded through the Campbell Foundation and the Saltonstall-Kennedy Grants Program (Grant # NA17NMF4270208). For this research, CFRF is requesting exemptions from the following Federal lobster regulations:
1. Gear specification requirements in 50 CFR 697.21(c) to allow for closed escape vents and smaller trap mesh and entrance heads;
2. Trap limit requirements, as listed in § 697.19, for LCMA 2, 3, 4 and 5, to be exceeded by 3 additional traps per fishing vessel for a total of 54 additional traps;
3. Trap tag requirements, as specified in § 697.19(j), to allow for the use of untagged traps (though each experimental trap will have the participating fisherman's identification attached); and
4. Possession restrictions in §§§ 697.20(a), 697.20(d), and 697.20(g) to allow for temporary possession of juvenile, v-notched, and egg-bearing lobsters for onboard biological sampling.
If the EFP is approved, this research would take place during the regular fishing activity of the participating vessels: 6 “inshore” vessels in LCMA 2 and 11 “offshore” vessels in LCMAs 3, 4, and 5. Experimental traps will be attached to a standard, Atlantic Large Whale-compliant trap trawl. Modifications to conventional lobster traps used in this study include a closed escape vents, single parlors, and smaller mesh sizes and entrance heads, all to allow for the capture of juvenile lobsters and Jonah crabs. Sampling would occur weekly in LCMA 2, and every 10 days in the other areas.
All lobster and Jonah crabs caught in the experimental traps will be counted, sexed, and measured. Biological information including shell hardness and presence of eggs will also be recorded. All species captured in study traps will be returned promptly to the sea after sampling. All data collected will be made available to state and Federal management agencies to improve and enhance the available data for these two crustacean species.
Currently, there are no Federal regulations for Jonah crab. We are preparing a proposed rule to establish Federal regulations for the Jonah crab fishery. We anticipate that the final rulemaking will occur during the proposed study period. To ensure that there is no disruption to research activities, we would modify the exemptions granted to this study, should they be approved, to include exemption from the possession of undersized and egg-bearing Jonah crabs. We would solicit comment on this expansion in the rulemaking being developed to propose and implement the Jonah Crab Fishery Management Plan.
If approved, the applicant may request minor modifications and extensions to the EFP throughout the study period. EFP modifications and extensions may be granted without further notice if they are deemed essential to facilitate completion of the proposed research and have minimal impacts that do not change the scope or impact of the initially approved EFP request. Any fishing activity conducted outside the scope of the exempted fishing activity would be prohibited.
16 U.S.C. 1801
National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), Commerce.
Notice of receipt of an application for exempted fishing permit; request for comments.
NMFS announces the receipt of an application for an exempted fishing permit (EFP) from Bradford Whipple and Howard Rau. If granted, the EFP would authorize the applicants to deploy golden crab traps and commercially fish on a limited basis for golden crab in the Federal waters of the Gulf of Mexico (Gulf). The project seeks to collect information on the effectiveness of golden crab traps in the Gulf and the viability of a commercial golden crab fishery in the Gulf.
Written comments must be received on or before October 31, 2018.
You may submit comments on the application, identified by “NOAA-NMFS-2018-0108” by any of the following methods:
•
•
•
Electronic copies of the applications may be obtained from the Southeast Regional Office website at
Karla Gore, 727-824-5305; email:
The EFP is requested under the authority of the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act (16 U.S.C. 1801
The Gulf of Mexico Fishery Management Council (Council) and NMFS do not manage the harvest of golden crab in Federal waters of the Gulf. However, the use or possession of a fish trap in Federal waters in the Gulf is prohibited (50 CFR 622.9(c)), and a “fish trap” is any trap capable of taking finfish, except for a trap historically used in the directed fishery for crustaceans (that is, blue crab, stone crab, and spiny lobster) (50 CFR 622.2). Therefore, golden crab traps are a prohibited gear in Gulf Federal waters.
If granted, the EFP would exempt the applicants from the prohibition on the use or possession of a fish trap in Federal waters of the Gulf to allow the testing of various golden crab trap designs and fishing configurations to determine if a commercial golden crab fishery is viable in the Gulf. Additionally, because most of the information and data on golden crab in the Gulf is at least 20 years old, this project would allow for the collection of new information on golden crab in the Gulf. The applicants have requested the EFP be effective for 2 years. During that time, the applicants would collect information on harvest rates, soak time, effectiveness of the various trap style, bycatch, and crab quality. The project design is intended to avoid impacts to non-target species, protected species, and habitats.
As described in the application, the applicants would test the catch efficiency of four different golden crab trap configurations that are currently used in the South Atlantic golden crab fishery. The two vessels to be used in the EFP would deploy a maximum of two strings of 6 to 40 traps per trip. The traps would be baited with fish carcasses and trap soak times would range from overnight up to 17 days depending on trap type and location. Sampling would occur year-round and the applicants expect to set and haul the traps a maximum of 60 times over the course of the 2-year project. At any time, there would be no more than 100 golden crab traps deployed on the seafloor during the project. Setting and hauling of the traps will occur during all hours.
The golden crab trap gear would be deployed in the southeastern Gulf, on mud bottom. From south to north, the gear would be set, between 25° and 28° north latitude with the western gear boundary ranging from 84.20° to 85.40° west longitude in depths ranging from 1,800 to 2,600 ft (548.6 m to 792.4 m). The 1,800 ft (548.6 m) contour will also mark the eastern boundary for gear deployment. This location is west of southwest Florida and outside the range of any other known directed-fishery operating in the Gulf, including the deep-water shrimp fishery. The applicants have agreed to avoid areas of known coral habitats and have communicated with the members of the Council's Scientific and Statistical Committee to identify these coral locations. This project area is also outside the boundaries of both the Flower Garden Banks National Marine Sanctuary and the Florida Keys National Marine Sanctuary. However, the project area is close to Bryde's whale habitat and part of the project area overlaps with an area where sperm whales are known to be present.
As described in the application, the traps to be tested would be of various shapes (rectangle, square and round), various sizes (from 6 ft by 6 ft by 2 ft to 2 ft by 3 ft by 4 ft, (1.8 m by 1.8 m by 0.6 m to 0.6 m by 0.9 m by 1.2 m)), and have different mesh sizes (1.5 inch to 4 inch (3.8 cm to 10.2 cm)). The traps would also have different types of entrances, including top entrances from 8 inch by 8 inch (20.3 cm by 20.3 cm) to 9 inch by 9 inch (22.9 cm by 22.9 cm), and on circle traps, top funnels that are 3 feet (0.9 m) in diameter. One variation of trap would include a 4-inch by 6-inch (10.2 cm to 15.2 cm) side entrance. All of the traps would have the same size escape gap (3 inches by 4 inches (7.6 cm by 10.2 cm)) and would be constructed of steel or rebar frames covered in vinyl-coated mesh. The weight of each trap is estimated to range from 50 lb to 100 lb (23 to 45 kg), depending on the design used.
Each trap location would be marked on the vessel's global positioning system (GPS) before deployment to ensure ease of retrieval. There would be no buoy lines to the surface and the gear would be set in muddy bottom habitat. Sophisticated sounder technology on each vessel is capable of identifying bottom characteristics that are suitable habitat (muddy bottom) for golden crab traps and fishing while avoiding coral habitat.
The applicants would conduct the testing using two vessels issued South Atlantic commercial golden crab permits. Vessel crew would keep detailed records during the sampling trips, including the location of the trip, set and haul date and time, species harvested, impacts on bottom features, trap efficiency, and any bycatch. This information would be shared with the Council and NMFS. Landings information would be collected through the vessel trip ticket program and any golden crab landed from the project would only be sold to federally licensed dealers.
The Council reviewed the EFP application at its April 2018 meeting, provided comments related to avoiding both coral areas and conflicts with shrimp vessels, and recommended that NMFS approve the application. NMFS finds the application warrants further consideration. Possible conditions the agency may impose on the permit, if granted, include but are not limited to, a prohibition on conducting research in known coral areas, marine protected areas, marine sanctuaries, special management zones, or areas where they might interfere with managed fisheries without additional authorization. Additionally, NMFS may require special protections for marine mammals, ESA-listed species and designated critical habitat, and may require particular gear markings. A final decision on issuance of the EFP will depend on NMFS' review of public comments received on the application, consultations with the appropriate fishery management agencies of the affected states, and the U.S. Coast Guard, as well as a determination that it is consistent with all applicable laws.
16 U.S.C. 1801
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 Recreational Advisory Panel 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 Monday, October 29, 2018 at 10 a.m.
The meeting will be held at the Hilton Garden Inn, Four Home Depot Drive, Plymouth, MA 02360; phone: (508) 830-0200.
Thomas A. Nies, Executive Director, New England Fishery Management Council; telephone: (978) 465-0492.
The Recreational Advisory Panel will receive an overview of recreational fishing data for fishing year 2017 and preliminary fishing year 2018 from National Marine Fisheries Service staff. They will also discuss recent changes to the Marine Recreational Information Program data with respect to groundfish stocks. The panel will receive an update on the Council's public listening sessions on the possibility of limited entry in the groundfish party and charter fishery. The panel will discuss planning the Greater Atlantic Regional Fisheries Office's Upcoming Recreational Workshops building off the outcomes of the 2017 workshop. They also plan to hold a discussion of possible recreational priorities for 2019 and develop recommendations to the Groundfish Committee. Other business will be discussed as necessary.
Although non-emergency issues not contained in this agenda may come before this group for discussion, those issues may not be the subject of formal action during these meetings. 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 Act, provided the public has been notified of the Council's intent to take final action to address the emergency.
This meeting is physically accessible to people with disabilities. 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 November 1-8, 2018. The Pacific Council meeting will begin on Saturday, November 3, 2018 at 10 a.m. Pacific Daylight Time (PDT), reconvening at 8 a.m. each day through Thursday, November 8, 2018. All meetings are open to the public, except a closed session will be held from 8 a.m. to 10 a.m., Saturday, November 3 to address litigation and personnel matters. The Pacific Council will meet as late as necessary each day to complete its scheduled business.
The meetings will be held at the San Diego Marriott Del Mar, 11966 El Camino Real, San Diego, CA; phone: (858) 523-1700.
Instructions for attending the meeting via live stream broadcast are given under
Mr. Chuck Tracy, Executive Director; telephone: (503) 820-2280 or (866) 806-7204 toll-free; or access the Pacific Council website,
The November 1-8, 2018 meeting of the Pacific Council will be streamed live on the internet. The broadcasts begin initially at 10 a.m. PDT Saturday, November 3, 2018 and continue at 8 a.m. daily through Thursday, November 8, 2018. Broadcasts end daily at 5 p.m. PDT 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 November 2018 briefing materials and posted on the Pacific Council website 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 website
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 ten business days prior to the meeting date.
The Department of Commerce will submit to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for clearance the following proposal for collection of information under the provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act.
This request is for revision and extension of a currently approved information collection.
The NOAA Restoration Center (NOAA RC) provides technical and financial assistance to identify, develop, implement, and evaluate community-driven habitat restoration projects. Awards are made as grants or cooperative agreements under the authority of the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act of 2006, 16 U.S.C. 1891a and the Fish and Wildlife Coordination Act, 16 U.S.C. 661, as amended by the Reorganization Plan No. 4 of 1970.
The NOAA RC requires specific information on habitat restoration projects that we fund, as part of routine progress reporting. Recipients of NOAA RC funds submit information such as project location, restoration techniques used, species benefited, acres restored, stream miles opened to access for diadromous fish, volunteer participation, and other parameters.
The required information enables NOAA to track, evaluate and report on coastal and marine habitat restoration and demonstrate accountability for federal funds. This information is used to populate a database of NOAA RC-funded habitat restoration. The database, with its robust querying capabilities, is instrumental to provide accurate and timely responses to NOAA, Department of Commerce, Congressional and constituent inquiries. It also facilitates reporting by NOAA on the Government Performance and Results Act “acres restored” performance measure. Grant recipients are required by the NOAA Grants Management Division to submit periodic performance reports and a final report for each award; this collection stipulates the information to be provided in these reports.
There are two progress report forms for simplicity. The Performance Report Form focuses on tracking project implementation, milestones, performance measures, monitoring, and expenditures. The Administrative Form only applies to recipients with an award that will implement multiple projects. It collects information on the administration of the award, the number of projects supported by the award, and award expenditures.
This information collection request may be viewed at
Written comments and recommendations for the proposed information collection should be sent within 30 days of publication of this notice to
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 Habitat Advisory Panel 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 Monday, November 5, 2018 at 10 a.m.
Thomas A. Nies, Executive Director, New England Fishery Management Council; telephone: (978) 465-0492.
The advisory panel will review range of alternatives in the clam dredge framework. These alternatives were developed by the Habitat Plan Development Team with guidance from the Habitat Committee and the Council. The panel will also review the PDT's preliminary analysis of alternatives. They will also discuss findings of the Council's Enforcement Committee regarding the use of 5-minute VMS to monitor fishing activity within potential exemption areas. The panel will provide feedback to the Habitat Committee about the alternatives and related analyses. Other business will be discussed as necessary.
Although non-emergency issues not contained in this agenda may come before this group for discussion, those issues may not be the subject of formal action during these meetings. 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 Act, provided the public has been notified of the Council's intent to take final action to address the emergency.
This meeting is physically accessible to people with disabilities. 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 date. This meeting will be recorded. Consistent with 16 U.S.C. 1852, a copy of the recording is available upon request.
16 U.S.C. 1801
National Center for Education Statistics (NCES), 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 November 15, 2018.
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 Kashka Kubzdela, 202-245-7377 or email
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.
Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy, Department of Energy.
Notice of decision and order.
The U.S. Department of Energy (“DOE”) gives notice of a Decision and Order (Case Number 2017-011) that grants to Big Ass Solutions (“BAS”) a waiver from specified portions of the DOE test procedure for determining the energy efficiency of ceiling fans. Under the Decision and Order, BAS is required to test and rate specified basic models of its ceiling fans in accordance with the alternate test procedure specified in the Decision and Order.
The Decision and Order is effective on October 16, 2018. The Decision and Order will terminate upon the compliance date of any future amendment to the test procedure for ceiling fans located in 10 CFR part 430, subpart B, appendix U that addresses the issues presented in this waiver. At such time, BAS must use the relevant test procedure for this product for any testing to demonstrate compliance with standards, and any other representations of energy use.
Ms. Lucy deButts, U.S. Department of Energy, Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy, Building Technologies Office, EE-5B, 1000 Independence Avenue SW, Washington, DC 20585-0121. Email:
Ms. Elizabeth Kohl, U.S. Department of Energy, Office of the General Counsel, Mail Stop GC-33, Forrestal Building, 1000 Independence Avenue SW, Washington, DC 20585-0103. Email:
In accordance with Title 10 of the Code of Federal Regulations (10 CFR
Consistent with 10 CFR 430.27(j), not later than December 17, 2018, any manufacturer currently distributing in commerce in the United States products employing a technology or characteristic that results in the same need for a waiver from the applicable test procedure must submit a petition for waiver. Manufacturers not currently distributing such products in commerce in the United States must petition for and be granted a waiver prior to the distribution in commerce of those products in the United States. Manufacturers may also submit a request for interim waiver pursuant to the requirements of 10 CFR 430.27.
The Energy Policy and Conservation Act of 1975 (“EPCA”),
Under EPCA, DOE's energy conservation program consists essentially of four parts: (1) Testing, (2) labeling, (3) Federal energy conservation standards, and (4) certification and enforcement procedures. Relevant provisions of EPCA include definitions (42 U.S.C. 6291), energy conservation standards (42 U.S.C. 6295), test procedures (42 U.S.C. 6293), labeling provisions (42 U.S.C. 6294), and the authority to require information and reports from manufacturers (42 U.S.C. 6296).
The Federal testing requirements consist of test procedures that manufacturers of covered products must use as the basis for: (1) Certifying to DOE that their products comply with the applicable energy conservation standards adopted pursuant to EPCA (42 U.S.C. 6295(s)), and (2) making representations about the efficiency of that product (42 U.S.C. 6293(c)). Similarly, DOE must use these test procedures to determine whether the product complies with relevant standards promulgated under EPCA. (42 U.S.C. 6295(s))
Under 42 U.S.C. 6293, EPCA sets forth the criteria and procedures DOE is required to follow when prescribing or amending test procedures for covered products. EPCA requires that any test procedures prescribed or amended under this section must be reasonably designed to produce test results which reflect energy efficiency, energy use or estimated annual operating cost of a covered product during a representative average use cycle or period of use and requires that test procedures not be unduly burdensome to conduct. (42 U.S.C. 6293(b)(3)) The test procedure for ceiling fans is contained in the Code of Federal Regulations (“CFR”) at 10 CFR part 430, subpart B, appendix U,
Under 10 CFR 430.27, any interested person may submit a petition for waiver from DOE's test procedure requirements. DOE will grant a waiver from the test procedure requirements if DOE determines either that the basic model for which the waiver was requested contains a design characteristic that prevents testing of the basic model according to the prescribed test procedures, or that the prescribed test procedures evaluate the basic model in a manner so unrepresentative of its true energy consumption characteristics as to provide materially inaccurate comparative data. 10 CFR 430.27(a)(1). DOE may grant the waiver subject to conditions, including adherence to alternate test procedures. 10 CFR 430.27(f)(2).
By letter dated June 14, 2017, BAS filed a petition for waiver and an application for interim waiver from the test procedure applicable to ceiling fans set forth in Appendix U. According to BAS, testing at low speed for the basic models listed in the petition
On March 23, 2018, DOE published a notice announcing its receipt of the petition for waiver and granting BAS an interim waiver. 83 FR 12726. In the notice of petition for waiver, DOE reviewed the alternate test procedure suggested by BAS and granted the interim waiver initially finding that the alternate test procedure of relaxing the stability criteria for low speed will allow for the accurate measurement of efficiency of these products, while alleviating the testing problems associated with BAS's implementation of ceiling fan testing for the basic models specified in its petition. In that notice, DOE also solicited comments from interested parties on all aspects of the petition and specified an alternate test procedure that must be followed for testing and certifying the specific basic models for which BAS requested a waiver.
DOE received two relevant comments to the notice of petition for waiver.
While the petition for waiver from BAS and the interim waiver granted by DOE addressed the required testing at low speed only, Hunter also suggested that the same alternate test procedure stability criteria be applied to high speed as well, stating that there is test efficiency gain for high speed also. (Hunter, No. 6 at p. 2) Furthermore, Hunter stated that although relaxing the air velocity stability criteria for low and high speed for the entire industry would help reduce undue burden, it also recommended that DOE consider requiring stability for airflow instead of air velocity, stating that when overall airflow on low or high speed from one test run to the next is substantially unchanged, stability is reached, and that air velocity being the same for a particular sensor from one second to the next is of no real consequence and unnecessarily adds to the burden.
As to Hunter's and ALA's request to make an alternate test procedure available to all manufacturers that are faced with similar issues as BAS, DOE considers such requests in the context of a rulemaking proceeding rather than through the waiver process. As noted, any manufacturer currently distributing in commerce in the United States products employing a technology or characteristic that results in the same need for a waiver from the applicable test procedure must submit a petition for waiver. 10 CFR 430.27(j). The waiver process addresses particular basic models that contain one or more design characteristics which either prevent testing according to the prescribed test procedures or cause the prescribed test procedures to evaluate the basic models in a manner so unrepresentative of its true energy and/or water consumption characteristics as to provide materially inaccurate comparative data. 10 CFR 430.27(a)(1). Changes to the test procedure that apply to the covered product more generally would appropriately be addressed as part of a rulemaking.
Regarding Hunter's request that DOE provide an alternate test procedure for testing at high speed, DOE would also consider such a request generally in the context of a rulemaking. The petition submitted by BAS does not address testing issues at high speed. DOE understands that the ceiling fans specified in the BAS petition, when operated at low speed, produce air velocities that have trouble meeting the stability criteria because the average air velocity is so low that it creates highly variable airflow patterns. BAS also specifically stated that at low speed for the basic models in question, the air speed is so low that the acceptable variance under the stability criteria (often less than 2 feet per minute) falls below the required accuracies for airflow sensors in section 3.3.2 of Appendix U (
Regarding Hunter's recommendation to require stability for airflow instead of air velocity to determining test room stability, under the current DOE test procedure, air velocity is measured at each sensor along the sensor arm, and airflow is calculated based on these measurements. The air velocity measurements indicate both the amount and location of air provided by the fan within the effective area (
BAS's petition requested a waiver from the test procedure applicable to the specified ceiling fans only in regard to the stability criteria for testing at low speed. DOE reviewed the manufacturer specifications and test data provided by BAS. DOE concluded that the data demonstrated that the basic models specified in the petition cannot be tested under the DOE test procedure because when testing the basic models at low speed, the air speed is so low that the acceptable variance under the stability criteria (often less than 2 feet per minute) falls below the required accuracies for airflow sensors in section 3.3.2 of Appendix U. This Decision and Order grants an alternate test procedure for low speed only.
DOE understands that absent a waiver, the basic models identified by BAS in its petition cannot be tested and rated for energy consumption on a basis representative of their true energy consumption characteristics. DOE has reviewed the recommended procedure suggested by BAS and concludes that it will allow for the accurate measurement of the energy use of the basic model, while alleviating the testing problems associated with BAS's implementation of DOE's applicable ceiling fan test procedure for the specified basic models. In the Decision and Order, DOE is requiring that BAS test and rate the ceiling fan basic models for which it has requested a waiver according to the alternate test procedure specified in the Decision and Order, which is identical to the procedure provided in the interim waiver
In its petition BAS sought a test procedure waiver for certain basic models. This Decision and Order is applicable only to BAS and only to the basic models listed and does not extend to any other basic models.
BAS may request that the scope of this waiver be extended to include additional basic models that employ the same technology as those listed in this waiver. 10 CFR 430.27(g). BAS may also submit another petition for waiver from the test procedure for additional basic models that employ a different technology and meet the criteria for test procedure waivers. 10 CFR 430.27(a)(1).
DOE notes that it may modify the waiver at any time upon DOE's determination that the factual basis underlying the petition for waiver is incorrect, or upon a determination that the results from the alternate test procedure are unrepresentative of the basic models' true energy consumption characteristics. 10 CFR 430.27(k)(1). Likewise, BAS may request that DOE rescind or modify the waiver if the company discovers an error in the information provided to DOE as part of its petition, determines that the waiver is no longer needed, or for other appropriate reasons. 10 CFR 430.27(k)(2).
In accordance with 10 CFR 430.27(f)(2), DOE consulted with the Federal Trade Commission (“FTC”) staff concerning the BAS petition for waiver. The FTC staff did not have any objections to granting a waiver to BAS.
After careful consideration of all the material that was submitted by BAS and commenters in this matter, it is
(1) BAS must, as of the date of publication of this Order in the
(2) The alternate test procedure for the BAS basic models listed in paragraph (1) of this Order is the test procedure for ceiling fans prescribed by DOE at 10 CFR part 430, subpart B, appendix U, except that under section 3.3.2 of appendix U, the stability criteria for low speed is relaxed from 5 percent to 10 percent. The alternative test procedure shall apply as follows:
Measure the airflow (CFM) and power consumption (W) for HSSD ceiling fans until stable measurements are achieved, measuring at high speed only. Measure the airflow and power consumption for LSSD ceiling fans until stable measurements are achieved, measuring first at low speed and then at high speed. Airflow and power consumption measurements are considered stable for high speed if:
(1) The average air velocity for all axes for each sensor varies by less than 5% compared to the average air velocity measured for that same sensor in a successive set of air velocity measurements, and
(2) Average power consumption varies by less than 1% in a successive set of power consumption measurements.
Airflow and power consumption measurements are considered stable for low speed if:
(1) The average air velocity for all axes for each sensor varies by less than 10% compared to the average air velocity measured for that same sensor in a successive set of air velocity measurements, and
(2) Average power consumption varies by less than 1% in a successive set of power consumption measurements.
(3)
(4) This waiver shall remain in effect according to the provisions of 10 CFR 430.27.
(5) This waiver is issued on the condition that the statements, representations, and documentation provided by BAS are valid. If BAS makes any modifications to the configuration of these basic models, the waiver will no longer be valid and BAS will either be required to use the current Federal test method or submit a new application for a test procedure waiver. DOE may revoke or modify this waiver at any time if it determines the factual basis underlying the petition for waiver is incorrect, or the results from the alternate test procedure are unrepresentative of the basic models' true energy consumption characteristics. 10 CFR 430.27(k)(1). Likewise, BAS may request that DOE rescind or modify the waiver if BAS discovers an error in the information provided to DOE as part of its petition, determines that the waiver is no longer needed, or for other appropriate reasons. 10 CFR 430.27(k)(2).
(6) Granting of this waiver does not release BAS from the certification requirements set forth at 10 CFR part 429.
Signed in Washington, DC, on October 9, 2018.
Department of Energy.
Designation of Performance Review Board Chair.
This notice provides the Performance Review Board Chair designee for the Department of Energy. This listing supersedes all previously published lists of Performance Review Board Chair.
This appointment is effective as of September 30, 2018.
Department of Energy.
Designation of Performance Review Board Standing Register.
This notice provides the Performance Review Board Standing Register for the Department of Energy. This listing supersedes all previously published lists of PRB members.
This appointment is effective as of September 30, 2018.
U.S. Department of Energy.
Notice and request for comments.
The Department of Energy (DOE), pursuant to the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, intends to extend for three years, an information collection request with the Office of Management and Budget (OMB). This information collection request consists of forms that will certify to DOE that respondents were advised of the requirements for occupying or continuing to occupy a Human Reliability Program (HRP) position. The forms include: Human Reliability Program Certification (DOE F 470.3), Acknowledgement and Agreement to Participate in the Human Reliability Program (DOE F 470.4), Authorization and Consent to Release Human Reliability Program Records in Connection with HRP (DOE F 470.5), Refusal of Consent (DOE F 470.6), and Human Reliability Program (HRP) Alcohol Testing Form (DOE F 470.7). The HRP is a security and safety reliability program for individuals who apply for or occupy certain positions that are critical to the national security. It requires an initial and annual supervisory review, medical assessment, management evaluation, and a DOE personnel security review of all applicants or incumbents. It is also used to ensure that employees assigned to nuclear explosive duties do not have emotional, mental, or physical conditions that could result in an accidental or unauthorized detonation of nuclear explosives.
Comments regarding this proposed information collection must be received on or before December 17, 2018. If you anticipate difficulty in
Written comments may be sent to Regina Cano, U.S. Department of Energy, Office of Corporate Security Strategy (AU-1.2), 1000 Independence Ave. SW, Washington, DC 20585, telephone at (202) 586-7079, by fax at (202) 586-9779, or by email at
Requests for additional information or copies of the information collection instrument and instructions should be directed to Regina Cano, (202) 586-7079,
Comments are invited on: (a) Whether the extended collection of information is 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, including the validity of the methodology and assumptions used; (c) ways to enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected; and (d) ways to minimize the burden of the collection of information on respondents, including through the use of automated collection techniques or other forms of information technology.
This information collection request pertains to the Human Reliability Program (HRP). This information collection request contains: (1)
42 U.S.C. 2165; 42 U.S.C. 2201; 42 U.S.C. 5814-5815; 42 U.S.C. 7101
U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA), U.S. Department of Energy (DOE).
Notice.
EIA submitted an information collection request for extension as required by the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995. The information collection requests a three-year extension with no changes of Form NWPA-830G, “
Comments on this information collection must be received no later than November 15, 2018. If you anticipate any difficulties in submitting your comments by the deadline, contact the DOE Desk Officer at 202-395-4718.
Written comments should be sent to
Michael Scott, (202) 586-0253, email
This information collection request contains:
(1)
(2)
(3)
(4)
The Nuclear Waste Policy Act of 1982 (42 U.S.C. 10101
(5)
(6)
(7)
(8)
42 U.S.C. 10222 and 15 U.S.C. 772(b).
The following notice of meeting is published pursuant to section 3(a) of the government in the Sunshine Act(Pub. L. 94-409), 5 U.S.C. 552b:
Federal Energy Regulatory Commission.
October 18, 2018 10:00 a.m.
Room 2C, 888 First Street NE, Washington, DC 20426.
Open.
Agenda
*
Kimberly D. Bose, Secretary, Telephone (202) 502-8400.
For a recorded message listing items struck from or added to the meeting, call (202) 502-8627.
This is a list of matters to be considered by the Commission. It does not include a listing of all documents relevant to the items on the agenda. All public documents, however, may be viewed on line at the Commission's website at
A free webcast of this event is available through
Immediately following the conclusion of the Commission Meeting, a press
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
Notice.
Public notice is hereby given that the state of New Jersey has revised its approved Public Water System Supervision Program. New Jersey has adopted drinking water regulations for the Revised Total Coliform Rule. The EPA has determined that New Jersey's Revised Total Coliform Rule meets all minimum federal requirements, and that it is no less stringent than the corresponding federal regulation. Therefore, the EPA has decided to approve the State program revisions. All interested parties may request a public hearing or submit comments.
Comments or request for public hearing must be received on or before November 15, 2018.
Comments or a request for a public hearing must be submitted to the Regional Administrator, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region 2, 290 Broadway, FL 24, New York, NY 10007.
All documents relating to this determination are available for inspection between the hours of 8:00 a.m. and 3:00 p.m., Monday through Friday, at the following offices: U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region 2, Clean Water Division, 290 Broadway, FL 24, New York, NY 10007-1823; and New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection, Division of Water Supply & Geoscience, 401 East State St., Trenton, NJ 08608.
Daniel D'Agostino, Clean Water Division, Drinking Water and Groundwater Protection Section (24W-058), Environmental Protection Agency, Region 2, 290 Broadway, FL 24, New York, NY 10007-1823; telephone number: 212-637-3805; email address:
All interested parties are invited to submit written comments on this determination and may request a hearing. All comments will be considered, and if necessary EPA will issue a response. Frivolous or insubstantial requests for a hearing will be denied by the Regional Administrator. If a substantial request for a public hearing is made by November 15, 2018, a public hearing will be held. A request for public hearing shall include the following: (1) The name, address, and telephone number of the individual, organization, or other entity requesting a hearing; (2) a brief statement of the requesting person's interest in the Regional Administrator's determination and of information that the requesting person intends to submit at such hearing; and (3) the signature of the individual making the request; or, if the request is made on behalf of an organization or other entity, the signature of a responsible official of the organization or other entity.
Section 1413 of the Safe Drinking Water Act, as amended (1996), and 40 CFR part 142 of the National Primary Drinking Water Regulations.
83 FR 50093.
Tuesday, October 9, 2018 AT 10:00 a.m.
The meeting was continued on Thursday, October 11, 2018.
Judith Ingram, Press Officer. Telephone: (202) 694-1220.
Office of Planning, Research, and Evaluation; ACF; HHS.
Request for public comment.
The Administration for Children and Families (ACF) within the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) seeks to continue data collection for the Annual Survey of Refugees with minor updates to improve survey administration procedures. The Annual Survey of Refugees is a yearly sample survey of refugees entering the U.S. in the previous five fiscal years. No changes to the survey instrument or estimated response burden are proposed.
Data from the Annual Survey of Refugees are used to meet the Office of Refugee Resettlement's Congressional reporting requirements, as set forth in the Refugee Act of 1980 (Section 413(a) of the Immigration and Nationality Act). The ACF Office of Refugee Resettlement makes aggregated survey findings available to the general public and uses findings for the purposes of program planning, policy-making, and budgeting.
Copies of the proposed collection of information can be obtained and comments may be forwarded by writing to the Administration for Children and Families, Office of Planning, Research, and Evaluation, 330 C Street SW, Washington, DC 20201, Attn: OPRE Reports Clearance Officer. Email address:
The Department specifically requests comments on (a) whether the proposed collection of information is 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) 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. Consideration will be given to comments and suggestions submitted within 60 days of this publication.
Sec. 413. [8 U.S.C. 1523].
ACF first sought comments on this revised collection of information on May 11, 2018 (83 FR 22490) and again on August 24, 2018 (83 FR 42895). The more recent request for comment erroneously described the request as one for emergency processing and immediate approval. This notice corrects that error to clarify that ACF is seeking public comments on the proposed information collection, including aspects previously approved under emergency processing, prior to its renewal.
Food and Drug Administration, HHS.
Notice of availability.
The Food and Drug Administration (FDA or Agency) is announcing the availability of a final guidance for industry entitled “Developing Targeted Therapies in Low-Frequency Molecular Subsets of a Disease.” This final guidance incorporates public comments to the draft guidance published in the
The pharmacological effect of a targeted therapy is often related to a particular molecular alteration, and many diseases are caused by a range of different molecular alterations (some of which may be rare). Therefore, a targeted therapy may have differential effects among patients with the same disease who have different molecular alterations. The purpose of this guidance is to describe general approaches to evaluating the benefits and risks of targeted therapeutics within a clinically defined disease where some molecular alterations may occur at low frequencies.
The announcement of the guidance is published in the
You may submit either electronic or written comments on Agency guidances at any time 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 Dockets Management Staff, 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
You may submit comments on any guidance at any time (see 21 CFR 10.115(g)(5)).
Submit written requests for single copies of this guidance to the Division of Drug Information, Center for Drug Evaluation and Research, Food and Drug Administration, 10001 New Hampshire Ave., Hillandale Building, 4th Floor, Silver Spring, MD 20993-0002; or the Office of Communication, Outreach, and Development, Center for Biologics Evaluation and Research (CBER), Food and Drug Administration, 10903 New Hampshire Ave., Bldg. 71, Rm. 3128, Silver Spring, MD 20993-0002. Send one self-addressed adhesive label to assist that office in processing your requests. The guidance may also be obtained by mail by calling CBER at 1-800-835-4709 or 240-402-8010. See the
Michael Pacanowski, Center for Drug Evaluation and Research, Food and Drug Administration, 10903 New Hampshire Ave., Bldg. 71, Rm. 7301, Silver Spring, MD 20993-0002, 301-796-3919; or Stephen Ripley, Center for Biologics Evaluation and Research, Food and Drug Administration, 10903 New Hampshire Ave., Bldg. 71, Rm. 7301, Silver Spring, MD 20993-0002, 240-402-7911.
FDA is announcing the availability of a guidance for industry entitled “Developing Targeted Therapies in
In recent years, advances in our understanding of the molecular pathology of many diseases have led to the development of targeted therapies. Although variability in drug response has long been recognized in drug development, targeted therapies present new challenges in addressing the heterogeneity in drug response because the pharmacological effect of a targeted therapy is often related to a particular molecular alteration (
This guidance addresses the following important topics in evaluating the benefits and risks of targeted therapeutics within a disease where some molecular alterations may occur at low frequencies:
This final guidance incorporates public comments to the draft guidance published in December of 2017 and includes minimal revisions for clarity.
This guidance is being issued consistent with FDA's good guidance practices regulation (21 CFR 10.115). The guidance represents the current thinking of FDA on “Developing Targeted Therapies in Low-Frequency Molecular Subsets of a Disease.” It does not establish any rights for any person and is not binding on FDA or the public. You can use an alternative approach if it satisfies the requirements of the applicable statutes and regulations. This guidance is not subject to Executive Order 12866.
Persons with access to the internet may obtain the guidance at either
Food and Drug Administration, HHS.
Notice of availability.
The Food and Drug Administration (FDA or Agency) is announcing the availability of a draft guidance for industry entitled “Rare Diseases: Early Drug Development and the Role of Pre-Investigational New Drug Application Meetings.” The purpose of this draft guidance is to assist sponsors of drug and biological products for the treatment of rare diseases in planning and conducting more efficient and productive pre-investigational new drug application (pre-IND) meetings. Drug development for rare diseases has many challenges related to the nature of these diseases. This draft guidance is intended to advance and facilitate the development of drugs and biological products for the treatment of rare diseases.
Submit either electronic or written comments on the draft guidance by December 17, 2018 to ensure that the Agency considers your comment on this draft guidance before it begins work on the final version of the guidance.
You may submit comments on any guidance at any time 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 Dockets Management Staff, 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
You may submit comments on any guidance at any time (see 21 CFR 10.115(g)(5)).
Submit written requests for single copies of the draft guidance to the Division of Drug Information, Center for Drug Evaluation and Research, Food and Drug Administration, 10001 New Hampshire Ave., Hillandale Building, 4th Floor, Silver Spring, MD 20993-0002, or Office of Communication, Outreach, and Development, Center for Biologics Evaluation and Research, Food and Drug Administration, 10903 New Hampshire Ave., Bldg. 71, Rm. 3128, Silver Spring, MD 20993-0002. Send one self-addressed adhesive label to assist that office in processing your requests. See the
Lucas Kempf, Center for Drug Evaluation and Research, Food and Drug Administration, 10903 New Hampshire Ave., Bldg. 22, Rm. 6460, Silver Spring, MD 20993-0002, 301-796-1140; or Stephen Ripley, Center for Biologics Evaluation and Research, Food and Drug Administration, 10903 New Hampshire Ave., Bldg. 71, Rm. 7301, Silver Spring, MD 20993-0002, 240-402-7911.
FDA is announcing the availability of a draft guidance for industry entitled “Rare Diseases: Early Drug Development and the Role of Pre-Investigational New Drug Application Meetings.” This guidance is intended to assist sponsors of drug and biological products for the treatment of rare diseases in planning and conducting more efficient and productive pre-IND meetings through a discussion of selected issues commonly encountered in the early phases of rare disease drug development. Although these issues are encountered in other drug development programs, the issues are frequently more difficult to address in the context of a rare disease than in the context of a common disease, of which there is often greater and more widespread medical experience. A rare disease is defined in section 526(a)(2) of the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (21 U.S.C. 360bb(a)(2)) as a disease or condition that affects fewer than 200,000 people in the United States or affects more than 200,000 in the United States and for which there is no reasonable expectation that the cost of developing and making available in the United States a drug for such disease or condition will be recovered from sales in the United States of such drug. Most rare diseases affect far fewer than 200,000 people.
Most rare disorders are serious conditions with no approved treatments, and rare disease patients often have considerable unmet medical needs. Collectively, rare diseases are highly diverse. FDA is committed to helping sponsors of drugs for rare diseases have successful pre-IND meetings that address the particular challenges posed by each drug.
This guidance addresses the following important topics related to pre-IND meetings:
• Regulatory considerations across various FDA disciplines including chemistry, manufacturing, and controls; nonclinical; clinical pharmacology; and clinical.
• Additional considerations, including expedited programs for serious conditions, companion diagnostics, orphan drug incentives, pediatric studies, and data standards.
Early consideration of these issues allows sponsors to efficiently and adequately plan for a productive pre-IND meeting with FDA.
This draft guidance is being issued consistent with FDA's good guidance practices regulation (21 CFR 10.115). The draft guidance, when finalized, will represent the current thinking of FDA on “Rare Diseases: Early Drug Development and the Role of Pre-Investigational New Drug Application Meetings.” It does not establish any rights for any person and is not binding on FDA or the public. You can use an alternative approach if it satisfies the requirements of the applicable statutes and regulations. This guidance is not subject to Executive Order 12866.
This guidance refers to previously approved collections of information that are subject to review by the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501-3520). The collections of information in 21 CFR parts 312 and 314 have been approved under OMB control numbers 0910-0014 and 0910-0001, respectively. The collection of information resulting from the draft guidance for industry “Formal Meetings Between the FDA and Sponsors or Applicants of PDUFA Products” (available at
Persons with access to the internet may obtain the draft guidance at either
Food and Drug Administration, HHS.
Notice of availability.
The Food and Drug Administration (FDA or Agency) is announcing the availability of a draft guidance for industry entitled “Hematologic Malignancies: Regulatory Considerations for Use of Minimal Residual Disease in Development of Drug and Biological Products for Treatment.” This draft guidance is intended to assist sponsors planning to use minimal residual disease (MRD) as a biomarker in clinical trials conducted under an investigational new drug application (IND) or to support marketing approval of drugs and biological products for the treatment of specific hematologic malignancies.
Submit either electronic or written comments on the draft guidance by December 17, 2018 to ensure that the Agency considers your comment on this draft guidance before it begins work on the final version of the guidance.
You may submit comments on any guidance at any time 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 Dockets Management Staff, 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
You may submit comments on any guidance at any time (see 21 CFR 10.115(g)(5)).
Submit written requests for single copies of the draft guidance to the Division of Drug Information, Center for Drug Evaluation and Research, Food and Drug Administration, 10001 New Hampshire Ave., Hillandale Building, 4th Floor, Silver Spring, MD 20993-0002, or Office of Communication, Outreach, and Development, Center for Biologics Evaluation and Research, Food and Drug Administration, 10903 New Hampshire Ave., Bldg. 71, Rm. 3128, Silver Spring, MD 20993-0002. Send one self-addressed adhesive label to assist that office in processing your requests. See the
Nicole Gormley, Center for Drug Evaluation and Research, Food and Drug Administration, 10903 New Hampshire Ave., Bldg. 22, Rm. 2310, Silver Spring, MD 20993-0002, 240-402-0210; or Stephen Ripley, Center for Biologics Evaluation and Research, Food and Drug Administration, 10903 New Hampshire Ave., Bldg. 71, Rm. 7301, Silver Spring, MD 20993-0002, 240-402-7911.
FDA is announcing the availability of a draft guidance for industry entitled “Hematologic Malignancies: Regulatory Considerations for Use of Minimal Residual Disease in Development of Drug and Biological Products for Treatment.” This draft guidance is intended to assist sponsors planning to use MRD as a biomarker in clinical trials conducted under an IND or to support marketing approval of drugs and biological products for the treatment of specific hematologic malignancies.
This draft guidance is being issued consistent with FDA's good guidance practices regulation (21 CFR 10.115). The draft guidance, when finalized, will represent the current thinking of FDA
This draft guidance refers to previously approved collections of information found in FDA regulations. These collections of information are subject to review by the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501-3520). The collection of information in 21 CFR part 312 for submitting INDs has been approved under OMB control number 0910-0014. The collection of information in 21 CFR part 314 for the submission of new drug applications has been approved under OMB control number 0910-0001. The collection of information in the draft guidance for industry entitled “Formal Meetings Between the FDA and Sponsors or Applicants of PDUFA Products” (available at
The submission of biologics license applications has been approved under OMB control number 0910-0338. The submission of investigational device exemptions has been approved under OMB control number 0910-0078.
Persons with access to the internet may obtain the draft guidance at either
Title 5, U.S.C. Section 4314(c)(4) of the Civil Service Reform Act of 1978, Public Law 95-454, requires that the appointment of Performance Review Board Members be published in the
Periodically, the Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration (SAMHSA) will publish a summary of information collection requests under OMB review, in compliance with the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. Chapter 35). To request a copy of these documents, call the SAMHSA Reports Clearance Officer on (240) 276-1243.
The Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration (SAMHSA) is authorized under Section 1003 of the 21st Century Cures Act, as amended, to support a grant program, for up to 2 years, that addresses the supplemental activities pertaining to opioids currently undertaken by the state agency or territory and will support a comprehensive response to the opioid epidemic.
SAMHSA received approval from OMB in September 2017 to collect performance data from Opioid State Targeted Response (STR) grantees (OMB No. 0930-0378). However, SAMHSA omitted a data collection table (Table E) in the original OMB request. This data table is currently in use by Opioid STR grantees, who are reporting Table E data to SAMHSA on a semi-annual basis. In order to correct this violation, SAMHSA is now seeking OMB approval for a new data collection package that includes not only the instruments originally approved by OMB in September 2017, but also this additional data collection table. It is important for SAMHSA to continue to collect this information in order to assess the impact of funding from the Opioid STR program on increasing access to prevention strategies, as well as treatment and recovery services that address the opioid crisis. Additionally, this data will provide SAMHSA with critical information to effectively manage the Opioid STR program, to help states and territories adopt, or scale-up, effective practices and policies, and to help prepare to implement the new State Opioid Response grant program.
The primary purpose of the Opioid STR program is to address the opioid crisis by increasing access to treatment, reducing unmet treatment need, and reducing opioid overdose related deaths through the provision of prevention, treatment and recovery activities for opioid use disorder (OUD) (including prescription opioids as well as illicit drugs such as heroin).
There are 57 (states and jurisdictions) award recipients in this program. All funded states and jurisdictions are asked to report on their implementation and performance through an online data collection system. Award recipients report performance on the following measures specific to this program: Number of people who receive OUD treatment, number of people who receive OUD recovery services, number of providers implementing medication-assisted treatment, and the number of OUD prevention and treatment providers trained, to include nurse practitioners, physician assistants, as well as physicians, nurses, counselors, social workers, case managers, etc. This information is collected at the mid-point and conclusion of each grant award year. Additionally, each award recipient
Written comments and recommendations concerning the proposed information collection should be sent by November 15, 2018 to the SAMHSA Desk Officer at the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, Office of Management and Budget (OMB). To ensure timely receipt of comments, and to avoid potential delays in OMB's receipt and processing of mail sent through the U.S. Postal Service, commenters are encouraged to submit their comments to OMB via email to:
U.S. Customs and Border Protection, Department of Homeland Security.
Notice of accreditation and approval of Intertek USA Inc. (Yorktown, VA), as a commercial gauger and laboratory.
Notice is hereby given, pursuant to CBP regulations, that Intertek USA Inc. (Yorktown, VA), has been approved to gauge petroleum and certain petroleum products and accredited to test petroleum and certain petroleum products for customs purposes for the next three years as of August 23, 2017.
Intertek USA Inc. (Yorktown, VA) was approved and accredited as a commercial gauger and laboratory as of August 23, 2017. The next triennial inspection date will be scheduled for August 2020.
Melanie Glass, Laboratories and Scientific Services, 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 Intertek USA, Inc., 109-B Freedom Blvd., Yorktown, VA 23692, has been approved to gauge petroleum and certain petroleum products 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.
Intertek USA Inc. (Yorktown, VA) is approved for the following gauging procedures for petroleum and certain petroleum products from the American Petroleum Institute (API):
Intertek USA Inc. (Yorktown, VA) 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
U.S. Customs and Border Protection, Department of Homeland Security.
Notice of approval of The Strawn Group, Houston, TX as a commercial gauger.
Notice is hereby given, pursuant to CBP regulations, that The Strawn Group (Houston, TX) has been approved to gauge petroleum and certain petroleum products for customs purposes for the next three years as of October 3, 2017.
The Strawn Group (Houston, TX) was approved as commercial gauger as of October 3, 2017. The next triennial inspection date will be scheduled for October 2020.
Melanie A. Glass, Laboratories and Scientific Services, 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 151.13, that The Strawn Group, 3855 Villa Ridge Road, Houston, TX 77068, has been approved to gauge petroleum and certain petroleum products for customs purposes, in accordance with the provisions of 19 CFR 151.13. The Strawn Group is approved for the following gauging procedures for petroleum and certain petroleum products per the American Petroleum Institute (API) Measurement Standards:
Anyone wishing to employ this entity to conduct gauger services should request and receive written assurances from the entity that it is approved by the U.S. Customs and Border Protection to conduct the specific gauger service requested. Alternatively, inquiries regarding the specific gauger service this entity is 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
U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services, Department of Homeland Security.
60-Day notice.
The Department of Homeland Security (DHS), U.S. Citizenship and Immigration (USCIS) invites the general public and other Federal agencies to comment upon this proposed revision of a currently approved collection of information or new collection of information. In accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA) of 1995, the information collection notice is published in the
Comments are encouraged and will be accepted for 60 days until December 17, 2018.
All submissions received must include the OMB Control Number 1615-0033 in the body of the letter, the agency name and Docket ID USCIS-2006-0074. To avoid duplicate submissions, please use only
(1)
(2)
USCIS, Office of Policy and Strategy, Regulatory Coordination Division, Samantha Deshommes, Chief, 20 Massachusetts Avenue NW, Washington, DC 20529-2140, telephone number 202-272-8377 (This is not a toll-free number. Comments are not accepted via telephone message). Please note contact information provided here is solely for questions regarding this notice. It is not for individual case status inquiries. Applicants seeking information about the status of their individual cases can check Case Status Online, available at the USCIS website at
You may access the information collection instrument with instructions, or additional information by visiting the Federal eRulemaking Portal site at:
Written comments and suggestions from the public and affected agencies should address one or more of the following four points:
(1) Evaluate whether the proposed collection of information is necessary for the proper performance of the functions of the agency, including whether the information will have practical utility;
(2) Evaluate the accuracy of the agency's estimate of the burden of the proposed collection of information, including the validity of the methodology and assumptions used;
(3) Enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected; and
(4) 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,
(1)
(2)
(3)
(4)
(5)
(6)
(7)
U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services, Department of Homeland Security.
60-day notice.
The Department of Homeland Security (DHS), U.S. Citizenship and Immigration (USCIS) invites the general public and other Federal agencies to comment upon this proposed extension of a currently approved collection of information. In accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA) of 1995, the information collection notice is published in the
Comments are encouraged and will be accepted for 60 days until December 17, 2018.
All submissions received must include the OMB Control Number 1615-0136 in the body of the letter, the agency name and Docket ID USCIS-2016-0005. To avoid duplicate submissions, please use only
(1)
(2)
USCIS, Office of Policy and Strategy, Regulatory Coordination Division, Samantha Deshommes, Chief, 20 Massachusetts Avenue NW, Washington, DC 20529-2140, telephone number 202-272-8377 (This is not a toll-free number. Comments are not accepted via telephone message). Please note contact information provided here is solely for questions regarding this notice. It is not for individual case status inquiries. Applicants seeking information about the status of their individual cases can check Case Status Online, available at the USCIS website at
You may access the information collection instrument with instructions, or additional information by visiting the Federal eRulemaking Portal site at:
Written comments and suggestions from the public and affected agencies should address one or more of the following four points:
(1) Evaluate whether the proposed collection of information is necessary for the proper performance of the functions of the agency, including whether the information will have practical utility;
(2) Evaluate the accuracy of the agency's estimate of the burden of the proposed collection of information, including the validity of the methodology and assumptions used;
(3) Enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected; and
(4) 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,
(1)
(2)
(3)
(4)
(5)
(6)
(7)
Office of Acquisition and Property Management, Office of the Secretary, Interior.
Notice of information collection; request for comment.
In accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, we, the Office of Acquisition and Property Management are proposing to renew an information collection.
Interested persons are invited to submit comments on or before November 15, 2018.
Send written comments on this information collection request (ICR) by mail to the Office of Management and Budget's Desk Officer for the Department of the Interior by email at
To request additional information about this ICR, contact Mary Heying by email
In accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, we provide the general public and other Federal agencies with an opportunity to comment on new, proposed, revised, and continuing collections of information. This helps us assess the impact of our information collection requirements and minimize the public's reporting burden. It also helps the public understand our information collection requirements and provide the requested data in the desired format. A
We are again soliciting comments on the proposed ICR that is described below. We are especially interested in public comment addressing the following issues: (1) Is the collection necessary to the proper functions of the Office of Acquisition and Property Management; (2) will this information be processed and used in a timely manner; (3) is the estimate of burden accurate; (4) how might the Office of Acquisition and Property Management enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected; and (5) how might the Office of Acquisition and Property Management minimize the burden of this collection on the respondents, including through the use of information technology.
Comments that you submit in response to this notice are a matter of public record. We will include or summarize each comment in our request to OMB to approve this ICR. 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 review, we cannot guarantee that we will be able to do so.
The information required is obtained through application made by the displaced person or business to the funding agency for determination as to the specific amount of monies due under the law. The forms, through which application is made, require specific information since the Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Act allows for various amounts based upon each actual circumstance. Failure to make application to the agency would eliminate any basis for payment of claims.
An agency may not conduct or sponsor and a person is not required to respond to a collection of information unless it displays a currently valid OMB control number.
The authority for this action is the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501
Bureau of Land Management, Interior.
Notice of public meeting.
In accordance with the Federal Land Policy and Management Act of 1976 and the Federal Advisory Committee Act of 1972, the U.S. Department of the Interior, the Bureau of Land Management (BLM) Southeast Oregon Resource Advisory Council (RAC) will meet as indicated below.
The Southeast Oregon RAC will meet via teleconference Friday, November 16, 2018, from 8:30 a.m. to 3:30 p.m. Pacific Standard Time.
The Southeast Oregon RAC meeting will be held via teleconference. The telephone conference line number for the meeting is 1-866-524-6456, Participant Code: 608605.
Larisa Bogardus; Public Affairs Officer; 1301 S G Street, Lakeview, Oregon 97630; 541-947-6811;
The meeting will include discussion regarding the management of land as part of the Lakeview District's Resource Management Plan Amendment process. A final agenda will be posted online at
The 15-member Southeast Oregon RAC was chartered and its members appointed by the Secretary of the Interior. The members provide diverse perspectives in commodity, conservation, and general interests. They provide advice to the BLM and Forest Service resource managers regarding management plans and proposed resource actions on public land in southeast Oregon. All meetings are open to the public in their entirety
Before including your address, phone number, email address, or other personal identifying information in your comments, please 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 review, we cannot guarantee that we will be able to do so.
43 CFR 1784.4-2
United States International Trade Commission.
Institution of investigation and scheduling of public hearing.
Following receipt of a request from the U.S. Trade Representative (USTR) on August 31, 2018, the U.S. International Trade Commission (Commission) has instituted investigation No. TPA-105-003 for the purpose of preparing the report required by section 105(c) of the Bipartisan Congressional Trade Priorities and Accountability Act of 2015 (19 U.S.C. 4204(c)). The report will assess the likely impact of the United States-Mexico-Canada Agreement (USMCA) on the U.S. economy as a whole, on selected industry sectors, and on U.S. consumer interests. The Commission will submit its report to the President and Congress.
All Commission offices, including the Commission's hearing rooms, are located in the United States International Trade Commission Building, 500 E Street SW, Washington, DC. All written submissions should be addressed to the Secretary, United States International Trade Commission, 500 E Street SW, Washington, DC 20436. The public record for this investigation may be viewed on the Commission's electronic docket (EDIS) at
Co-Project Leader Serge Shikher (202-205-2393 or
On August 31, 2018, the Commission received a letter from the United States Trade Representative (USTR) stating that the President that day had notified Congress of his intent to enter into a trade agreement “with Mexico—and with Canada if it is willing.” On October 1, 2018, the Office of the USTR published the text of the United States-Mexico-Canada Agreement (USMCA) on its website at
The statute requires that the Commission submit its assessment to the President and Congress no later than 105 days after the President enters into the Agreement.
A public hearing in connection with this investigation will be held at the U.S. International Trade Commission Building, 500 E Street SW, Washington, DC, beginning at 9:30 a.m. on November 15, 2018, and continuing on November 16, 2018, if necessary. Requests to appear at the public hearing should be filed with the Secretary, no later than 5:15 p.m., October 29, 2018; all pre-hearing briefs and statements should be filed no later than 5:15 p.m., October 30, 2018; and all post-hearing briefs responding to matters raised at the hearing should be filed no later than 5:15 p.m., November 23, 2018. All requests to appear, pre-hearing briefs and statements, and post-hearing briefs must be filed in accordance with the procedural requirements in the “Submissions” section below. In the event that, as of the close of business on November 8, 2018, no witnesses are scheduled to appear at the hearing, the hearing will be canceled.
In lieu of or in addition to participating in the hearing, the Commission invites interested parties to submit written statements concerning this investigation. All written submissions should be addressed to the Secretary, and should be received no later than 5:15 p.m., December 20, 2018. All written submissions must conform with the provisions of section 201.8 of the Commission's
Any submissions that contain CBI must also conform to the requirements of section 201.6 of the
All information, including CBI, submitted in this investigation may be disclosed to and used (i) by the Commission, its employees and Offices, and contract personnel (a) for developing or maintaining the records of this or a related proceeding, or (b) in internal investigations, audits, reviews, and evaluations relating to the programs, personnel, and operations of the Commission, including under 5 U.S.C. Appendix 3; or (ii) by U.S. government employees and contract personnel for cybersecurity purposes. The Commission will not otherwise disclose any CBI in a manner that would reveal the operations of the firm supplying the information. The report that the Commission sends to the President and Congress will not include any CBI.
The Commission intends to publish summaries of the written submissions filed by interested persons. Persons wishing to have a summary of their submission included in the report should include a summary with their written submission and should mark the summary as having been provided for that purpose. The summary should be clearly marked as “summary” at the top of the page. It may not exceed 500 words, should be in MSWord format or a format that can be easily converted to MSWord, and should not include any CBI. The summary will be published as provided if it meets these requirements and is germane to the subject matter of the investigation. The Commission will identify the name of the organization furnishing the summary and will include a link to the Commission's Electronic Document Information System (EDIS) where the full written submission can be found.
By order of the Commission.
Notice is hereby given that, on September 26, 2018, pursuant to Section 6(a) of the National Cooperative Research and Production Act of 1993, 15 U.S.C. 4301
No other changes have been made in either the membership or planned activity of the group research project. Membership in this group research project remains open, and CableLabs intends to file additional written notifications disclosing all changes in membership.
On August 8, 1988, CableLabs filed its original notification pursuant to Section 6(a) of the Act. The Department of Justice published a notice in the
The last notification was filed with the Department on October 5, 2017. A notice was published in the
Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI), DOJ.
Meeting notice.
The purpose of this notice is to announce the meeting of the Federal Bureau of Investigation's Criminal Justice Information Services (CJIS) Advisory Policy Board (APB). The CJIS APB is a federal advisory committee established pursuant to the Federal Advisory Committee Act (FACA). This meeting announcement is being published as required by Section 10 of the FACA.
The APB will meet in open session from 9 a.m. until 5 p.m., on December 5-6, 2018.
The meeting will take place at the Hyatt Regency New Orleans, 601 Loyola Avenue, New Orleans, LA 70113, telephone 504-561-1234.
Inquiries may be addressed to Ms. Melissa Abel; Management and Program Assistant; CJIS Training and Advisory Process Unit, Resources Management Section; FBI CJIS Division, Module C2, 1000 Custer Hollow Road, Clarksburg, West Virginia 26306-0149; telephone (304) 625-5670, facsimile (304) 625-5090.
The FBI CJIS APB is responsible for reviewing policy issues and appropriate technical and operational issues related to the programs administered by the FBI's CJIS Division, and thereafter, making appropriate recommendations to the FBI Director. The programs administered by the CJIS Division are the Next Generation Identification, Interstate Identification Index, Law Enforcement Enterprise Portal, National Crime Information Center, National Instant Criminal Background Check System, National Incident-Based Reporting System, National Data Exchange, and Uniform Crime Reporting.
This meeting is open to the public. All attendees will be required to check-in at the meeting registration desk.
Anyone requiring special accommodations should notify Mr. Megna at least seven (7) days in advance of the meeting.
Notice of availability; request for comments.
The Department of Labor (DOL) is submitting the information collection request (ICR) titled, “Youth CareerConnect Grant Program Participant Tracking System,” to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for review and approval for use in accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (PRA). Public comments on the ICR are invited.
The OMB will consider all written comments that agency receives on or before November 15, 2018.
A copy of this ICR with applicable supporting documentation; including a description of the likely respondents, proposed frequency of response, and estimated total burden may be obtained free of charge from the RegInfo.gov website at
Submit comments about this request by mail to the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, Attn: OMB Desk Officer for DOL-OASAM, Office of Management and Budget, Room 10235, 725 17th Street NW, Washington, DC 20503; by Fax: 202-395-5806 (this is not a toll-free number); or by email:
Michel Smyth by telephone at 202-693-4129, TTY 202-693-8064, (these are not toll-free numbers) or by email at
This ICR seeks PRA authority for the Youth CareerConnect (YCC) Grant Program Participant Tracking System information collection. Specifically, YCC grantees submit participant-level data and quarterly aggregate reports for individuals who receive services through YCC programs and their partnerships with entities administering the workforce investment system as established under the Workforce Innovation and Opportunity Act. The reports include aggregate data on demographic characteristics, types of services received, placements, program outcomes, and follow-up status. Specifically, reports summarize data on participants who received core YCC program services, (
This information collection is subject to the PRA. A Federal agency generally cannot conduct or sponsor a collection of information, and the public is generally not required to respond to an information collection, unless it is approved by the OMB under the PRA and displays a currently valid OMB Control Number. In addition, notwithstanding any other provisions of law, no person shall generally be subject to penalty for failing to comply with a collection of information that does not display a valid Control Number.
Interested parties are encouraged to send comments to the OMB, Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs at the address shown in the
• Evaluate whether the proposed collection of information is necessary for the proper performance of the functions of the agency, including whether the information will have practical utility;
• Evaluate the accuracy of the agency's estimate of the burden of the proposed collection of information, including the validity of the methodology and assumptions used;
• Enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected; and
• 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,
44 U.S.C. 3507(a)(1)(D).
Office of National Drug Control Policy (ONDCP).
Notice of HIDTA Designations.
The Director of the Office of National Drug Control Policy designated 10 additional areas as High Intensity Drug Trafficking Areas (HIDTA) pursuant to 21 U.S.C. 1706. The new areas are (1) Montgomery and Powell Counties in Kentucky as part of the Appalachia HIDTA; (2) Charleston County in South Carolina and the Eastern Band of Cherokee Indian Reservation as part of the Atlanta/Carolinas HIDTA; (3) Atlantic County in New Jersey as part of the Liberty Mid-Atlantic HIDTA; (4) Allegheny, Beaver, and Washington Counties in Pennsylvania and Butler County in Ohio as part of the Ohio HIDTA; and (5) Mineral County in West Virginia as part of the Washington/Baltimore HIDTA.
Questions regarding this notice should be directed to Michael K. Gottlieb, National HIDTA Program Director, Office of National Drug Control Policy, Executive Office of the President, Washington, DC 20503; (202) 395-4868.
National Endowment for the Humanities.
Notice of availability and request for comment.
The National Endowment for the Humanities (“NEH”) proposes to promulgate procedures implementing the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (“NEPA”), Executive Order (“E.O.”) 11514 (as amended), and Council on Environmental Quality (“CEQ”) NEPA implementing regulations. Pursuant to CEQ regulations, NEH is soliciting comments on its proposed procedures.
NEH is providing a 30-day review period. You must submit comments by no later than November 15, 2018.
You may send comments by any of the following methods:
•
•
•
Adam M. Kress, (202) 606-8322;
NEH is an independent agency within the executive branch of the United States government, established by the National Foundation on the Arts and the Humanities Act of 1965. NEH extends financial assistance to individuals and organizations to support research, education, preservation, and public programs in the humanities. It also has statutory authority to extend financial assistance to cultural organizations to enable infrastructure development and capacity building, including through the design, purchase, construction, restoration, or renovation of facilities needed for humanities activities and historic landscapes.
NEPA and implementing regulations promulgated by CEQ (40 CFR parts 1500-1508) established a broad national policy to use all practicable means and measures, including financial and technical assistance, in a manner calculated to foster and promote the general welfare, as well as to create and maintain conditions under which man and nature can exist in productive harmony and fulfill the social, economic, and other requirements of present and future generations of Americans. The CEQ regulations implementing the procedural provisions of NEPA are designed to ensure that this national policy, environmental considerations, and associated public concerns are given careful attention and appropriate weight in all decisions of the federal government. Sections 102(2) of NEPA and 40 CFR 1505.1 and 1507.3 require federal agencies to develop and, as needed, revise implementing procedures consistent with the CEQ regulations. NEH is issuing the following NEPA implementing procedures that comply with NEPA and supplement the CEQ regulations.
In accordance with CEQ regulations (40 CFR 1507.3), NEH consulted with CEQ prior to publication of the proposed procedures set forth below. These proposed procedures include proposed categorical exclusions specific to NEH projects and actions that NEH determined will not normally have a potentially significant effect, individually or cumulatively, on the human environment.
Executive Orders 13563 and 12866 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, distribute impacts, and equity). Executive Order 13563 emphasizes the importance of quantifying both costs and benefits, of reducing costs, of harmonizing rules, and of promoting flexibility. These procedures have not been designated a “significant regulatory action” because they do not: (1) Have an annual effect on the economy of $100 million or more or adversely affect in a material way the economy; a section of the economy; productivity; competition; jobs; the environment; public health or safety; or State, local, or tribal governments or communities; (2) create a serious inconsistency or otherwise interfere with an action taken or planned by another Agency; (3) materially alter the budgetary impact of entitlements,
These procedures implement the provisions of NEPA, 42 U.S.C. 4321
These procedures apply NEPA to NEH programs and activities, including programs and activities carried out by state and local governments, federally-recognized tribal governments and non-governmental organizations, with the use of NEH financial assistance.
It is the policy of NEH to:
(a) Start the NEPA process at the earliest possible time as an effective decision-making tool while evaluating a proposed action;
(b) Comply with the procedures and policies of NEPA and other related environmental laws, regulations, and orders applicable to NEH actions;
(c) Provide guidance to applicants responsible for ensuring that proposals comply with all appropriate NEH requirements;
(d) Integrate NEPA requirements and other planning and environmental review procedures required by law or NEH practice so that all such procedures run concurrently rather than consecutively;
(e) Encourage and facilitate public involvement in NEH actions that affect the quality of the human environment;
(f) Use the NEPA process to identify and assess reasonable alternatives to proposed NEH actions to avoid or minimize adverse effects upon the quality of the human environment; and
(g) Use all practicable means consistent with NEPA and other essential considerations of national policy to restore or enhance the quality of the human environment and avoid, minimize, or otherwise mitigate any possible adverse effects of NEH actions upon the quality of the human environment.
(a) For the purposes of this section, the definitions in the CEQ regulations, 40 CFR parts 1500 through 1508, are adopted and supplemented as set out in paragraphs (a)(i) through (vi) of this section. In the event of a conflict the CEQ regulations apply.
(i)
(ii)
(iii)
(iv)
(v)
(vi)
(b) The following abbreviations are used throughout these procedures:
(i) CATEX—Categorical exclusions;
(ii) CEQ—Council on Environmental Quality;
(iii) EA—Environmental assessment;
(iv) EIS—Environmental impact statement;
(v) FONSI—Finding of no significant impact;
(vi) NEPA—National Environmental Policy Act of 1969, as amended;
(vii) NOI—Notice of intent; and
(viii) ROD—Record of decision.
NEH occasionally partners with federal, state and local agencies, and federally-recognized tribal governments, and may depend on these governmental agencies for project management. Under such circumstances, NEH may rely on the expertise and processes already in use by partnering agencies to help prepare NEH NEPA analyses and documents.
(a) With federal partners, NEH will work as either a joint lead agency (40 CFR 1501.5 and 1508.16) or cooperating agency (40 CFR 1501.6 and 1508.5). NEH may invite other Federal agencies to serve as the lead agency, a joint lead agency, or as a cooperating agency.
(b) Consistent with 40 CFR 1508.5, NEH may invite state and local government partners, and federally-recognized tribal governments, to serve as cooperating agencies.
Applicants shall work under NEH direction provided by the Approving Official, and assist NEH in fulfilling its NEPA obligations by preparing NEPA analyses and documents that comply with the provisions of NEPA (42 U.S.C. 4321-4347), the CEQ regulations (40 CFR parts 1500 through 1508), and the requirements set forth in this part.
Applicants shall follow NEH direction when they assist NEH with the following responsibilities, among others:
(a) Prepare and disseminate applicable environmental documentation concurrent with a
(b) Create and distribute public notices;
(c) Coordinate public hearings and meetings as required;
(d) Submit all environmental documents created pursuant to these procedures to NEH for review and approval before public distribution;
(e) Participate in all NEH-conducted hearings or meetings;
(f) Consult with NEH prior to obtaining the services of an environmental consultant; in the case that an EIS is required, the consultant or contractor will be selected by NEH; and
(g) Implement mitigation measures included as voluntary commitments by the applicant or as requirements of the applicant in NEH decision documents (FONSI or ROD).
(a) The NEH Chairman or his/her designee shall designate an Approving Official for each NEH proposal, and shall provide environmental guidance to the Approving Official;
(b) The Approving Official shall provide direction and guidance to the applicant as well as identification and development of required analyses and documentation;
(c) The Approving Official shall make an independent evaluation of the environmental issues, take responsibility for the scope and content of the environmental document (EA or EIS), and make the environmental finding;
(d) The Approving Official shall ensure mitigation measures included in NEH decision documents (FONSI or ROD) are implemented; and
(e) The Approving official shall be responsible for coordinating communications with cooperating agencies and other federal agencies.
NEH will make diligent efforts to involve the public in preparing and implementing its NEPA procedures in accordance with 40 CFR 1501.4(b), 1506.6 and part 1503. When developing a plan to include the public and affected parties in the environmental analysis process, NEH will consider the following factors: (a) The magnitude of the environmental considerations associated with the proposal; (b) the extent of expected public interest; and (c) any relevant questions of national concern. NEH will specifically publish EAs and draft FONSIs on its website as provided in Section 11(c) below.
The environmental review process is the investigation of potential environmental impacts to determine the environmental process to be followed and to assist in the preparation of the environmental document. NEH shall specifically determine whether any NEH proposal:
(a) Is categorically excluded from preparation of either an EA or an EIS;
(b) Requires preparation of an EA; or
(c) Requires preparation of an EIS.
(a)
(b)
(i) The action has not been segmented (too narrowly defined or broken down into small parts in order minimize its potential effects and avoid a higher level of NEPA review) and its scope includes the consideration of connected actions and, when evaluating extraordinary circumstances, cumulative impacts.
(ii) No extraordinary circumstances described in paragraph (c) of this section exist.
(iii) The proposed action fits within one of the categorical exclusions described in either section of Appendix A of this part.
(c)
(i) Have significant impacts on public health, public safety, or the environment;
(ii) Have effects on the environment that are highly controversial or involve unresolved conflicts concerning alternative uses of available resources;
(iii) Have effects on the human environment that are highly uncertain, involve unique or unknown risks, or are scientifically controversial;
(iv) Establish a precedent for future action or represent a decision in principle about future actions with potentially significant environmental effects;
(v) Relate to other actions with individually insignificant but cumulatively significant environmental effects;
(vi) Have a greater scope or size than is normal for the category of action;
(vii) Degrade already existing poor environmental conditions or initiate a degrading influence, activity, or effect in areas not already significantly modified from their natural condition;
(viii) Have a disproportionately high and adverse effect on low income or minority populations (see Executive Order 12898);
(ix) Limit access to and ceremonial use of Indian sacred sites on federal lands by Indian religious practitioners or adversely affect the physical integrity of such sacred sites (see Executive Order 13007);
(x) Threaten a violation of a federal, tribal, state or local law or requirement imposed for the protection of the environment;
(xi) Significantly affect subsistence activities; or
(xii) Significantly affect environmentally sensitive resources, such as (A) properties listed, or eligible for listing, in the National Register of Historic Places; (B) species listed, or proposed to be listed, on the List of Endangered or Threatened Species, or their habitat; or (C) natural resources and unique geographic characteristics such as historic or cultural resources; park, recreation or refuge lands; wilderness areas; wild or scenic rivers; national natural landmarks; sole or principal drinking water aquifers; prime farmlands; special aquatic sites (defined under Section 404 of the Clean Water Act); floodplains; national monuments; and other ecologically significant or critical areas.
An EA is required for all proposals, except those exempt from NEPA or categorically excluded under these procedures, and those requiring an EIS. An EA is not necessary if the NEH has
(i) The EA shall include brief discussions of the need for the proposal; of alternatives to the proposal as required by NEPA section 102(2)(E); and of the environmental impacts of the proposal and alternatives. The EA shall also include a listing of agencies and persons consulted in the preparation of the EA.
(ii) The EA may describe a broad range of alternatives and proposed mitigation measures to facilitate planning and decision-making.
(iii) The EA should also document compliance, to the extent possible, with all applicable environmental laws and Executive Orders, or provide reasonable assurance that those requirements can be met.
(iv) The EA should be a concise public document. The level of detail and depth of impact analysis will normally be limited to the minimum needed to determine the significance of potential environmental effects.
(i)
(ii)
(iii)
(i) In accordance with 40 CFR 1506.6, the Approving Official shall publish EAs and draft FONSIs on the NEH website and make such documents available for public comment for not less than 15 calendar days.
(ii) NEH will only take final action on an EA and draft FONSI after it reviews and considers public comments.
(i)
(ii)
(iii)
(iv)
(v)
(i)
(ii)
Proposals that normally require preparation of an EA include proposed actions that potentially result in significant changes to established land use.
An EIS is required when the project is determined to have a potentially significant impact on the human environment.
NEH shall publish an NOI, as described in 40 CFR 1508.22, in the
Publication of the NOI in the
(i)
(ii)
(iii)
(iv)
(v)
(vi)
(vii)
(viii)
(i) Supplements to either draft or final EISs shall be prepared, as prescribed in 40 CFR 1502.9, when NEH finds that there are substantial changes proposed in a project that are relevant to environmental concerns; or when there are significant new circumstances or information relevant to environmental concerns and bearing on the proposed action or its impacts.
(ii) Where NEH action remains to be taken and the EIS is more than three years old, NEH will review the EIS to determine whether it is adequate or requires supplementation.
(iii) NEH shall prepare, circulate and file a supplement to an EIS in the same fashion (exclusive of scoping) as a draft and final EIS. In addition, the supplement and accompanying administrative record shall be included in the administrative record for the proposal. When an applicant is involved, the applicant shall, under the direction of the Approving Official, provide assistance.
(iv) An NOI to prepare a supplement to a final EIS will be published in those cases where a ROD has already been issued.
(i) NEH may adopt a draft or final EIS or portion thereof (see 40 CFR 1506.3), including a programmatic EIS, prepared by another agency.
(ii) If the actions covered by the original EIS and the proposal are substantially the same, NEH shall recirculate it as a final statement. Otherwise, NEH shall treat the statement as a draft and recirculate it except as provided in paragraph (iii) of this section.
(iii) Where NEH is a cooperating agency, it may adopt the EIS of the lead agency without recirculating it when, after an independent review of the EIS, NEH concludes that its comments and suggestions have been satisfied.
(iv) When NEH adopts an EIS which is not final within the agency that prepared it, or when the action it assesses is the subject of a referral under 40 CFR part 1504, or when the EIS's adequacy is the subject of a judicial action which is not final, NEH shall so specify.
Given the nature of NEH activities, there are no proposals that would normally require use of an EIS. NEH would most likely use an EA in any given case to determine whether a project has a potentially significant impact on the human environment. The conclusion reached by NEH in the EA would dictate whether it would then prepare an EIS.
Actions consistent with any of the following categories are, in the absence of extraordinary circumstances, categorically excluded from further analysis in an EA or EIS:
1. Routine administrative and management activities including, but not limited to, those activities related to budgeting, finance, personnel actions, procurement activities, compliance with applicable executive orders and procedures for sustainable or “greened” procurement, retaining legal counsel, public affairs activities (
2. Preparing, revising, or adopting regulations, including those that implement without substantial change the regulations, instructions, directives, or guidance documents from other Federal agencies.
3. Routine activities undertaken by NEH to support its program partners, such as serving on task forces, ad hoc committees or representing NEH interests in other forums.
4. Approving and issuing financial assistance to support research, education, preservation, and public programs in the humanities, except where such assistance supports the construction, restoration, or renovation of facilities, including the purchase or lease of new infrastructure, or otherwise involves ground disturbing activity.
5. Approving and issuing financial assistance to support facility planning and design.
6. Approving and issuing grants to support the purchase or lease of preexisting infrastructure.
7. Nondestructive data collection, inventory, study, research, and monitoring activities.
Actions consistent with any of the following categories are, in the absence of extraordinary circumstances, categorically excluded from further analysis and documentation in an EA or EIS upon completion of the NEH CATEX checklist. As contemplated by the checklist, for any proposed action requiring review under Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act (“NHPA”), a categorical exclusion may only apply after NEH has determined that such action is not reasonably likely to have a significant effect on historic properties.
1. Upgrade, repair, maintenance, replacement, or minor renovations and additions to facilities, grounds and equipment, including but not limited to, roof replacement, foundation repair, access ramp and door improvements pursuant to the Americans with Disabilities Act (“ADA”), weatherization and energy efficiency related improvements, HVAC renovations, painting, floor system replacement, repaving parking lots and ground maintenance, that do not result in a change in the functional use of the real property.
2. Construction, purchase or lease of new infrastructure, including, but not limited to, museums, libraries and other community buildings, and office space, that is similar to existing land use if the area to be disturbed has no more than two acres of new surface disturbance. The following conditions must be met:
a. The structure and proposed use are compatible with applicable Federal, tribal, state, and local planning and zoning standards.
b. The site and scale of the construction or improvement is consistent with those of existing, adjacent, or nearby buildings.
c. There is no evidence of community controversy.
d. The proposed use will not substantially increase the number of motor vehicles at the facility or in the area.
e. The construction or improvement will not result in uses that exceed existing support infrastructure capacities (road, sewer, water, parking, etc.).
3. Construction, purchase or lease of new infrastructure, including, but not limited to, museums, libraries and other community buildings, and office space, where such construction, purchase or lease is for infrastructure of less than 12,000 square feet of useable space.
4. Demolition, disposal, or improvements involving buildings or structures when done
9:30 a.m., Tuesday, October 30, 2018.
NTSB Conference Center, 429 L'Enfant Plaza SW, Washington, DC 20594.
The one item is open to the public.
Individuals requesting specific accommodations should contact Rochelle McCallister at (202) 314-6305 or by email at
The public may view the meeting via a live or archived webcast by accessing a link under “News & Events” on the NTSB home page at
Schedule updates, including weather-related cancellations, are also available at
For More Information Contact: Candi Bing at (202) 314-6403 or by email at
Peter Knudson at (202) 314-6100 or by email at
Postal Regulatory Commission.
Notice.
The Commission is noticing a recently filed Postal Service notice of inflation-based rate adjustments affecting market dominant domestic and international products and services, along with temporary mailing promotions and numerous proposed classification changes. The adjustments and other changes are scheduled to take effect January 27, 2019. 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.
On October 10, 2018, the Postal Service filed a notice of inflation-based price adjustments affecting market dominant domestic and international products and services, along with temporary mailing promotions and numerous proposed classification changes to the Mail Classification Schedule (MCS).
Attachment A presents the proposed price and related product description changes to the MCS. Notice, Attachment A. Attachments B and C address workshare discounts and the price cap calculation, respectively. Notice, Attachments B and C. Attachment D presents the promotions schedule. Notice, Attachment D.
Several library references present supporting financial documentation for the five classes of mail. Notice at 4-5 nn. 7-9. The Postal Service filed one library reference pertaining to the two international mail products within First-Class Mail (Outbound Single-Piece First-Class Mail International and Inbound Letter Post) under seal and applied for non-public treatment of those materials.
Price adjustments for products within classes vary from the average.
• Emerging and Advanced Technology Promotion (Mar. 1-Aug. 31, 2019);
• Mobile Shopping Promotion (Aug. 1-Dec. 31, 2019);
• Tactile, Sensory and Interactive Mailpiece Engagement Promotion (Feb.1-July 31, 2019);
• Personalized Color Transpromo Promotion (July 1-Dec. 31, 2019);
• Informed Delivery Promotion (Sept.1-Nov. 30, 2019); and
• Earned Value Reply Mail Promotion (Apr. 1-June 30, 2019).
Pursuant to 39 CFR 3010.11(a), the Commission establishes Docket No. R2019-1 to consider the planned price adjustments for market dominant postal products and services, as well as the related classification changes, identified in the Notice. The Commission invites
The public portions of the Postal Service's filing are available for review on the Commission's website (
Pursuant to 39 U.S.C. 505, the Commission appoints Kenneth R. Moeller to represent the interests of the general public (Public Representative) in this proceeding.
1. The Commission establishes Docket No. R2019-1 to consider the planned price adjustments for market dominant postal products and services, as well as the related classification changes, identified in the Postal Service's October 10, 2018 Notice.
2. Comments on the planned price adjustments and related classification changes are due no later than October 30, 2018.
3. Pursuant to 39 U.S.C. 505, Kenneth R. Moeller is appointed to serve as an officer of the Commission (Public Representative) to represent the interests of the general public in this proceeding.
4. The Commission directs the Secretary of the Commission to arrange for prompt publication of this notice in the
Notice is hereby given that the Securities and Exchange Commission (“Commission”) has issued an Order, pursuant to Section 17(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (“Act”),
Section 19(g)(1) of the Act,
Section 17(d)(1) of the Act
To implement Section 17(d)(1), the Commission adopted two rules: Rule 17d-1 and Rule 17d-2 under the Act.
To address regulatory duplication in these and other areas, the Commission adopted Rule 17d-2 under the Act.
On September 12, 2008, the Commission declared effective the Participating Organizations' Plan for allocating regulatory responsibilities pursuant to Rule 17d-2.
On September 21, 2018, the Parties submitted a proposed amendment to the Plan. The proposed amendment was submitted to: (i) reflect name changes of certain Participating Organizations; (ii) update the SRO rules that are covered by the Agreement; and (iii) provide that, for purposes of determining a Participant's Percentage of Publicly Reported Trades in the calculation of quarterly fees, total trades will be adjusted to separate out bunched or bundled trades by a Participating Organization.
This agreement (the “Agreement”) by and among [Bats]
1.
a. “Rule” of an “exchange” or an “association” shall have the meaning defined in Section 3(a)(27) of the Act.
b. “Common FINRA Members” shall mean members of FINRA and at least one of the Participating Organizations.
c. “Common Insider Trading Rules” shall mean (i) the federal securities laws and rules thereunder promulgated by the SEC pertaining to insider trading, and (ii) the rules of the Participating Organizations that are related to insider
d. “Effective Date” shall have the meaning set forth in paragraph 27.
e. “Insider Trading” shall mean any conduct or action taken by a natural person or entity related in any way to the trading of securities by an insider or a related party based on or on the basis of material non-public information obtained during the performance of the insider's duties at the corporation, or otherwise misappropriated, that could be deemed a violation of the Common Insider Trading Rules.
f. “Intellectual Property” will mean any: (1) processes, methodologies, procedures, or technology, whether or not patentable; (2) trademarks, copyrights, literary works or other works of authorship, service marks and trade secrets; or (3) software, systems, machine-readable texts and files and related documentation.
g. “Plan” shall mean this Agreement, which is submitted as a Plan for the allocation of regulatory responsibilities of surveillance for insider trading pursuant to § 17(d) of the Act, 15 U.S.C. 78q(d), and SEC Rule 17d-2.
h. “NMS Stock(s)” shall have the meaning set forth in Rule 600(b)(47) of SEC Regulation NMS.
i. “Listing Market” shall mean an exchange that lists NMS stocks.
2.
3.
a.
b.
4.
5.
6.
7.
a.
b.
8.
9.
10.
a.
b.
c.
d.
(i)
(ii)
(iii)
11.
12.
a.
b.
(i) The arbitration shall be conducted in the city of New York in accordance with the Commercial Arbitration Rules of the American Arbitration Association and judgment upon the award rendered by the arbitrator may be entered in any court having jurisdiction thereof; and
(ii) There shall be three arbitrators, and the chairperson of the arbitration panel shall be an attorney.
13.
14.
a. The parties agree to file promptly this Agreement with the SEC for its review and approval. FINRA shall file this Agreement on behalf, and with the explicit consent, of all Participating Organizations.
b. If approved by the SEC, the Participating Organizations will notify their members of the general terms of this Agreement and of its impact on their members.
15.
16.
17.
18.
a. Any Participating Organization may cancel its participation in this Agreement at any time, provided that it
b. The Regulatory Responsibilities assumed under this Agreement by FINRA may be terminated by FINRA against any Participating Organization as follows. The Participating Organization will have thirty (30) days from receipt to satisfy the invoice. If the Participating Organization fails to satisfy the invoice within thirty (30) days of receipt (“Default”), FINRA will notify the Participating Organization of the Default. The Participating Organization will have thirty (30) days from receipt of the Default notice to satisfy the invoice.
c. FINRA will have the right to terminate the Regulatory Responsibilities assumed under this Agreement if a Participating Organization has Defaulted in its obligation to pay the invoice on more than three (3) occasions in any rolling twenty-four (24) month period.
19.
20.
21.
For [Bats]
For [Bats]
For Chicago Stock Exchange, Inc.: [Peter D. Santori]
For [Bats]
For [Bats]
For Financial Industry Regulatory Authority, Inc.: Cameron Funkhouser, Executive Vice President, [Market Regulation]
For [NASDAQ]
For [NASDAQ]
For The [NASDAQ]
For
For New York Stock Exchange LLC: Anthony Albanese, Chief Regulatory Officer, NYSE, 11 Wall Street, New York, NY 10005, Telephone: (212) 656-8927, Facsimile: (212) 656-[2223]
For NYSE [MKT]
For NYSE Arca, Inc.: Anthony Albanese, Chief Regulatory Officer, NYSE Arca, 11 Wall Street, New York, NY 10005, Telephone: (212) 656-8927, Facsimile: (212) 656-[2223]
For Investors' Exchange LLC.: Claudia Crowley, Chief Regulatory Officer, IEX, 4 World Trade Center, 150 Greenwich Street, 44th Floor, New York, NY 10007, Telephone: (646) 343-2041, Facsimile: (646) 365-6862, Email:
22.
23.
24.
25.
26.
a. This Agreement may be amended to add a new Participating Organization, provided that such Participating Organization does not assume regulatory responsibility, solely by an amendment executed by FINRA and such new Participating Organization. All other Participating Organizations expressly consent to allow FINRA to add new Participating Organizations to this Agreement as provided above. FINRA will promptly notify all Participating Organizations of any such amendments to add a new Participating Organization.
b. All other amendments must be approved by each Participating Organization. All amendments, including adding a new Participating Organization, must be filed with and approved by the SEC before they become effective.
27.
28.
In Witness Whereof, the parties hereto have each caused this Agreement for the Allocation of Regulatory Responsibility of Surveillance, Investigation and Enforcement for Insider Trading to be signed and delivered by its duly authorized representative.
1. Securities Exchange Act of 1934 Section 10(b), and rules and regulations promulgated there under in connection with insider trading, including SEC Rule 10b-5 (as it pertains to insider trading), which states that:
Rule 10b-5—Employment of Manipulative and Deceptive Devices It shall be unlawful for any person, directly or indirectly, by the use of any means or instrumentality of interstate commerce, or of the mails or of any facility of any national securities exchange,
a. To employ any device, scheme, or artifice to defraud,
b. To make any untrue statement of a material fact or to omit to state a material fact necessary in order to make the statements made, in the light of the circumstances under which they were made, not misleading, or
c. To engage in any act, practice, or course of business which operates or would operate as a fraud or deceit upon any person, in connection with the purchase or sale of any security.
2. Securities Exchange Act of 1934 Section 17(a), and rules and regulations promulgated there under in connection with insider trading, including SEC Rule 17a-3 (as it pertains to insider trading).
3. The following SRO Rules as they pertain to violations of insider trading:
1.
a.
(1) Quarterly Fees for each Participating Organization will be charged by FINRA according to the Participating Organization's “Percentage of Publicly Reported Trades” occurring over three-month billing periods. The “Percentage of Publicly Reported Trades” shall equal a Participating Organization's
(2) The Quarterly Fees shall be determined by FINRA in the following manner for each Participating Organization:
(a) Less than 1.0%: If the Participating Organization's Percentage of Publicly Reported Trades for the relevant three-month billing period is less than 1.0%, the Quarterly Fee shall be $6,250, per quarter (“Static Fee”);
(b) Less than 2.0% but No Less than 1.0%: If the Participating Organization's Percentage of Publicly Reported Trades for the relevant three-month billing period is less than 2.0% but no less than 1.0%, the Quarterly Fee shall be $18,750, per quarter (“Static Fee”);
(c) 2.0% or Greater: If the Participating Organization's Percentage of Publicly Reported Trades for the relevant three-month billing period is 2.0% or greater, the Quarterly Fee shall be the amount equal to the Participating Organization's Percentage of Publicly Reported Trades multiplied by FINRA's total charge (“Total Charge”) for its performance of Regulatory Responsibilities for the relevant three-month billing period.
(3) Increases in Static Fees. FINRA will re-evaluate the Quarterly Fees on an annual basis during the annual budget process outlined in paragraph 1.c. below. During each annual re-evaluation, FINRA will have the discretion to increase the Static Fees by a percentage no greater than the percentage increase in the Final Budget over the preceding year's Final Budget. Any changes to the Static Fees shall not require an amendment to this Agreement, but rather shall be memorialized through the budget process.
(4) Increases in Total Charges. Any change in the Total Charges (whether a Final Budget increase or any mid year change) shall not require an amendment to this Agreement, but rather shall be memorialized through the budget process.
b.
c.
d.
(1) In the event that any proposed increase to Fees by FINRA for a given calendar year (which increase may arise either during the annual budgetary forecasting process or through any mid-year increase) will result in a cumulative increase in such calendar year's Fees of more than five percent (5%) above the preceding calendar year's Final Budget (a “Major Increase”), then senior management of any Participating Organization (a) that is a Listing Market or (b) for which the Percentage of Publicly Reported Trades is then currently twenty percent (20%) or greater, shall have the right to call a meeting with the senior management of FINRA in order to discuss any disagreement over such proposed Major Increase. By way of example, if FINRA provides a Final Budget for 2011 that represents an 4% increase above the Final Budget for 2010, the terms of this paragraph 1.d.(1) shall not apply; if, however, in April of 2011, FINRA notifies the Exchange Committee of an increase in Fees that represents an additional 3% increase above the Final Budget for 2010, then the increase shall be deemed a Major Increase, and the terms of this paragraph 1.d.(1) shall become applicable (
(2) In the event that senior management members of the involved parties are unable to reach an agreement regarding the proposed Major Increase, then the matter shall be referred back to the Exchange Committee for final resolution. Prior to the matter being referred back to the Exchange Committee, nothing shall prohibit the parties from conferring with the SEC. Resolution shall be reached through a vote of no fewer than all Participating Organizations seated on the Exchange Committee, and a simple majority shall be required in order to reject the proposed Major Increase.
e.
2.
3.
4.
5.
a.
(i) Once every rolling twelve (12) month period, FINRA shall permit no more than one audit (to be performed by one or more Participating Organizations) of the Fees charged by FINRA to the Participating Organizations hereunder and a detailed cost analysis supporting such Fees (the “Audit”). The Participating Organization or Organizations that conduct this Audit will select a nationally-recognized independent auditing firm (or may use its regular independent auditor, providing it is a nationally-recognized auditing firm) (“Auditing Firm”) to act on its, or their behalf, and will provide reasonable notice to other Participating Organizations of the Audit. FINRA will permit the Auditing Firm reasonable access during FINRA's normal business hours, with reasonable advance notice, to such financial records and supporting documentation as are necessary to permit review of the accuracy of the calculation of the Fees charged to the Participating Organizations. The Participating Organization, or Organizations, as applicable, other than FINRA, shall be responsible for the costs of performing any such audit.
(ii) If, through an Audit, the Exchange Committee determines that FINRA has inaccurately calculated the Fees for any Participating Organization, the Exchange Committee will promptly notify FINRA in writing of the amount of such difference in the Fees, and, if applicable, FINRA shall issue a reimbursement of the overage amount to the relevant Participating Organization(s), less any amount owed by the Participating Organization under any outstanding, undisputed invoice(s). If such an Audit reveals that any Participating Organization paid less than what was required pursuant to the Agreement, then that Participating Organization shall promptly pay FINRA the difference between what the Participating Organization owed pursuant to the Agreement and what that Participating Organization originally paid FINRA. If FINRA disputes the results of an Audit regarding the accuracy of the Fees, it will submit the dispute for resolution pursuant to the dispute resolution procedures in paragraph 12 of the Agreement.
(iii) In the event that through the review of any supporting documentation provided during the Audit, any one or more Participating Organizations desire to discuss with FINRA the supporting documentation and any questions arising therefrom with regard to the manner in which regulation was conducted, the Participating Organization(s) shall call a
b.
FINRA shall provide the following information in reports to the Exchange Committee, which information covers activity occurring under this Agreement:
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
Interested persons are invited to submit written data, views, and arguments concerning the foregoing. 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.
The Commission finds that the Plan, as proposed to be amended, is consistent with the factors set forth in Section 17(d) of the Act
Under paragraph (c) of Rule 17d-2, the Commission may, after appropriate notice and comment, declare a plan, or any part of a plan, effective. In this instance, the Commission believes that appropriate notice and comment can take place after the proposed amendment is effective. The amendment provides for the adjustment of total trades by separating out bunched or bundled trades by a Participating Organization when determining a Participant's Percentage of Publicly Reported Trades in the calculation of quarterly fees.
This order gives effect to the amended Plan submitted to the Commission that is contained in File No. 4-566.
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”),
Cboe C2 Exchange, Inc. (the “Exchange” or “C2”) proposes to amend C2's rulebook to allow the Post Only order instruction on complex orders that route to its electronic book.
The text of the proposed rule change is available on the Exchange's website (
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.
C2 recently adopted the Post Only order instruction on simple orders that route to its electronic book (“Simple Book”),
Pursuant to C2 Rule 1.1, “[a] “Post Only” order is an order the System ranks and executes pursuant to Rule 6.12, subjects to the Price Adjust process pursuant to Rule 6.12, or cancels or rejects (including if it is not subject to the Price Adjust process and locks or crosses a Protected Quotation of another exchange), as applicable (in accordance with User instructions), except the order may not remove liquidity from the [Simple] Book or route away to another Exchange.” In other words, if a Post Only order is entered into C2's automated trading system (“System”), it will not execute against an order resting in the Simple Book or route to another exchange. The purpose of the Post Only order is to add liquidity to the Simple Book.
Because C2 has a maker-taker fee structure, pursuant to which an execution taking liquidity from the Simple Book is subject to a taker fee, the Post Only order instruction provides Trading Permit Holders (“TPHs” or “Users”) with the flexibility to avoid incurring a taker fee if the TPH's intent is to submit an order to add liquidity to the Simple Book. Additionally, under C2's maker-taker fee structure, if a TPH submits an order that adds liquidity to the Simple Book (for both penny and non-penny classes of options), it receives a rebate in connection with the execution of that order. For example, a Public Customer order that adds liquidity to the Simple Book in a non-penny class receives a rebate of $0.80, whereas a Public Customer order that removes liquidity from the Simple Book in a non-penny class incurs a fee of $0.85. Similar rebates and fees are also applied to Professional Customers, Firms, and Broker/Dealers orders, among others.
C2 does not currently offer Post Only complex orders. Like in the Simple Book, execution of a complex order taking liquidity from the COB is subject to a taker fee and execution of an order adding liquidity is subject to a maker rebate. For example, a Public Customer order that adds liquidity to the COB in a non-penny class receives a rebate of $0.75, whereas a Public Customer order that removes liquidity from the COB in a non-penny class incurs a fee of $0.83. Unlike in the Simple Book, however, a TPH that intends to submit a complex order to add liquidity to the COB is not given the same flexibility to avoid incurring a taker fee. Accordingly, C2 is proposing to add Post Only to the permissible types of complex orders submitted to the Exchange in C2 Rule 6.13(b).
Proposed C2 Rule 6.13(b)(2) states that upon receipt of a Post Only complex order with any Time-in-Force, the System does not initiate a complex order auction (“COA”), and if a User marks the Post Only complex order to initiate a COA, the System cancels the order. Not permitting a Post Only complex order to COA is consistent with the purposes of a Post Only order, which as discussed above is to add liquidity to the COB. Proposed C2 Rule 6.13(g)(4) states that Post Only complex orders may not Leg into the Simple Book and proposed C2 Rule 6.13(h)(3) states that the System cancels or rejects a Post Only complex order if it locks or crosses a resting complex order in the COB or the then-current opposite side synthetic best bid or offer (“SBBO”). For example, assume there are no orders for a specific strategy resting on the COB, the synthetic national best bid or offer (“SNBBO”) is $3.00 by $3.15, and the SBBO is $2.95 by $3.15. Assume next that Complex Order 1 enters the COB to sell 10 contracts of that strategy at $3.14 and such order is posted to the COB. If Complex Order 2 then enters the COB to buy 10 contracts of that strategy at $3.14, but Complex Order 2 also contains the Post Only instruction, Complex Order 2 is rejected since it locks the resting contra order. Similarly, assume there are no orders for a specific strategy resting on the COB, the SNBBO is $3.00 by $3.15, and the SBBO is $2.95 by $3.20. If a two-leg Complex Order with the Post Only instruction enters the COB to buy 10 contracts of that strategy at $3.20, that Complex Order is rejected since it cannot leg in to the Simple Book and it locks the contra side SBBO. This proposed functionality is consistent with the purpose of the Post Only instruction and ensures a Post
By adding the Post Only order instruction for complex orders, TPHs will be given the ability to exercise more control over the circumstances in which their complex orders are executed and be encouraged to add liquidity in the complex order market. Any additional liquidity will subsequently benefit all participants who trade complex orders on the Exchange.
The Exchange believes the proposed rule change is consistent with the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (the “Act”) and the rules and regulations thereunder applicable to the Exchange and, in particular, the requirements of Section 6(b) of the Act.
Specifically, the Post Only order instruction on complex orders is designed to encourage market participants to add liquidity in the complex order market, which will benefit investors. By giving market participants the flexibility to manage their execution costs and the circumstances in which their complex orders are executed, the Exchange believes the proposed rule change would remove impediments to perfect the mechanism of a free and open market and a national market system and protect investors. The Exchange also believes that the proposed rule change will contribute to the protection of investors and the public interest by assuring compliance with rules related to locked and crossed markets.
Additionally, the Exchange notes that Post Only functionality is not new or unique functionality and is already available in a similar capacity. While the Post Only complex order type is not currently available in the market, C2 and other exchanges have implemented the Post Only simple order type, which functions in the same manner as the proposed Post Only complex order type. The purpose of a Post Only complex order is the same as the purpose of a Post Only simple order, given C2's maker-taker fee structure with respect to executions of complex orders.
C2 does not believe that the proposed rule change will impose any burden on intramarket or intermarket competition that is not necessary or appropriate in furtherance of the purposes of the Act. In particular, the Exchange believes the proposed rule change will not burden intramarket competition because the Post Only order instruction on complex orders will be available to all market participants. Additionally, use of the Post Only order instruction on complex orders is voluntary. The Exchange also believes the proposed rule change will not impose any burden on intermarket competition because this relates to an instruction on orders that are submitted to the Exchange and may only execute on the Exchange. Additionally, nothing prevents other options exchanges that offer complex orders from adopting a Post Only complex order type. The Exchange also believes the proposed rule change will promote competition, as the Exchange believes it will encourage the provision of additional liquidity in the complex order market, which benefits all market participants.
The Exchange neither solicited nor received comments on the proposed rule change.
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.
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 (the “Act”),
The Exchange filed a proposal to list and trade shares of the JPMorgan Municipal ETF and JPMorgan Ultra-Short Municipal ETF (each a “Fund” or, collectively, the “Funds”) of the J.P. Morgan Exchange-Traded Fund Trust (the “Trust” or the “Issuer”) under Rule 14.11(i) (“Managed Fund Shares”). The shares of the Funds are referred to herein as the “Shares.”
The text of the proposed rule change is available at the Exchange's website 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 list and trade the Shares under Rule 14.11(i), which governs the listing and trading of Managed Fund Shares on the Exchange.
Rule 14.11(i)(4)(C)(ii)(a) requires that component fixed income securities that, in the aggregate, account for at least 75% of the weight of the portfolio shall have a minimum principal amount outstanding of $100 million or more. The Exchange submits this proposal because the portfolios of the Funds will not meet this requirement. The Fund will, however, meet all of the other requirements of Rule 14.11(i)(4)(C)(ii), (iii), (iv) and (v), specifically including Rule 14.11(i)(4)(C)(iv), which provides that non-agency, non-GSE, and privately-issued mortgage-related and other asset-backed securities components of a portfolio shall not account, in the aggregate, for more than 20% of the weight of the fixed income portion of the portfolio, and 14.11(i)(4)(C)(iv)(a), which provides that in the aggregate, at least 90% of the weight of listed derivatives holdings shall consist of futures, options, and swaps for which the Exchange may obtain information via the Intermarket Surveillance Group (“ISG”) from other members or affiliates of the ISG or for which the principal market is a market with which the Exchange has a comprehensive surveillance sharing agreement, calculated using the aggregate gross notional value of such holdings.
J.P. Morgan Investment Management, Inc. is the investment adviser (the “Adviser”) to the Fund. JPMorgan Chase Bank, N.A. is the administrator, custodian, and transfer agent (“Administrator,” “Custodian,” and “Transfer Agent,” respectively) for the Trust. JPMorgan Distribution Services, Inc. serves as the distributor (“Distributor”) for the Trust.
Rule 14.11(i)(7) provides that, if the investment adviser to the investment company issuing Managed Fund Shares is affiliated with a broker-dealer, such investment adviser shall erect a “fire wall” between the investment adviser and the broker-dealer with respect to access to information concerning the composition and/or changes to such investment company portfolio.
According to the Registration Statement, the Fund will seek to provide monthly dividends, which are excluded from gross income, and to protect the value of a shareholder's investment by investing primarily in municipal obligations. For purposes of the Fund's investment objective, “gross income” means gross income for federal income tax purposes. To achieve its objective, the Fund will invest, under normal circumstances,
The Fund intends to qualify each year as a regulated investment company (a “RIC”) under Subchapter M of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended. The Fund will invest its assets, and otherwise conduct its operations, in a manner that is intended to satisfy the qualifying income, diversification and distribution requirements necessary to establish and maintain RIC qualification under Subchapter M.
To achieve its objective, the Fund will invest, under normal circumstances, in fixed and variable rate Municipal Securities, as defined below. As part of its investments in Municipal Securities, the Fund invests primarily in investment grade securities or the unrated equivalent. Investment-grade securities are rated a minimum of BBB- or higher by Standard & Poor's Ratings Services and/or Fitch, or Baa3 or higher by Moody's, or if unrated, determined by the Adviser to be of equivalent quality.
Municipal securities (“Municipal Securities”) are debt securities issued by or on behalf of states, territories and possessions of the United States, including the District of Columbia, and their respective authorities, political subdivisions, agencies and instrumentalities and other groups with the authority to act for the municipalities, the interest on which is exempt from federal income tax and will include only the following instruments: General obligation bonds,
The Fund will hold a minimum of 40 different Municipal Securities diversified among issuers in at least 8 different states with no more than 30% of the Fund's assets comprised of Municipal Securities that provide exposure to any single state (collectively, “Minimum Requirement 1”). The Fund will hold a minimum of 75 different Municipal Securities when at least four creation units are outstanding (“Trigger Number 1A”). The Fund will hold a minimum of 100 different Municipal Securities diversified among issuers in at least 20 different states when at least eight creation units are outstanding (“Trigger Number 1B”). No single Municipal Security held by the Fund will exceed 4% of the weight of the Fund's portfolio and no single issuer of Municipal Securities will account for more than 10% of the weight of the Fund's portfolio (collectively, “Minimum Requirement 2”). The Fund will hold Municipal Securities of at least 20 non-affiliated issuers (“Minimum Requirement 3”). The Fund will hold Municipal Securities of at least 30 non-affiliated issuers when at least four creation units are outstanding (“Trigger Number 2”).
In the absence of normal circumstances, the Fund may temporarily depart from its normal investment process, provided that such departure is, in the opinion of the Adviser, consistent with the Fund's investment objective and in the best interest of the Fund. For example, the Fund may hold a higher than normal proportion of its assets in cash in response to adverse market, economic or political conditions.
The Fund may also, to a limited extent (under normal circumstances, less than 20% of the Fund's net assets), engage in transactions in United States bond futures contracts, exchange traded treasury and debt futures options, interest rate swaps and zero coupon swaps, interest rate futures, interest rate options, and swaps on Municipal Securities indexes.
The Fund may also enter into repurchase and reverse repurchase agreements (collectively, “Repurchase Agreements”). Repurchase Agreements involve the sale of securities with an agreement to repurchase the securities at an agreed-upon price, date and interest payment and have the characteristics of borrowing as part of the Fund's principal holdings.
The Fund may also invest in cash and Cash Equivalents,
The Fund may hold up to an aggregate amount of 15% of its net assets in illiquid assets (calculated at the time of investment), as deemed illiquid by the Adviser
According to the Registration Statement, the Fund will seek as high a level of current income exempt from federal income tax as is consistent with relative stability of principal. To achieve its objective, the Fund will invest, under normal circumstances,
The Fund intends to qualify each year as a regulated investment company (a “RIC”) under Subchapter M of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended. The Fund will invest its assets, and otherwise conduct its operations, in a manner that is intended to satisfy the qualifying income, diversification and distribution requirements necessary to establish and maintain RIC qualification under Subchapter M.
To achieve its objective, the Fund will invest, under normal circumstances, in fixed and variable rate Municipal Securities, as defined below. As part of its investments in Municipal Securities, the Fund invests primarily in investment grade securities or the unrated equivalent. Investment-grade securities are rated a minimum of BBB- or higher by Standard & Poor's Ratings Services and/or Fitch, or Baa3 or higher by Moody's, or if unrated, determined by the Adviser to be of equivalent quality.
Municipal securities (“Municipal Securities”) are debt securities issued by or on behalf of states, territories and possessions of the United States, including the District of Columbia, and their respective authorities, political subdivisions, agencies and instrumentalities and other groups with the authority to act for the municipalities, the interest on which is exempt from federal income tax and will include only the following instruments: General obligation bonds,
The Fund will hold a minimum of 40 different Municipal Securities
In the absence of normal circumstances, the Fund may temporarily depart from its normal investment process, provided that such departure is, in the opinion of the Adviser, consistent with the Fund's investment objective and in the best interest of the Fund. For example, the Fund may hold a higher than normal proportion of its assets in cash in response to adverse market, economic or political conditions.
The Fund may also, to a limited extent (under normal circumstances, less than 20% of the Fund's net assets), engage in transactions in United States bond futures contracts, exchange traded treasury and debt futures options, interest rate swaps and zero coupon swaps, interest rate futures, interest rate options, and swaps on Municipal Securities indexes.
The Fund may also enter into repurchase and reverse repurchase agreements (collectively, “Repurchase Agreements”). Repurchase Agreements involve the sale of securities with an agreement to repurchase the securities at an agreed-upon price, date and interest payment and have the characteristics of borrowing as part of the Fund's principal holdings.
The Fund may also invest in cash and Cash Equivalents,
The Fund may hold up to an aggregate amount of 15% of its net assets in illiquid assets (calculated at the time of investment), as deemed illiquid by the Adviser
The Fund may also invest up to 100% of its net assets in Municipal Securities that pay interest which may be subject to the Alternative Minimum Tax for individuals.
Based on the characteristics of the Funds and the representations made in each of the Requirements for Fund Holdings sections above, the Exchange believes it is appropriate to allow the listing and trading of the Shares. The Funds satisfy all of the generic listing requirements for Managed Fund Shares that hold fixed income securities, except for the minimum principal amount outstanding requirement in 14.11(i)(4)(C)(ii)(a). The Exchange notes that the representations in the Requirements for Fund Holdings for the Funds are identical to the representations made regarding the iShares iBonds Dec 2024 AMT Free Muni Bond ETF, iShares iBonds Dec 2025 AMT Free Muni Bond ETF, and iShares iBonds Dec 2026 AMT Free Muni Bond ETF (collectively, the “Comparable Funds”), which were previously approved for listing and trading by the Commission.
In addition, the Exchange represents that: (1) Except for Rule 14.11(i)(4)(C)(ii)(a), the Funds will satisfy all of the generic listing standards under Rule 14.11(i)(4); (2) the continued listing standards under Rule 14.11(i), as applicable to Managed Fund Shares that hold fixed income securities, will apply to the shares of the Funds; and (3) the issuer of the Funds is required to comply with Rule 10A-3
Each Fund will issue and redeem Shares on a continuous basis at the NAV per Share only in large blocks of a specified number of Shares or multiples thereof (“Creation Units”) in transactions with authorized participants who have entered into agreements with the Distributor. Each Fund currently anticipates that a Creation Unit will consist of 50,000 Shares, though this number may change from time to time, including prior to listing of the Funds. The exact number of Shares that will constitute a Creation Unit will be disclosed in the respective Registration Statement of each Fund. Once created, Shares of each Fund trade on the secondary market in amounts less than a Creation Unit.
Additional information regarding the Shares and each Fund, including investment strategies, risks, creation and redemption procedures, fees and expenses, portfolio holdings disclosure policies, distributions, taxes and reports to be distributed to beneficial owners of the Shares can be found in the Registration Statement or on the website for the Funds (
The Funds' website, which will be publicly available prior to the public offering of Shares, will include a form of the prospectus for each Fund that may be downloaded. The website will include additional quantitative information updated on a daily basis, including, for each Fund: (1) Daily trading volume, the prior business day's reported closing price, NAV and mid-point of the bid/ask spread at the time of calculation of such NAV (the “Bid/Ask Price”),
In addition, for each Fund, an estimated value, defined in Rule 14.11(i)(3)(C) as the “Intraday Indicative Value,” that reflects an estimated intraday value of the Fund's portfolio, will be disseminated. Moreover, the Intraday Indicative Value will be based upon the current value for the components of the Disclosed Portfolio and will be updated and widely disseminated by one or more major market data vendors at least every 15 seconds during the Exchange's Regular Trading Hours.
The dissemination of the Intraday Indicative Value, together with the
Intraday, executable price quotations on assets held by each Fund are available from major broker-dealer firms and for exchange-traded assets, including shares of exchange traded investment companies, such intraday information is available directly from the applicable listing exchange. All such intraday price information is available through subscription services, such as Bloomberg, Thomson Reuters and International Data Corporation, which can be accessed by authorized participants and other investors. Pricing information for Repurchase Agreements and securities not listed on an exchange or national securities market will be available from major broker-dealer firms and/or subscription services, such as Bloomberg, Thomson Reuters and International Data Corporation. Trade price and other information relating to Municipal Securities is available through the Municipal Securities Rulemaking Board's (the “MSRB”) Electronic Municipal Market Access (“EMMA”) system. Quotation and last sale information for U.S. exchange-listed options contracts cleared by The Options Clearing Corporation will be available via the Options Price Reporting Authority.
Information regarding market price and volume of the Shares will be continually available on a real-time basis throughout the day on brokers' computer screens and other electronic services. The previous day's closing price and trading volume information for the Shares will be published daily in the financial section of newspapers and publicly available sources. Quotation and last sale information for the Shares will be available on the facilities of the CTA. Price information relating to all other securities held by the Funds will be available from major market data vendors. Quotations and last sale information for the underlying exchange traded investment companies will be available through CTA.
Investors can also obtain the Trust's Statement of Additional Information (“SAI”), the Fund's Shareholder Reports, and its Form N-CSR and Form N-SAR, filed twice a year. The Trust's SAI and Shareholder Reports are available free upon request from the Trust, and those documents and the Form N-CSR and Form N-SAR may be viewed on-screen or downloaded from the Commission's website at
The Shares will be subject to Rule 14.11(i), which sets forth the initial and continued listing criteria applicable to Managed Fund Shares. The Exchange represents that, for initial and/or continued listing, each Fund must be in compliance with Rule 10A-3 under the Act.
With respect to trading halts, the Exchange may consider all relevant factors in exercising its discretion to halt or suspend trading in the Shares of each Fund. The Exchange will halt trading in the Shares under the conditions specified in Rule 11.18. Trading may be halted because of market conditions or for reasons that, in the view of the Exchange, make trading in the Shares inadvisable. These may include: (1) The extent to which trading is not occurring in the securities and/or the financial instruments composing the Disclosed Portfolio of the Fund; or (2) whether other unusual conditions or circumstances detrimental to the maintenance of a fair and orderly market are present. Trading in the Shares also will be subject to Rule 14.11(i)(4)(B)(iv), which sets forth circumstances under which trading in the Shares of a Fund may be halted.
The Exchange deems the Shares to be equity securities, thus rendering trading in the Shares subject to the Exchange's existing rules governing the trading of equity securities. The Exchange will allow trading in the Shares from 8:00 a.m. until 5:00 p.m. Eastern Time. The Exchange has appropriate rules to facilitate transactions in the Shares during all trading sessions. As provided in Rule 11.11(a), the minimum price variation for quoting and entry of orders in Managed Fund Shares traded on the Exchange is $0.01, with the exception of securities that are priced less than $1.00, for which the minimum price variation for order entry is $0.0001.
The Exchange believes that its surveillance procedures are adequate to properly monitor the trading of the Shares on the Exchange during all trading sessions and to deter and detect violations of Exchange rules and the applicable federal securities laws. Trading of the Shares through the Exchange will be subject to the Exchange's surveillance procedures for derivative products, including Managed Fund Shares. The Exchange may obtain information regarding trading in the Shares and the underlying shares in exchange traded equity securities via the Intermarket Surveillance Group (“ISG”), from other exchanges that are members or affiliates of the ISG, or with which the Exchange has entered into a comprehensive surveillance sharing agreement.
As it relates to exchange traded investment companies, the Funds will only invest in investment companies that trade on markets that are a member of the ISG or with which the Exchange has in place a comprehensive surveillance sharing agreement.
The Exchange prohibits the distribution of material non-public information by its employees.
Prior to the commencement of trading, 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 that Shares are not individually redeemable); (2) Rule 3.7, which imposes suitability obligations on Exchange members with respect to recommending transactions in the Shares to customers; (3) how information regarding the Intraday Indicative Value is disseminated; (4) the risks involved in trading the Shares during the Pre-Opening
In addition, the Information Circular will advise members, prior to the commencement of trading, of the prospectus delivery requirements applicable to the Funds. Members purchasing Shares from the Funds for resale to investors will deliver a prospectus to such investors. The Information Circular will also discuss any exemptive, no-action, and interpretive relief granted by the Commission from any rules under the Act.
In addition, the Information Circular will reference that each 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 of the Funds and the applicable NAV Calculation Time for the Shares. The Information Circular will disclose that information about the Shares of the Funds will be publicly available on the Funds' website. In addition, the Information Circular will reference that the Trust is subject to various fees and expenses described in each Fund's Registration Statement.
The Exchange 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 will be listed and traded on the Exchange pursuant to the initial and continued listing criteria in Rule 14.11(i). The Exchange believes that its surveillance procedures are adequate to properly monitor the trading of the Shares on the Exchange during all trading sessions and to deter and detect violations of Exchange rules and the applicable federal securities laws. Rule 14.11(i)(7) provides that, if the investment adviser to the investment company issuing Managed Fund Shares is affiliated with a broker-dealer, such investment adviser shall erect a “fire wall” between the investment adviser and the broker-dealer with respect to access to information concerning the composition and/or changes to such investment company portfolio. The Adviser is not a registered broker-dealer, but is affiliated with multiple broker-dealers and has implemented “fire walls” with respect to such broker-dealers regarding access to information concerning the composition and/or changes to a Fund's portfolio. In addition, Adviser personnel who make decisions regarding a Fund's portfolio are subject to procedures designed to prevent the use and dissemination of material nonpublic information regarding the Fund's portfolio. The Exchange may obtain information regarding trading in the Shares and the underlying shares in exchange traded equity securities via the ISG, from other exchanges that are members or affiliates of the ISG, or with which the Exchange has entered into a comprehensive surveillance sharing agreement. In addition, the Exchange, or FINRA, on behalf of the Exchange, is able to access, as needed, trade information for certain fixed income instruments reported to TRACE and Municipal Securities reported to MSRB. FINRA also can access data obtained from the MSRB relating to municipal bond trading activity for surveillance purposes in connection with trading in the Shares. Each Fund's investments will be well-diversified in that each Fund will hold a minimum of 40 different Municipal Securities diversified among issuers in at least 8 different states with no more than 30% of the Fund's assets comprised of Municipal Securities that provide exposure to any single state; each Fund will hold a minimum of 75 different Municipal Securities when at least four creation units are outstanding for that Fund; each Fund will hold a minimum of 100 different Municipal Securities diversified among issuers in at least 20 different states when at least eight creation units are outstanding for that Fund; no single Municipal Security held by a Fund will exceed 4% of the weight of that Fund's portfolio and no single issuer of Municipal Securities will account for more than 10% of the weight of a Fund's portfolio; each Fund will hold Municipal Securities of at least 20 non-affiliated issuers; and each Fund will hold Municipal Securities of at least 30 non-affiliated issuers when at least four creation units are outstanding.
According to the Registration Statement, each Fund will invest, under normal circumstances,
The proposed rule change is designed to promote just and equitable principles of trade and to protect investors and the public interest in that the Exchange will obtain a representation from the issuer of the Shares that the NAV per Share will be calculated daily and that the NAV and the Disclosed Portfolio will be made available to all market participants at the same time. In addition, a large amount of information is publicly available regarding the Funds and the Shares, thereby promoting market transparency. Moreover, the Intraday Indicative Value will be disseminated by one or more major market data vendors at least every 15 seconds during Regular Trading Hours. On each business day, before commencement of trading in Shares during Regular Trading Hours, each Fund will disclose on its website the Disclosed Portfolio that will form the basis for the Fund's calculation of NAV at the end of the business day. Pricing information will include additional quantitative information updated on a daily basis, including, for the Fund: (1) The prior business day's NAV and the market closing price or mid-point of the Bid/Ask Price,
Intraday, executable price quotations on assets held by the Funds are available from major broker-dealer firms and for exchange-traded assets, including investment companies, such intraday information is available directly from the applicable listing exchange. All such intraday price information is available through subscription services, such as Bloomberg, Thomson Reuters and International Data Corporation, which can be accessed by authorized participants and other investors.
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 an additional type of actively-managed exchange traded product that will enhance competition among market participants, to the benefit of investors and the marketplace. As noted above, the Exchange has in place surveillance procedures relating to trading in the Shares and 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. In addition, the Exchange, or FINRA, on behalf of the Exchange, is able to access, as needed, trade information for certain fixed income instruments reported to TRACE and Municipal Securities reported to MSRB. FINRA also can access data obtained from the MSRB relating to municipal bond trading activity for surveillance purposes in connection with trading in the Shares. As noted above, investors will also have ready access to information regarding each Fund's holdings, the Intraday Indicative Value, the Disclosed Portfolio, and quotation and last sale information for the Shares.
For the above reasons, the Exchange believes that 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 impose any burden on competition that is not necessary or appropriate in furtherance of the purpose of the Act. The Exchange notes that the proposed rule change will facilitate the listing and trading of additional actively-managed exchange-traded products that will enhance competition among market participants, to the benefit of investors and the marketplace.
The Exchange has neither solicited nor received written comments on the proposed rule change.
The Exchange has filed the proposed rule change pursuant to Section 19(b)(3)(A)(iii) of the Act
A proposed rule change filed under Rule 19b-4(f)(6)
At any time within 60 days of the filing of such proposed rule change, the Commission summarily may temporarily suspend such rule change if it appears to the Commission that such action is necessary or appropriate in the public interest, for the protection of investors, or otherwise in furtherance of the purposes of the Act. If the Commission takes such action, the Commission shall institute proceedings under Section 19(b)(2)(B)
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 July 31, 2018, Miami International Securities Exchange LLC (“MIAX” or the “Exchange”) filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (“Commission”), pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (“Act”),
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 is proposing to amend the Exchange's rulebook to allow the Post Only Order instruction on complex orders that route to its electronic book for trading options (“EDGX Options”).
The text of the proposed rule change is available at the Exchange's website 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.
EDGX Options currently offers the Post Only Order instruction on simple orders that route to its electronic book (“Simple Book”) and now proposes to adopt the Post Only Order instruction on complex orders that route to its electronic book (“COB”).
Pursuant to Exchange Rule 21.1(d)(8), Post Only Orders are “orders that are to be ranked and executed on the Exchange pursuant to Rule 21.8 (Order Display and Book Processing) or cancelled, as appropriate, without routing away to another options exchange except that the order will not remove liquidity from the EDGX Options Book.” In other words, if a Post Only Order is entered into the EDGX Options electronic trading facility (“System”), it will not execute against an order resting in the Simple Book or route to another exchange. The purpose of the Post Only Order is to add liquidity to the Simple Book.
EDGX Options does not currently offer Post Only complex orders. Based on the EDGX Options fee structure, the execution of a complex order taking liquidity from the COB is subject to a higher fee than the execution of a complex order adding liquidity to the COB. For example, a Non-Customer complex order that adds liquidity to the COB in a non-penny class incurs a fee of $0.10, whereas a Non-Customer complex order that removes liquidity from the COB in a non-penny class incurs a fee of $0.75. Without the ability to mark a complex order as Post Only, a Member that intends to submit a complex order to add liquidity to the COB may not receive the benefit of the reduced fee. Accordingly, EDGX Options is proposing to add Post Only to the available types of complex orders submitted to the Exchange in Exchange Rule 21.20(b).
Proposed Exchange Rule 21.20(b)(2) states that complex Orders that are marked Post Only with any Time in Force will, by default, not initiate a complex order auction (“COA”), and if a Member marks a Post Only complex order to initiate a COA, that order will be cancelled.. [sic] This is consistent with the purposes of a Post Only Order, which as discussed above is to add liquidity to the COB. Proposed Exchange Rule 21.20(c)(2)(F) states that complex orders marked Post Only may not Leg into the Simple Book, and proposed Exchange Rule 21.20(c)(4)(C) states that the System will cancel or reject a Post Only complex order if it locks or crosses a resting complex order in the COB or the then-current opposite side synthetic best bid or offer (“SBBO”). For example, assume there are no orders for a specific strategy resting on the COB, the synthetic national best bid or offer (“SNBBO”) is $3.00 by $3.15, and the SBBO is $2.95 by $3.15. Assume next that Complex Order 1 enters the COB to sell 10 of that strategy at $3.14 and such order is posted to the COB. If Complex Order 2 then enters the COB to buy 10 contracts of that strategy at $3.14, but Complex Order 2 also contains the Post Only instruction, Complex Order 2 is rejected since it locks the resting contra order. Similarly, assume there are no orders for a specific strategy resting on the COB, the SNBBO is $3.00 by $3.15, and the SBBO is $2.95 by $3.20. If a two-leg Complex Order with the Post Only instruction enters the COB to buy 10 contracts of that strategy at $3.20, that Complex Order is rejected since it cannot leg in to the Simple Book and it locks the contra side SBBO. This proposed functionality is consistent with the purpose of the Post Only instruction and ensures a Post Only complex order will not remove liquidity from the COB. This is also consistent with the functionality and purpose of the Post Only Order instruction on simple orders.
By adding the Post Only Order instruction for complex orders, Members will be given the ability to exercise more control over the circumstances in which their complex orders are executed and be encouraged to add liquidity in the complex order market. Any additional liquidity will subsequently benefit all participants who trade complex orders on the Exchange.
The Exchange believes the proposed rule change is consistent with the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (the “Act”) and the rules and regulations thereunder applicable to the Exchange and, in particular, the requirements of Section 6(b) of the Act.
Specifically, the Post Only Order instruction on complex orders is designed to encourage market participants to add liquidity in the complex order market, which will benefit investors. By giving market participants the flexibility to manage their execution costs and the circumstances in which their complex orders are executed, the Exchange believes the proposed rule change would remove impediments to perfect the mechanism of a free and open market and a national market system and protect investors. The Exchange also believes that the proposed rule change will contribute to the protection of investors and the public interest by assuring compliance with rules related to locked and crossed markets.
Additionally, the Exchange notes that Post Only functionality is not new or unique functionality and is already available in a similar capacity. While the Post Only complex order type is not currently available in the market, the Exchange and other exchanges have implemented the Post Only simple order type, which functions in the same manner as the proposed Post Only complex order type. The purpose of a Post Only complex order is the same as the purpose of a Post Only simple order, and the Post Only Order instruction on complex orders ensures the submitter
The Exchange does not believe that the proposed rule change will impose any burden on intramarket or intermarket competition that is not necessary or appropriate in furtherance of the purposes of the Act. In particular, the Exchange believes the proposed rule change will not burden intramarket competition because the Post Only Order instruction on complex orders will be available to all market participants. Additionally, use of the Post Only Order instruction on complex orders is voluntary. The Exchange also believes the proposed rule change will not impose any burden on intermarket competition because this relates to an instruction on orders that are submitted to the Exchange and may only execute on the Exchange. Additionally, nothing prevents other options exchanges that offer complex orders from adopting a Post Only complex order type. The Exchange also believes the proposed rule change will promote competition, as the Exchange believes it will encourage the provision of additional liquidity in the complex order market, which benefits all market participants.
The Exchange neither solicited nor received comments on the proposed rule change.
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)
The Exchange proposes to list and trade shares of the iShares iBond Dec 2026 Term Muni Bond ETF (the “Fund”) pursuant to NYSE Arca Rule 5.2-E(j)(3), Commentary .02. The proposed rule change is available on the Exchange's website at
In its filing with the Commission, the self-regulatory organization 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 those 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 list and trade shares (“Shares”) of the Fund under Commentary .02 to NYSE Arca Rule 5.2-E(j)(3), which governs the listing and trading of Investment Company Units (“Units”)
The Fund is a series of the iShares Trust (the “Trust”).
According to the Registration Statement, the investment objective of the Fund is to track the investment results of an index composed of investment-grade U.S. municipal bonds maturing after December 31, 2025 and before December 2, 2026. Specifically, the Fund will seek to track the investment results (before fees and expenses) of the S&P AMT-Free Municipal Series December 2026 Index
The 2026 Index includes municipal bonds primarily from issuers that are state or local governments or agencies such that the interest on the bonds is exempt from U.S. federal income taxes. Each bond must have, inter alia, a minimum maturity par amount of $2 million to be eligible for inclusion in the 2026 Index. To remain in the 2026 Index, bonds must maintain a minimum par amount greater than or equal to $2 million, and must not be subject to the federal alternative minimum tax (“AMT”) as of each rebalancing date. All bonds in the 2026 Index will mature after December 31, 2025 and before December 2, 2026. Bonds in the 2026 Index that mature or are pre-refunded in their respective year of maturity do not accrue interest past the maturity or pre-refund date. All payments related to the maturity or pre-refunding of a bond are reinvested in tax-exempt cash or cash equivalents for the duration of each month.
The Fund will generally invest, under normal market conditions,
The Fund may invest the remainder of its assets in interest rate futures, interest rate options, interest rate swaps,
For informational purposes, as of April 30, 2018, 76.30% of the weight of the 2026 Index components was comprised of individual maturities that were part of an entire municipal bond offering with a minimum original principal amount outstanding of $100 million or more for all maturities of the offering. In addition, the total dollar amount outstanding of issues in the 2026 Index was approximately $30.8 billion, the total market value of issues in the 2026 Index was $35.2 billion, and the average dollar amount outstanding of issues in the 2026 Index was approximately $10,579,000. Further, the most heavily weighted component represented 1.36% of the weight of the 2026 Index and the five most heavily weighted components represented 4.24% of the weight of the 2026 Index.
The Exchange is submitting this proposed rule change because the 2026 Index for the Fund does not meet all of the “generic” listing requirements of Commentary .02(a) to NYSE Arca Rule 5.2-E(j)(3) applicable to the listing of Units based on fixed income securities indexes. The 2026 Index meets all such requirements except for those set forth in Commentary .02(a)(2).
On a continuous basis, (1) the Index will contain at least 500 components; and (2) each of the components of the Index will have an outstanding par value of at least $2 million.
The Exchange notes that, in the iShares Orders, the Commission approved Exchange listing and trading of Units for which each bond in the applicable underlying index must have a minimum maturity par amount of $2 million to be eligible for inclusion in such index, and each such index included at least 500 components.
In addition, the Exchange represents that: (1) Except for Commentary .02(a)(2) to Rule 5.2-E(j)(3), the 2026 Index currently satisfies all of the generic listing standards under NYSE Arca Rule 5.2-E(j)(3); (2) the continued listing standards under Commentary .02 to NYSE Arca Rule 5.2-E(j)(3), as applicable to Units based on fixed income securities, will apply to the Shares of the Fund; and (3) the issuer of the Fund is required to comply with Rule 10A-3
The current value of the Index will be widely disseminated by one or more major market data vendors at least once per day, as required by Commentary .02(b)(ii) to NYSE Arca Rule 5.2-E(j)(3). The portfolio of securities held by the Fund will be disclosed daily on the Fund's website
According to the Registration Statement, the Fund will issue and redeem Shares on a continuous basis at the net asset value per Share (“NAV”) only in a large specified number of Shares called a “Creation Unit”, or multiples thereof, with each Creation Unit consisting of 50,000 Shares, provided, however, that from time to time the Fund may change the number of Shares (or multiples thereof) required for each Creation Unit if the Fund determines such a change would be in the best interests of the Fund.
The consideration for purchase of Creation Units of the Fund generally will consist of the in-kind deposit of a designated portfolio of securities (including any portion of such securities for which cash may be substituted), which constitutes a representative sample of the securities of the 2026 Index
The portfolio of securities required for purchase of a Creation Unit may not be identical to the portfolio of securities the Fund will deliver upon redemption of the Fund's Shares. The Deposit Securities and Fund Securities (as defined below), as the case may be, in connection with a purchase or redemption of a Creation Unit, generally will correspond pro rata, to the extent practicable, to the securities held by the Fund. As the planned termination date of the Fund approaches, and particularly as the bonds held by the Fund begin to mature, the Fund would expect to effect both creations and redemptions increasingly for cash.
The Cash Component will be an amount equal to the difference between
BFA will make available through the National Securities Clearing Corporation (“NSCC”) on each business day, prior to the opening of business on the Exchange, the list of names and the required number or par value of each Deposit Security and the amount of the Cash Component to be included in the current Fund Deposit (based on information as of the end of the previous business day) for the Fund.
The identity and number or par value of the Deposit Securities change pursuant to changes in the composition of the Fund's portfolio and as rebalancing adjustments and corporate action events are reflected from time to time by BFA with a view to the investment objective of the Fund. The composition of the Deposit Securities may also change in response to adjustments to the weighting or composition of the component securities constituting the 2026 Index.
The Fund reserves the right to permit or require the substitution of a “cash in lieu” amount to be added to the Cash Component to replace any Deposit Security that may not be available in sufficient quantity for delivery or that may not be eligible for transfer through the Depository Trust Company (“DTC”) or the clearing process through the Continuous Net Settlement System of the NSCC or that the Authorized Participant is not able to trade due to a trading restriction.
Creation Units may be purchased only by or through a DTC participant that has entered into an “Authorized Participant Agreement” (as described in the Registration Statement) with the Distributor (an “Authorized Participant”). All creation orders must be placed for one or more Creation Units and must be received by the Distributor in proper form no later than the closing time of the regular trading session of the Exchange (normally 4:00 p.m., Eastern time (“E.T.”)) in each case on the date such order is placed in order for creation of Creation Units to be effected based on the NAV of Shares of the Fund as next determined on such date after receipt of the order in proper form.
Shares of the Fund may be redeemed only in Creation Units at the NAV next determined after receipt of a redemption request in proper form by the Distributor and only on a business day. BFA will make available through the NSCC, prior to the opening of business on the Exchange on each business day, the designated portfolio of securities (including any portion of such securities for which cash may be substituted) that will be applicable (subject to possible amendment or correction) to redemption requests received in proper form on that day (the “Fund Securities”). Fund Securities received on redemption may not be identical to Deposit Securities that are applicable to creations of Creation Units.
Unless cash redemptions are available or specified for the Fund, the redemption proceeds for a Creation Unit generally will consist of a specified amount of cash, Fund Securities, plus additional cash in an amount equal to the difference between the NAV of the Shares being redeemed, as next determined after the receipt of a request in proper form, and the value of the specified amount of cash and Fund Securities, less a redemption transaction fee. The Fund currently will redeem Shares for Fund Securities, but reserves the right to utilize a “cash” option for redemption of Shares.
Redemption requests for Creation Units of the Fund must be submitted to the Distributor by or through an Authorized Participant no later than 4:00 p.m. E.T. on any business day, in order to receive that day's NAV. The Authorized Participant must transmit the request for redemption in the form required by the Fund to the Distributor in accordance with procedures set forth in the Authorized Participant Agreement.
On each business day, the Fund will disclose on its website (
On a daily basis, the Fund will disclose for each portfolio security or other financial instrument of the Fund the following information on the Fund's website: Ticker symbol (if applicable), name of security and financial instrument, a common identifier such as CUSIP or ISIN (if applicable), number of shares (if applicable), and dollar value of securities and financial instruments held in the portfolio, and percentage weighting of the security and financial instrument in the portfolio. The website information will be publicly available at no charge. The current value of the Index will be widely disseminated by one or more major market data vendors at least once per day, as required by NYSE Arca Rule 5.2-E(j)(3), Commentary .02(b)(ii).
The IIV for Shares of the Fund will be disseminated by one or more major market data vendors, updated at least every 15 seconds during the Exchange's Core Trading Session, as required by NYSE Arca Rule 5.2-E(j)(3), Commentary .02(c). The current value of the Index would be widely disseminated by one or more major market data vendors at least once per day, as required by NYSE Arca Rule 5.2-(j)(3), Commentary .02 (b)(ii). In addition, the portfolio of securities held by the Fund will be disclosed daily on the Fund's website.
Investors can also obtain the Trust's Statement of Additional Information (“SAI”), the Fund's Shareholder Reports, and its Form N-CSR and Form N-SAR, filed twice a year. The Trust's SAI and Shareholder Reports are available free upon request from the Trust, and those documents and the Form N-CSR and Form N-SAR may be viewed on-screen or downloaded from the Commission's website at
Quotation and last sale information for the Shares of the Fund will be available via the Consolidated Tape Association (“CTA”) high speed line. Quotation information for investment company securities may be obtained through nationally recognized pricing services through subscription agreements or from brokers and dealers who make markets in such securities. Price information regarding municipal bonds is available from third party pricing services and major market data vendors. Trade price and other information relating to municipal bonds is available through the Municipal Securities Rulemaking Board's Electronic Municipal Market Access (“EMMA”) system.
Quotation information for OTC swaps agreements may be obtained from brokers and dealers who make markets in such instruments. Quotation information for exchange-traded swaps, futures and options will be available from the applicable exchange and/or major market vendors.
The Exchange represents that trading in the Shares of the Fund will be subject to the existing trading surveillances, administered by the Financial Industry Regulatory Authority (“FINRA”) on behalf of the Exchange, or by regulatory staff of the Exchange, which are designed to detect violations of Exchange rules and applicable federal securities laws. The Exchange represents that these procedures are adequate to properly monitor Exchange trading of the Shares of the Fund in all trading sessions and to deter and detect violations of Exchange rules and federal securities laws applicable to trading on the Exchange.
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.
The Exchange or FINRA, on behalf of the Exchange, or both, will communicate as needed regarding trading in the Shares, certain futures and certain options with other markets and other entities that are members of the Intermarket Surveillance Group (“ISG”), and the Exchange or FINRA, on behalf of the Exchange, or both, may obtain trading information regarding trading in the Shares, certain futures and certain options from such markets and other entities. In addition, the Exchange may obtain information regarding trading in the Shares, certain futures and certain options from markets and other entities that are members of ISG or with which the Exchange has in place a comprehensive surveillance sharing agreement. FINRA also can access data obtained from the Municipal Securities Rulemaking Board relating to municipal bond trading activity for surveillance purposes in connection with trading in the Shares.
The Exchange represents that at least 90% of the weight of Fund holdings invested in exchange-traded futures contracts and exchange-traded options will be traded on an exchange that is a member of the ISG or with which the Exchange has in place a comprehensive surveillance sharing agreement.
The Exchange 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 of the Fund will be listed and traded on the Exchange pursuant to the initial and continued listing criteria in NYSE Arca Rule 5.2-E(j)(3), except for the requirement in Commentary .02(a)(2) that the component fixed income securities, in the aggregate, account for at least 75% of the weight of the index each shall have a minimum principal amount outstanding of $100 million or more. The Exchange represents that trading in the Shares will be subject to the existing trading surveillances administered by the Exchange as well as cross-market surveillances administered by FINRA on behalf of the Exchange, which are designed to detect violations of Exchange rules and federal securities laws applicable to trading on the Exchange.
As discussed above, the Exchange believes that the Index is sufficiently broad-based to deter potential manipulation. For informational purposes, as of April 30, 2018, 76.30% of the weight of the 2026 Index components was comprised of individual maturities that were part of an entire municipal bond offering with a minimum original principal amount outstanding of $100 million or more for all maturities of the offering. In addition, the total dollar amount outstanding of issues in the 2026 Index was approximately $30.8 billion, the total market value of issues in the 2026 Index was $35.2 billion, and the average dollar amount outstanding of issues in the 2026 Index was approximately $10,579,000. Further, the most heavily weighted component represented 1.36% of the weight of the 2026 Index and the five most heavily weighted components represented 4.24% of the weight of the 2026 Index.
On a continuous basis, (1) the Index will contain at least 500 components; and (2) each of the components of the Index will have an outstanding par value of at least $2 million. As noted above, in the iShares Orders, the Commission approved Exchange listing and trading of Units for which each bond in the applicable underlying index must have a minimum maturity par amount of $2 million to be eligible for inclusion in such index, and each such index included at least 500 components.
The proposed rule change is designed to promote just and equitable principles of trade and to protect investors and the public interest in that a large amount of information will be publicly available regarding the Fund and the Shares, thereby promoting market transparency. The Fund's portfolio holdings will be disclosed on the Fund's website daily after the close of trading on the Exchange. Moreover, the IIV will be widely disseminated by one or more major market data vendors at least every 15 seconds during the Exchange's Core Trading Session. The current value of the Index will be disseminated by one or more major market data vendors at least once per day. Information regarding market price and trading volume of the Shares will be continually available on a real-time basis throughout the day on brokers' computer screens and other electronic services, and quotation and last sale information will be available via the CTA high-speed line. The website for the Fund will include the prospectus for the Fund and additional data relating to NAV and other applicable quantitative information. Moreover, prior to the commencement of trading, the Exchange will inform its ETP Holders in an Information Bulletin of the special characteristics and risks associated with trading the Shares.
If the Exchange becomes aware that the NAV is not being disseminated to all market participants at the same time, it will halt trading in the Shares until such time as the NAV is available to all market participants. With respect to trading halts, the Exchange may consider all relevant factors in exercising its discretion to halt or suspend trading in the Shares of the Fund. Trading also may be halted because of market conditions or for reasons that, in the view of the Exchange, make trading in the Shares inadvisable. If the IIV or the Index value is not being disseminated as required, the Exchange may halt trading during the day in which the interruption to the dissemination of the IIV or Index value occurs. If the interruption to the dissemination of the IIV or Index value persists past the trading day in which it occurred, the Exchange will halt trading. Trading in Shares of the Fund will be halted if the circuit breaker parameters in NYSE Arca Rule 7.12-E have been reached or because of market conditions or for reasons that, in the view of the Exchange, make trading in the Shares inadvisable, and trading in the Shares will be subject to NYSE Arca Rule 7.34-E, which sets forth circumstances under which Shares of the Fund may be halted. In addition, investors will have ready access to information regarding the IIV, and quotation and last sale information for the Shares.
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 an additional type of exchange-traded fund that holds municipal bonds and that will enhance competition among market participants, to the benefit of investors and the marketplace. As noted above, the Exchange has in place surveillance procedures relating to trading in the Shares and 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. In addition, investors will have ready access to information regarding the IIV and quotation and last sale information for the Shares.
For the above reasons, the Exchange believes that 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 impose any burden on competition that is not necessary or appropriate in furtherance of the purpose of the Act. The Exchange notes that the proposed rule change will facilitate the listing and trading of an additional type of Units based on a municipal bond index that will enhance competition among market participants, to the benefit of investors and the marketplace.
No written comments were solicited or received with respect to the proposed rule change.
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) 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 necessary or appropriate in the public interest, for the protection of investors, or otherwise in furtherance of the purposes of the Act. If 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.
On July 31, 2018, MIAX PEARL, LLC (“MIAX PEARL” or the “Exchange”) filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (“Commission”), pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (“Act”),
For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets, pursuant to delegated authority.
Pursuant to Section 19(b)(1)
The Exchange proposes amendments to the Exchange's rules regarding qualification, registration and continuing education requirements applicable to Equity Trading Permit (“ETP”) Holders, Options Trading Permit (“OTP”) Holders or OTP Firms. The Exchange's rule proposal is intended to harmonize its rules with Financial Regulatory Authority, Inc. (“FINRA”) rules and thus promote consistency within the securities industry, and therefore the Exchange is only adopting rules that are relevant to the Exchange's ETP Holders, OTP Holders or OTP Firms. The Exchange is not adopting registration categories that are not applicable to ETP Holders, OTP Holders or OTP Firms because they do not engage in the type of business that
In its filing with the Commission, the self-regulatory organization 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 those 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 qualification, registration, and continuing education requirements applicable to ETP Holders, OTP Holders or OTP Firms. The proposed amendments are intended to: (i) Provide transparency and clarity with respect to the Exchange's registration, qualification and examination requirements; (ii) amend its rules relating to categories of registration and respective qualification examinations required for ETP Holders that engage in trading activities on the Exchange; (iii) harmonize the Exchange's qualification, registration and examination rules with those of FINRA
Current Rules 2.5(A) and (B) currently require traders of ETP Holders to successfully complete the Series 7 Examination. The Exchange proposes to amend current Rules 2.5(A) and (B) by requiring traders of ETP Holders to successfully complete the Securities Industry Essentials (“SIE”) examination in addition to the Series 7 Examination in order to satisfy the Exchange's registration requirement, consistent with the proposed restructuring of the representative-level examinations proposed in the FINRA Filing.
Current Rule 2.23(b)(1) similarly requires traders of OTP Holders and OTP Firms to successfully complete the Series 7 Examination. Consistent with the proposed restructuring of the representative-level examination proposed in the FINRA Filing, the Exchange proposes to amend current Rule 2.23(b)(1) to require traders of OTP Holders and OTP Firms to successfully complete the SIE examination and the Series 7 Examination in order to satisfy the Exchange's registration requirement. Rule 2.23(b)(2) currently provides that the examination requirement in Rule 2.23(b)(1) does not apply to an individual who does not conduct business with the public and who is registered as a Market Maker or Market Maker Authorized Traders, pursuant to Rule 2.23(b)(2)(A), or as a Securities Trader, pursuant to Rule 2.23(b)(2)(C), in which case such individuals are required to successfully complete the Series 57 examination.
Consistent with the proposed restructuring of the representative-level examination proposed in the FINRA Filing, the Exchange proposes to amend current Rule 2.23(b)(2)(A) and (C) by requiring traders of OTP Holders and OTP Firms to successfully complete the SIE examination and the Series 57 Examination in order to satisfy the Exchange's registration requirement. Further, current Rule 2.23(b)(2)(C) provides the definition of a Securities Trader. The Exchange proposes to adopt FINRA's definition of Securities Trader (as described below) and, therefore, proposes to add a reference to Rule 2.1220(b)(3) as the appropriate rule in the Exchange's Rulebook where the definition of Securities Trader can be found. The Exchange also proposes to adopt rule text within the current rule that provides that a person registered as a Securities Trader would not be qualified to function in any other registration category unless he or she is also qualified and registered in such other registration category. Current Rule 2.23(b)(3)(A) provides that a General Securities Principal engaged in supervisory activities must complete the Series 7 examination and the Series 24 examination. Consistent with the proposed restructuring of the representative-level examination proposed in the FINRA Filing, the Exchange proposes to amend current Rule 2.23(b)(3)(A) to require such persons to also complete the SIE examination.
Current Rule 2.24(b)(iii) provides that employees of ETP Holders seeking limited registration as Securities Traders are required to complete the Series 57 examination. Consistent with the proposed restructuring of the representative-level examination proposed in the FINRA Filing, the Exchange proposes to amend current Rule 2.24(b)(iii) to require such persons to also complete the SIE examination in addition to the Series 57 examination. Further, current Rule 2.24, Commentary .03, provides the definition of a Securities Trader. With this proposed rule change, the Exchange proposes to adopt FINRA's definition of Securities Trader (as described below) and therefore, proposes to add a reference to Rule 2.1220(b)(3) as the appropriate rule in the Exchange's Rulebook where the definition of Securities Trader can be found. The Exchange also proposes to adopt rule text within the current rule that provides that a person registered as a Securities Trader would not be qualified to function in any other
Current Rule 6.43-O(b)(1)(A) currently requires qualified Floor Brokers and Floor Clerks of qualified Floor Brokers that conduct a public business limited to accepting orders directly from Professional Customers for execution on the Floor of the Exchange must successfully complete the Series 7 examination or the Series 7A examination. Consistent with the proposed restructuring of the representative-level examination proposed in the FINRA Filing, the Exchange proposes to amend current Rule 6.43-O(b)(1)(A) by requiring qualified Floor Brokers and Floor Clerks of qualified Floor Brokers to successfully complete the SIE examination and the Series 7 Examination or the Series 7A examination in order to satisfy the Exchange's registration requirement.
Current Rule 9.27-O, Commentary .01, and Rule 9.27-E, Commentary .01, each states that the Exchange considers the Uniform Registered Representative Examination
Rules 2.23 and 2.24 provide the continuing education requirements of registered persons
The Exchange proposes to amend Rules 2.23(d)(1) and 2.24(d)(1) to provide, consistent with proposed Rule 2.1210, Commentary .08, that a waiver-eligible person would be subject to a Regulatory Element program that correlates to his or her most recent registration category, and that the content of the Regulatory Element would be based on the same cycle had the individual remain [sic] registered.
Further, the Exchange proposes to amend Rules 2.23(d)(1) and 2.24(d)(1) to provide that any person whose registration has been deemed inactive under the rule may not accept or solicit business or receive any compensation for the purchase or sale of securities. The proposed amendment provides, however, that such person may receive trail or residual commissions resulting from transactions completed before the inactive status, unless the OTP Holder or OTP Firm, or ETP Holder, with which the person is associated has a policy prohibiting such trail or residual commissions.
Additionally, under Rules 2.23(d)(1) and 2.24(d)(1), a registered person is required to retake the Regulatory Element in the event that such person (i) is subject to any statutory disqualification as defined in Section 3(a)(39) of the Exchange Act; (ii) is subject to suspension or to the imposition of a fine of $5,000 or more for violation of any provision of any securities law or regulation, or any agreement with or rule or standard of conduct of any securities governmental agency, securities self-regulatory organization, or as imposed by any such regulatory or self-regulatory organization in connection with a disciplinary proceeding; or (iii) is ordered as a sanction in a disciplinary action to retake the Regulatory Element by any securities governmental agency or self-regulatory organization. The Exchange proposes to amend Rules 2.23(d)(1) and 2.24(d)(1) to provide an exception to a waiver-eligible person from retaking the Regulatory Element and satisfy [sic] all of its requirements.
Current Rule 2.23(d)(2)(B)(ii) provides that programs used to implement an OTP Firm's or OTP Holder's training program must be appropriate for the business of the OTP Firm or OTP Holder and, at a minimum must cover specific matters concerning securities products, services, and strategies offered by the OTP Firm or OTP Holder. Current Rule 2.24(d)(2)(B)(ii) also provides that programs used to implement an ETP Holder's training program must be appropriate for the business of the ETP Holder and, at a minimum must cover specific matters concerning securities products, services, and strategies offered by the ETP Holder. The Exchange proposes to amend both Rules 2.23(d)(2)(B)(ii) and 2.24(d)(2)(B)(ii) to expand the minimum standard for such training programs by requiring that, at a minimum, a firm's training program must also cover training in ethics and professional responsibility.
The Exchange proposes to adopt Rule 2.23, Commentary .06 and Rule 2.24, Commentary .06, regarding the submission of fingerprint information by OTP Firms or OTP Holders, and ETP Holders, respectively. As proposed, upon filing an electronic Form U4 on behalf of a person applying for registration, an OTP Firm or OTP Holder, or ETP Holder, as applicable, would be required to promptly submit fingerprint information for that person. If the OTP Firm or OTP Holder, or ETP Holder, as applicable, fails to submit the fingerprint information within 30 days after the Exchange receives the electronic Form U4, the person's registration shall be deemed inactive and the person would be required to immediately cease all activities requiring registration and would be
As a general matter, FINRA administers qualification examinations that are designed to establish that persons associated with ETP Holders, OTP Holders or OTP Firm have attained specified levels of competence and knowledge. Over time, the examination program has increased in complexity to address the introduction of new products and functions, and related regulatory concerns and requirements. As a result, today, there are a large number of examinations, considerable content overlap across the representative-level examinations and requirements for individuals in various segments of the industry to pass multiple examinations. To address these issues, FINRA has formulated a general knowledge examination called the Securities Industry Essential (“SIE”) that all potential representative-level registrants would take.
Proposed Rule 2.1210 provides that each person engaged in the investment banking or securities business of an ETP Holder, OTP Holder or OTP Firm must register with the Exchange as a representative or principal in each category of registration appropriate to his or her functions and responsibilities as specified in proposed Rule 2.1220, unless exempt from registration pursuant to proposed Rule 2.1230. Proposed Rule 2.1210 also provides that such person is not qualified to function in any registered capacity other than that for which the person is registered, unless otherwise stated in the rules.
The Exchange currently does not have a specific rule that provides for permissive registrations. With this proposed rule change, and to conform its rules to the FINRA rules, the Exchange proposes to adopt a specific rule regarding permissive registrations. Proposed Rule 2.1210, Commentary .01, allows any associated person to obtain and maintain any registration permitted by an ETP Holder, OTP Holder or OTP Firm. For instance, an associated person of an ETP Holder, OTP Holder or OTP Firm working solely in a clerical or ministerial capacity, such as in an administrative capacity, would be able to obtain and maintain a General Securities Representative registration with the ETP Holder, OTP Holder or OTP Firm. As another example, an associated person of an ETP Holder, OTP Holder or OTP Firm who is registered, [sic] and functioning solely, as a General Securities Representative would be able to obtain and maintain a General Securities Principal registration with the ETP Holder, OTP Holder or OTP Firm. Further, proposed Rule 2.1210, Commentary .01, allows an individual engaged in the securities business of a foreign securities affiliate or subsidiary of an ETP Holder, OTP Holder or OTP Firm to obtain and maintain any registration permitted by the ETP Holder, OTP Holder or OTP Firm.
The Exchange is proposing to permit the registration of such individuals for several reasons. First, an ETP Holder, OTP Holder or OTP Firm may foresee a need to move a former representative or principal who has not been registered for two or more years back into a position that would require such person to be registered. Currently, such persons are required to requalify (or obtain a waiver of the applicable qualification examinations) and reapply for registration. Second, the proposed rule change would allow ETP Holders, OTP Holder or OTP Firm to develop a depth of associated persons with registrations in the event of unanticipated personnel changes. Finally, allowing registration in additional categories encourages greater regulatory understanding.
Individuals maintaining a permissive registration under the proposed rule change would be considered registered persons and subject to all Exchange rules, to the extent relevant to their activities. Additionally, consistent with the requirements of the Exchange's supervision rules, as proposed, ETP Holders, OTP Holder or OTP Firm would be required to have adequate supervisory systems and procedures reasonably designed to ensure that individuals with permissive registrations do not act outside the scope of their assigned functions. With respect to an individual who solely maintains a permissive registration, such as an individual working exclusively in an administrative capacity, the individual's day-to-day supervisor may be a non-registered person. However, for purposes of compliance with the Exchange's supervision rules, an ETP Holder, OTP Holder or OTP Firm would be required to assign a registered supervisor who would be responsible for periodically contacting such individual's day-to-day supervisor to verify that the individual is not acting outside the scope of his or her assigned functions. If such individual is permissively registered as a representative, the registered supervisor must be registered as a representative or principal. If the individual is permissively registered as a principal, the registered supervisor must be registered as a principal.
Proposed Rule 2.1210, Commentary .02, provides that before the registration of a person as a representative can become effective under proposed Rule 2.1210, such person must pass the SIE and an appropriate representative-level qualification examination as specified in proposed Rule 2.1220.
Further, proposed Rule 2.1210, Commentary .02, provides that if a registered person's job functions change and he or she needs to become registered in another representative-level category, he or she would not need to pass the SIE again. Rather, the registered person would need to pass only the appropriate representative-level qualification examination.
Moreover, proposed Rule 2.1210, Commentary .02, provides that all associated persons, such as associated persons whose functions are solely and exclusively clerical or ministerial, are eligible to take the SIE. Proposed Rule 2.1210, Commentary .02, also provides that individuals who are not associated persons of firms, such as members of the general public, are eligible to take the SIE. The Exchange believes that expanding the pool of individuals who are eligible to take the SIE would enable prospective securities industry professionals to demonstrate to prospective employers a basic level of knowledge prior to submitting a job application. Further, this approach would allow for more flexibility and career mobility within the securities industry. While all associated persons of firms as well as individuals who are not associated persons would be eligible to take the SIE pursuant to the proposed rule, passing the SIE alone would not qualify them for registration with the Exchange. Rather, to be eligible for registration with the Exchange, an individual must pass an applicable representative or principal qualification examination and complete the other requirements of the registration process.
Proposed Rule 2.1210, Commentary .02, also provides that the Exchange may, in exceptional cases and where good cause is shown, pursuant to Rule 2.5(c), waive the applicable qualification examination(s) and accept other standards as evidence of an applicant's qualifications for registration. The proposed rule further provides that the Exchange will only consider examination waiver requests submitted by an ETP Holder, OTP Holder or OTP Firm for individuals associated with the ETP Holder, OTP Holder or OTP Firm who are seeking registration in a representative- or principal-level registration category. Moreover, the proposed rule states that the Exchange will consider waivers of the SIE alone or the SIE and the representative- and principal-level examination(s) for such individuals. The Exchange would not consider a waiver of the SIE for non-associated persons or for associated persons who are not registering as representatives or principals.
Proposed Rule 2.1210, Commentary .03, provides that an ETP Holder, OTP Holder or OTP Firm may designate any person currently registered, or who becomes registered, with the ETP Holder, OTP Holder or OTP Firm as a representative to function as a principal for a limited period, provided that such person has at least 18 months of experience functioning as a registered representative with the [sic] five-year period immediately preceding the designation. The proposed rule is intended to ensure that representatives designated to function as principals for the limited period under the proposal have an appropriate level of registered representative experience. The proposed rule clarifies that the requirements of the rule apply to designations to any principal category, including those categories that are not subject to a prerequisite representative-level registration requirement, such as the Financial and Operations Principal registration category.
The proposed rule also clarifies that the individual must fulfill all applicable prerequisite registration, fee and examination requirements before his or her designation as a principal. Further, the proposed rule provides that in no event may such person function as a principal beyond the initial 120 calendar days without having successfully passed an appropriate principal qualification examination. The proposed rule also provides an exception to the experience requirement for principals who are designated by an ETP Holder, OTP Holder or OTP Firm to function in other principal categories for a limited period. Specifically, the proposed rule states that an ETP Holder, OTP Holder or OTP Firm may designate any person currently registered, or who becomes registered, with the ETP Holder as a principal to function in another principal category for 120 calendar days before passing any applicable examinations.
Proposed Rule 2.1210, Commentary .04 states that associated persons taking the SIE would be subject to the SIE Rules of Conduct, and associated persons taking a representative or principal examination would be subject to the Rules of Conduct for representative and principal examinations. Pursuant to proposed Rule 2.1210, Commentary .04, a violation of the SIE Rules of Conduct or the Rules of Conduct for representative and principal examinations by an associated person would be deemed to be a violation of Rule 11.1. Moreover, if an associated person is deemed to have violated the SIE Rules of Conduct or the Rules of Conduct for representative and principal examinations, the associated person may forfeit the results of the examination and may be subject to disciplinary action by the Exchange.
Further, the proposed rule states that individuals taking the SIE who are not associated persons must agree to be subject to the SIE Rules of Conduct. Among other things, the SIE Rules of Conduct would require individuals to attest that they are not qualified to engage in the investment banking or securities business based on passing the SIE and would prohibit individuals from cheating on the examination or misrepresenting their qualifications to the public subsequent to passing the SIE. Moreover, non-associated persons may forfeit their SIE results and may be prohibited from retaking the SIE if the Exchange determines that they cheated on the SIE or that they misrepresented their qualifications to the public subsequent to passing the SIE.
The proposed rule further notes that the Exchange considers all qualification examinations [sic] content to be highly confidential and that the removal of examination content from an examination center, reproduction, disclosure, receipt from or passing to any person, or use for study purposes of any portion of such qualification examination or any other use that would compromise the effectiveness of the examinations and the use in any manner and at any time of the questions or answers to the examinations is prohibited and would be deemed a violation of Rule 11.1.
Proposed Rule 2.1210, Commentary .05 provides that any person who fails a qualification examination may retake that examination after 30 calendar days from the date of the person's last attempt to pass that examination. The proposed rule further provides that if a person fails an examination three or more times in succession within a two-year period, he or she would be prohibited from retaking the examination either until a period of 180 calendar days from the date of the person's last attempt to pass it [sic]. These waiting periods would apply to the SIE and the representative- and principal-level examinations. Moreover, the proposed rule provides that non-associated persons taking the SIE must agree to be subject to the same waiting periods for retaking the SIE.
Pursuant to Rules 2.23(d) and 2.24(d), the CE requirements applicable to registered persons consist of a Regulatory Element
The Exchange believes that all registered persons, regardless of their activities, should be subject to the Regulatory Element of the CE requirements so that they can keep their knowledge of the securities industry current. Therefore, the Exchange proposes to adopt Rule 2.1210, Commentary .06, to clarify that all registered persons, including those who solely maintain a permissive registration, are required to satisfy the Regulatory Element, as specified in Rules 2.23(d)(1) and 2.24(d)(1). The Exchange is making corresponding changes to Rules 2.23(d)(1) and 2.24(d)(1). The Exchange is not proposing any changes to the Firm Element requirement at this time. Individuals who have passed the SIE but not a representative- or principal-level examination and do not hold a registered position would not be subject to any CE requirements.
Proposed Rule 2.1210, Commentary .06, also provides that a registered person of an ETP Holder, OTP Holder or OTP Firm who becomes CE inactive would not be permitted to be registered in another registration category with the ETP Holder, OTP Holder or OTP Firm or be registered in any registration category with another ETP Holder, OTP Holder or OTP Firm, until the person has satisfied the Regulatory Element.
Proposed Rule 2.1210, Commentary .07, provides that any person who was last registered as a representative two or more years immediately preceding the date of receipt by the Exchange of a new application for registration as a representative is required to pass a qualification examination for representatives appropriate to the category of registration as specified in proposed Rule 2.1220(b). Proposed Rule 2.1210, Commentary .07, also sets forth that a passing result on the SIE would be valid for up to four years. Therefore, under the proposed rule change, an individual who passes the SIE and is an associated person of an ETP Holder, OTP Holder or OTP Firm at the time would have up to four years from the date he or she passes the SIE to pass a representative-level examination to register as a representative with that ETP Holder, OTP Holder or OTP Firm, or a subsequent ETP Holder, OTP Holder or OTP Firm, without having to retake the SIE. In addition, an individual who passes the SIE and is not an associated person at the time would have up to four years from the date he or she passes the SIE to become an associated person of an ETP Holder, OTP Holder or OTP Firm and pass a representative-level examination and register as a representative without having to retake the SIE.
Moreover, an individual holding a representative-level registration who leaves the industry after the effective date of this proposed rule change would have up to four years to re-associate with an ETP Holder, OTP Holder or OTP Firm and register as a representative without having to retake the SIE. However, the four-year expiration period in the proposed rule change extends only to the SIE, and not the representative- and principal-level registrations. The representative- and principal-level registrations would continue to be subject to a two-year expiration period as is the case today.
Finally, proposed Rule 2.1210, Commentary .07, clarifies that, for purposes of the proposed rule, an application would not be considered to have been received by the Exchange if that application does not result in a registration.
Proposed Rule 2.1210, Commentary .08, provides the process for individuals working for a financial services industry affiliate of an ETP Holder, OTP Holder or OTP Firm
Under the proposed waiver process, the first time a registered person is designated as eligible for a waiver based on the FSA criteria, the ETP Holder, OTP Holder or OTP Firm with which the individual is registered would notify the Exchange of the FSA designation. The ETP Holder, OTP Holder or OTP Firm would concurrently file a full Form U5 terminating the individual's registration with the firm, which would also terminate the individual's other SRO and state registrations. To be eligible for initial designation as an FSA-eligible person by an ETP Holder, OTP Holder or OTP Firm, an individual must have been registered for a total of five years within the most recent 10-year period prior to the designation, including for the most recent year with that ETP Holder, OTP Holder or OTP Firm. An individual would have to satisfy these preconditions only for purposes of his or her initial designation as an FSA-eligible person, and not for any subsequent FSA designation(s). Thereafter, the individual would be eligible for a waiver for up to seven years from the date of initial designation,
An individual designated as an FSA-eligible person would be subject to the Regulatory Element of CE while working for a financial services industry affiliate of an ETP Holder, OTP Holder or OTP Firm. The individual would be subject to a Regulatory Element program that correlates to his or her most recent registration category, and CE would be based on the same cycle had the individual remained registered. If the individual fails to complete the prescribed Regulatory Element during the 120-day window for taking the session, he or she would lose FSA eligibility (
Upon registering an FSA-eligible person, a firm would file a Form U4 and request the appropriate registration(s) for the individual. The firm would also submit an examination waiver request to the Exchange,
(1) Prior to the individual's initial designation as an FSA-eligible person, the individual was registered for a total of five years within the most recent 10-year period, including for the most recent year with the ETP Holder, OTP Holder or OTP Firm that initially designated the individual as an FSA-eligible person;
(2) The waiver request is made within seven years of the individual's initial designation as an FSA-eligible person by an ETP Holder, OTP Holder or OTP Firm;
(3) The initial designation and any subsequent designation(s) were made concurrently with the filing of the individual's related Form U5;
(4) The individual continuously worked for the financial services affiliate(s) of an ETP Holder, OTP Holder or OTP Firm since the last Form U5 filing;
(5) The individual has complied with the Regulatory Element of CE; and
(6) The individual does not have any pending or adverse regulatory matters, or terminations, that are reportable on the Form U4, and has not otherwise been subject to a statutory disqualification while the individual was designated as an FSA-eligible person with an ETP Holder, OTP Holder or OTP Firm.
Following the Form U5 filing, an individual could move between the financial services affiliates of an ETP Holder, OTP Holder or OTP Firm so long as the individual is continuously working for an affiliate. Further, an ETP Holder could submit multiple waiver requests for the individual, provided that the waiver requests are made during the course of the seven-year period.
Proposed Rule 2.1210, Commentary .09 provides specific relief to registered persons serving in the Armed Forces of the United States. Among other things, the proposed rule permits a registered person of an ETP Holder, OTP Holder or OTP Firm who volunteers for or is called into active duty in the Armed Forces of the United States to be registered in an inactive status and remain eligible to receive ongoing transaction-related compensation. The proposed rule also includes specific provisions regarding the deferment of the lapse of registration requirements for formerly registered persons serving in
As set forth in proposed Rule 2.1220(a)(1), for purposes of these registration rules, the term “Principal” to mean any Person Associated with an ETP Holder, OTP Holder or OTP Firm actively engaged in the management of the ETP Holder's, OTP Holder's or OTP Firm's securities business, including supervision, solicitation, conduct of the ETP Holder's, OTP Holder's or OTP Firm's business, or the training of Authorized Traders and Persons Associated with an ETP Holder, OTP Holder or OTP Firm for any of these functions. Such Persons include Sole Proprietors, Officers, Partners, and Directors of Corporations.
For purposes of proposed Rule 2.1220(a)(1), the phrase “actively engaged in the management of the ETP Holder's, OTP Holder's or OTP Firm's securities business” includes the management of, and the implementation of corporate policies related to, such business. The term also includes managerial decision-making authority with respect to the ETP Holder's, OTP Holder's or OTP Firm's securities business and management-level responsibilities for supervising any aspect of such business, such as serving as a voting member of the ETP Holder's, OTP Holder's or OTP Firm's executive, management or operations committee.
Proposed Rule 2.1220(a)(2)(A) states that each principal as defined in proposed Rule 2.1220(a)(1) is required to register with the Exchange as a General Securities Principal, subject to the following exceptions. The proposed rule provides that if a principal's activities include the functions of a Compliance Officer, a Financial and Operations Principal (or an Introducing Broker-Dealer Financial and Operations Principal, as applicable), a Principal Financial Officer, a Principal Operations Officer, a Securities Trader Principal, or a Registered Options Principal then the principal must appropriately register in one or more of these categories.
Proposed Rule 2.1220(a)(2)(A) further provides that if a principal's activities are limited solely to the functions of a General Securities Sales Supervisor, then the principal may appropriately register in that category in lieu of registering as a General Securities Principal.
Proposed Rule 2.1220(a)(2)(B) requires that an individual registering as a General Securities Principal satisfy the General Securities Representative prerequisite registration and pass the General Securities Principal qualification examination. Proposed Rule 2.1220(a)(2)(B) also clarifies that an individual may register as a General Securities Sales Supervisor and pass the General Securities Sales Supervisor qualification examination in lieu of passing the General Securities Principal examination.
As a general matter, the Exchange currently recognizes the Corporate Securities Representative but would no longer recognize this registration category given its elimination by FINRA. Proposed Rule 2.1220(a)(2)(B), however, provides that, subject to the lapse of registration provisions in proposed Rule 2.1210, Commentary .07, each person registered with the Exchange as a Corporate Securities Representative and a General Securities Principal on October 1, 2018 and each person who was registered with the Exchange as a Corporate Securities Representative and a General Securities Principal within two years prior to October 1, 2018 would be qualified to register as a General Securities Principal without having to take any additional qualification examinations, provided that such person's supervisory responsibilities in the investment banking and securities business of an ETP Holder, OTP Holder or OTP Firm are limited to corporate securities activities of the ETP Holder, OTP Holder or OTP Firm. The proposed rule further provides that all other individuals registering as General Securities Principals after October 1, 2018 shall, prior to or concurrent with such registration, become registered as a General Securities Representative and either (1) pass the General Securities Principal qualification examination; or (2) register as a General Securities Sales Supervisor and pass the General Securities Sales Supervisor qualification examination.
Proposed Rule 2.1220(a)(3) establishes a Compliance Officer registration category and requires all persons designated as CCOs on Schedule A of Form BD to register as Compliance Officers, subject to an exception for ETP Holders, OTP Holders or OTP Firms engaged in limited investment banking or securities business. The proposed rule only addresses the registration requirements for CCOs. However, consistent with proposed Rule 2.1210, Commentary .01 relating to permissive registrations, a firm may allow other associated persons to register as Compliance Officers. Chief Compliance Officers at OTP Holders or OTP Firms, who are currently not subject to a registration requirement, would be excluded from the requirements of the proposed rule.
In addition, the Exchange is proposing to provide CCOs of firms that engage in limited investment banking or securities business with greater flexibility to satisfy the qualification requirements for CCOs. Specifically, proposed Rule 2.1220(a)(3) set forth the following qualification requirements for Compliance Officer registration:
• Subject to the lapse of registration provisions in proposed Rule 2.1210, Commentary .07, each person registered with the Exchange as a General Securities Representative and a General Securities Principal on October 1, 2018 and each person who was registered with the Exchange as a General Securities Representative and a General
• All other individuals registering as Compliance Officers after October 1, 2018 would have to: (1) Satisfy the General Securities Representative prerequisite registration and pass the General Securities Principal qualification examination; or (2) pass the Compliance Official qualification examination.
• An individual designated as a CCO on Schedule A of Form BD of an ETP Holder, OTP Holder or OTP Firm that is engaged in limited investment banking or securities business may be registered in a principal category under proposed Rule 2.1220(a) that corresponds to the limited scope of the ETP Holder's, OTP Holder's or OTP Firm's business.
Proposed Rule 2.1220(a)(4) provides that each principal who is responsible for the financial and operational management of an ETP Holder, OTP Holder or OTP Firm that has a minimum net capital requirement of $250,000 under SEA Rules 15c3-1(a)(1)(ii) and 15c3-1(a)(2)(i), or an ETP Holder, OTP Holder or OTP Firm that has a minimum net capital requirement of $150,000 under SEA Rule 15c3-1(a)(8) must be designated as a Financial and Operations Principal. In addition, proposed Rule 2.1220(a)(4) provides that a principal who is responsible for the financial and operational management of an ETP Holder, OTP Holder or OTP Firm that is subject to the net capital requirements of SEA Rule 15c3-1, other than an ETP Holder, OTP Holder or OTP Firm that is subject to the net capital requirements of SEA Rules 15c3-1(a)(1)(ii), (a)(2)(i) or (a)(8), must be designated and registered as either a Financial and Operations Principal or an Introducing Broker-Dealer Financial and Operations Principal. Financial and Operations Principals and Introducing Broker-Dealer Financial and Operation Principals are not subject to a prerequisite representative registration, but they must pass the Financial and Operations Principal or Introducing Broker-Dealer Financial and Operations Principal examination, as applicable.
Additionally, proposed Rule 2.1220(a)(4)(B) requires an ETP Holder, OTP Holder or OTP Firm to designate a Principal Financial Officer with primary responsibility for the day-to-day operations of the business, including overseeing the receipt and delivery of securities and funds, safeguarding customer and firm assets, calculation and collection of margin from customers and processing dividend receivable and payables and reorganization redemptions and those books and records related to such activities. Further, the proposed rule requires that a firm's Principal Financial Officer and Principal Operations Officer qualify and register as Financial and Operations Principals or Introducing Broker-Dealer Financial and Operations Principals, as applicable.
Because the financial and operational activities of ETP Holders, OTP Holders or OTP Firms that neither self-clear nor provide clearing services are more limited, such ETP Holders, OTP Holders or OTP Firms may designate the same person as the Principal Financial Officer, Principal Operations Officer and Financial and Operations Principal or Introducing Broker-Dealer Financial and Operations Principal (that is, such ETP Holders, OTP Holders or OTP Firms are not required to designate different persons to function in these capacities).
Given the level of financial and operational responsibility at clearing and self-clearing members, the Exchange believes that it is necessary for such ETP Holders, OTP Holders or OTP Firms to designate separate persons to function as Principal Financial Officer and Principal Operations Officer. Such persons may also carry out the other responsibilities of a Financial and Operations Principal, such as supervision of individuals engaged in financial and operational activities. In addition, the proposed rule provides that a clearing or self-clearing ETP Holder, OTP Holder or OTP Firm that is limited in size and resources may request a waiver of the requirement to designate separate persons to function as Principal Financial Officer and Principal Operations Officer.
Proposed Rule 2.1220(a)(5) requires that a principal responsible for supervising the securities trading activities specified in proposed Rule 2.1220(b)(3) register as a Securities Trader Principal. The proposed rule requires that individuals registering as Securities Trader Principals must be registered as Securities Traders and pass the General Securities Principal qualification examination.
Proposed Rule 2.1220(a)(6) provides that a principal may register with the Exchange as a General Securities Sales Supervisor if his or her supervisory responsibilities in the investment banking or securities business of an ETP Holder, OTP Holder or OTP Firm are limited to the securities sales activities of the ETP Holder, OTP Holder or OTP Firm, including the approval of customer accounts, training of sales and sales supervisory personnel and the maintenance of records of original entry or ledger accounts of the ETP Holder, OTP Holder or OTP Firm required to be maintained in branch offices by Exchange Act record-keeping rules.
A person registering as a General Securities Sales Supervisor must satisfy the General Securities Representative prerequisite registration and pass the General Securities Sales Supervisor examinations.
Proposed Rule 2.1220(a)(7) provides that each OTP Holder or OTP Firm engaged in options transactions with the public have at least one Registered Options Principal. The proposed rule further requires that a principal responsible for supervising an OTP
Proposed Rule 2.1220(a)(7)(B) further provides that, subject to the lapse of registration provisions in proposed Rule 2.1210, Commentary .07, each person registered with the Exchange as a Registered Options Principal on October 1, 2018 and each person who was registered with the Exchange as a Registered Options Principal within two years prior to October 1, 2018 would be qualified to register as a Registered Options Principal without having to pass any additional qualification examinations. The proposed rule further provides that all other individuals registering as Registered Options Principals after October 1, 2018 shall, prior to or concurrent with such registration, become registered as a General Securities Representative and pass the Registered Options Principal qualification examination.
Proposed Rule 2.1220(b)(1) defines a representative as any person associated with an ETP Holder, OTP Holder or OTP Firm, including assistant officers other than principals, who is engaged in the ETP Holder's, OTP Holder's or OTP Firm's investment banking or securities business, such as supervision, solicitation, conduct of business in securities or the training of persons associated with an ETP Holder, OTP Holder or OTP Firm for any of these functions.
Proposed Rule 2.1220(b)(2)(A) states that each representative as defined in proposed Rule 2.1220(b)(1) is required to register with the Exchange as a General Securities Representative, subject to the following exceptions. The proposed rule provides that if a representative's activities include the function of a Securities Trader, then the representative must appropriately register in that category.
The proposed rule further provides that, subject to the lapse of registration provisions in proposed Rule 2.1210, Commentary .07, each person registered with the Exchange as a General Securities Representative on October 1, 2018 and each person who was registered with the Exchange as a General Securities Representative within two years prior to October 1, 2018 would be qualified to register as a General Securities Representative without having to take any additional qualification examinations. Additionally, the proposed rule would require that individuals registering as General Securities Representatives after October 1, 2018 shall, prior to or concurrent with such registration, pass the SIE and the General Securities Representative examination.
Proposed Rule 2.1220(b)(3) provides that each representative as defined in proposed Rule 2.1220(b)(1) is required to register as a Securities Trader if, with respect to transactions in equity (including equity options), preferred or convertible debt securities, such person is engaged in proprietary trading, the execution of transactions on an agency basis, or the direct supervision of such activities. The proposed rule provides an exception from the registration requirement for any associated person of an ETP Holder, OTP Holder or OTP Firm whose trading activities are conducted primarily on behalf of an investment company that is registered with the SEC pursuant to the Investment Company Act and that controls, is controlled by, or is under common control with an ETP Holder, OTP Holder or OTP Firm. The Exchange proposes to adopt FINRA's definition of Securities Trader in proposed Rule 2.1220(b)(3) in order to align the text of the rule to that adopted by FINRA and other exchanges.
The proposed rule also requires that associated persons primarily responsible for the design, development or significant modification of algorithmic trading strategies (or responsible for the day-to-day supervision or direction of such activities) register as Securities Traders. Individuals registering as Securities Traders must pass the SIE and the Securities Trader examination.
Finally, the proposed rule provides that, subject to the lapse of registration provisions in proposed Rule 2.1210, Commentary .07, each person registered with the Exchange as a Securities Trader on October 1, 2018 and each person who was registered with the Exchange as a Securities Trader within two years prior to October 1, 2018 would be qualified to register as a Securities Trader without having to take any additional qualification examinations. Additionally, the proposed rule would require that individuals registering as Securities Traders after October 1, 2018 shall, prior to or concurrent with such registration, pass the SIE and the Securities Trader qualification examination.
Proposed Rule 2.1220, Commentary .01, states that individuals who are in good standing as representatives with the Financial Conduct Authority in the United Kingdom or with a Canadian stock exchange or securities regulator would be exempt from the requirement to pass the SIE, and thus would be required only to pass a specialized knowledge examination to register with the Exchange as a representative. The proposed approach would provide individuals with a United Kingdom or Canadian qualification more flexibility to obtain a representative-level registration. Additionally, proposed Rule 2.1220, Commentary .01, provides that, subject to the lapse of registration provisions in Rule 2.1210, Commentary .07, each person who is registered with the Exchange as a United Kingdom Securities Representative or a Canada Securities Representative on October 1, 2018 and each person who was registered with the Exchange in such categories within two years prior to October 1, 2018 would be eligible to maintain such registrations with the Exchange. However, if persons registered in such categories subsequently terminate such registration(s) with the Exchange and the registration remains terminated for two or more years, they would not be eligible to re-register in such categories.
Proposed Rule 2.1220, Commentary .02, states that each person who is
Proposed Rule 2.1220, Commentary .03, explains the purpose of the General Securities Sales Supervisor registration category. The General Securities Sales Supervisor category is an alternate category of registration designed to lessen the qualification burdens on principals of general securities firms who supervise sales. Without this category of limited registration, such principals would be required to separately qualify pursuant to the rules of FINRA, the MSRB, the NYSE and the options exchanges. While persons may continue to separately qualify with all relevant self-regulatory organizations, the General Securities Sales Supervisor examination permits qualification as a supervisor of sales of all securities through one registration category. Persons registered as General Securities Sales Supervisors may also qualify in any other category of principal registration. Persons who are already qualified in one or more categories of principal registration may supervise sales activities of all securities by also qualifying as General Securities Sales Supervisors.
The proposed rule further provides that any person required to be registered as a principal who supervises sales activities in corporate, municipal and option securities, investment company products, variable contracts, and security futures (subject to the requirements of Rule 2.1220, Commentary .02) may be registered solely as a General Securities Sales Supervisor. In addition to branch office managers, other persons such as regional and national sales managers may also be registered solely as General Securities Sales Supervisors as long as they supervise only sales activities.
Proposed Rule 2.1220, Commentary .03, requires that an OTP Holder or OTP Firm that have one Registered Options Principal promptly notify the Exchange and agree to specified conditions if such person is terminated, resigns, becomes incapacitated or is otherwise unable to perform his or her duties.
Proposed Rule 2.1230 provides an exemption from registration with the Exchange for certain associated persons. Specifically, the proposed rule provides that persons associated with an ETP Holder, OTP Holder or OTP Firm whose functions are solely and exclusively clerical or ministerial would be exempt from registration.
Proposed Rule 2.1230, Commentary .01, clarifies that the function of accepting customer orders is not considered clerical or ministerial and that associated persons who accept customer orders under any circumstances are required to be appropriately registered. However, the proposed rule provides that an associated person is not accepting a customer order where occasionally, when an appropriately registered person is unavailable, the associated person transcribes the order details and the registered person contacts the customer to confirm the order details before entering the order.
The proposed rule change is consistent with Section 6(b) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (the “Act”),
The Exchange believes that the proposed rule change will streamline, and bring consistency and uniformity to, the registration rules, which will, in turn, assist ETP Holders, OTP Holders or OTP Firms and their associated persons in complying with these rules and improve regulatory efficiency. The proposed rule change will also improve the efficiency of the examination program, without compromising the qualification standards. In addition, the proposed rule change will expand the scope of permissive registrations, which, among other things, will allow ETP Holders, OTP Holders or OTP Firms to develop a depth of associated persons with registrations to respond to unanticipated personnel changes and will encourage greater regulatory understanding. Further, the proposed rule change will provide a more streamlined and effective waiver process for individuals working for a financial services industry affiliate of an ETP Holder, OTP Holder or OTP Firm, and it will require such individuals to maintain specified levels of competence and knowledge while working in areas ancillary to the investment banking and securities business.
Finally, the Exchange believes that, with the introduction of the SIE and expansion of the pool of individuals who are eligible to take the SIE, the proposed rule change has the potential of enhancing the pool of prospective securities industry professionals by introducing them to securities laws, rules and regulations and appropriate conduct before they join the industry in a registered capacity.
The Exchange does not believe that the proposed rule change will impose any burden on competition that is not
Further, the Exchange does not believe that the proposed amendments will affect competition among securities markets since all SROs are expected to adopt similar rules with uniform standards for qualification, registration and continuing education requirements.
No written comments were solicited or received with respect to the proposed rule change.
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) of the Act
A proposed rule change filed under Rule 19b-4(f)(6) normally does not become operative for 30 days from the date of filing. However, Rule 19b-4(f)(6)(iii)
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 necessary or appropriate in the public interest, for the protection of investors, or otherwise in furtherance of the purposes 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 (the “Act”),
The Exchange is filing with the Securities and Exchange Commission (“Commission”) a proposed rule change to amend the Fee Schedule to amend the Fee Schedule on the BOX Options Market LLC (“BOX”) facility. While changes to the fee schedule pursuant to this proposal will be effective upon filing, the changes will become operative on October 1, 2018. The text of the proposed rule change is available from the principal office of the Exchange, at the Commission's Public Reference Room and also on the Exchange's internet website 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 the Fee Schedule for trading on BOX to adopt a new rebate for manual transactions initiated from the Trading Floor. Specifically, the Exchange proposes that on each trading day, Floor Brokers will be eligible to receive a $500 rebate for presenting certain Strategy QOO Orders on the Trading Floor.
The Exchange believes that the proposal is consistent with the requirements of Section 6(b) of the Act, in general, and Section 6(b)(4) and 6(b)(5)of the Act,
The Exchange believes that the proposed Strategy QOO Order Rebate is reasonable, equitable and not unfairly discriminatory. The Exchange believes the proposed rebate is reasonable when compared to rebates assessed at another options exchange.
The Exchange believes that the proposed rebate is equitable and not unfairly discriminatory as the rebate is available to all Floor Brokers. Further, the Exchange believes that applying the proposed rebate to Floor Brokers and not to Floor Market Makers is equitable and not unfairly discriminatory as Floor Market Makers only represent their own interest on the Trading Floor and therefore do not need a similar incentive. The Exchange believes that applying the rebate to Floor Brokers and not to the Floor Broker's customers is equitable and not unfairly discriminatory.
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
Further, the Exchange does not believe that offering a rebate to Floor Brokers will impose an undue burden on intra-market competition because all Floor Brokers are eligible to transact Strategy QOO Orders and receive a rebate. Further, as discussed above, the Exchange believes that applying the proposed rebate to Floor Brokers and not to Floor Market Makers is appropriate as Floor Market Makers only represent their own interest on the Trading Floor and therefore do not need a similar incentive. Lastly, the Exchange believes that the rebate will promote competition by allowing Floor Brokers to competitively price their services and for the Exchange to remain competitive with other exchanges with trading floors.
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 Exchange Act
At any time within 60 days of the filing of the proposed rule change, the Commission summarily may temporarily suspend the rule change if it appears to the Commission that the action is necessary or appropriate in the public interest, for the protection of investors, or would otherwise further 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.
Pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (the “Act”),
Cboe Exchange, Inc. (the “Exchange” or “Cboe Options”) proposes to amend its fees schedule. The text of the proposed rule change is also available on the Exchange's website (
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 Exchange proposes to amend its Fees Schedule, effective October 1, 2018 to amend its fee incentive program for Lead Market-Makers (“LMM”) in VIX during Global Trading Hours (“GTH”). By way of background, pursuant to Footnote 38 of the Fees Schedule, if a LMM in VIX options during GTH (1) provides continuous electronic quotes in at least the lesser of 99% of the non-adjusted series or 100% of the non-adjusted series minus one call-put pair in an GTH allocated class (excluding intra-day add-on series on the day during which such series are added for trading) and (2) enters opening quotes within five minutes of the initiation of an opening rotation in any series that is not open due to the lack of a quote, provided that the LMM will not be required to enter opening quotes in more than the same percentage of series set forth in clause (1) for at least 90% of the trading days during GTH in a given month, the LMM will receive a rebate for that month in the amount of a pro-rata share of a compensation pool equal to $15,000 times the number of LMMs in that class
The Exchange believes the proposed rule change is consistent with the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (the “Act”) and the rules and regulations thereunder applicable to the Exchange and, in particular, the requirements of Section 6(b) of the Act.
In particular, the Exchange believes it is reasonable, equitable and not unfairly discriminatory to offer LMMs in VIX during GTH a rebate if they meet a certain heightened quoting standard (described above) to encourage LMMs in VIX to provide increased liquidity. More specifically, the Exchange believes the amount of the amended rebate ($20,000) is reasonable because it provides an increased rebate for meeting the heightened quoting standard and takes into consideration additional costs an LMM may incur. Particularly, the Exchange believes the proposed amount is such that it will incentivize an appointed LMM to meet the GTH quoting standards for VIX. The Exchange notes the proposed amount is also in line with incentives given to LMMs for other products.
The Exchange does not believe that the proposed rule change will impose any burden on competition that is not necessary or appropriate in furtherance of the purposes of the Act. The Exchange does not believe that the proposed rule change will impose any burden on intramarket competition that is not necessary or appropriate in furtherance of the purposes of the Act, because the amended rebate is intended to encourage LMMs to bring liquidity in VIX during GTH, which benefits all market participants. Furthermore, the Exchange does not believe that the proposed rule changes will impose any burden on intermarket competition that is not necessary or appropriate in furtherance of the purposes of the Act because VIX is a proprietary product that will only be traded on Cboe Options. To the extent that the proposed changes make Cboe Options a more attractive marketplace for market participants at other exchanges, such market participants are welcome to become Cboe Options market participants.
The Exchange neither solicited nor received comments on the proposed rule change.
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)
The Exchange proposes amendments to the Exchange's rules regarding qualification, registration and continuing education requirements applicable to member organizations, Equity Trading Permit (“ETP”) Holders, and American Trading Permit (“ATP”) Holders. The Exchange's rule proposal is intended to harmonize its rules with Financial Regulatory Authority, Inc. (“FINRA”) rules and thus promote consistency within the securities industry, and therefore the Exchange is only adopting rules that are relevant to the Exchange's members and member organization and ETP Holders. The Exchange is not adopting registration categories that are not applicable to members and member organizations and ETP Holders because they do not engage in the type of business that would require such registration. As such, the Exchange is amending current Rules 341 and 341A of the Office Rules and Rules 2.4E and 2.21E of the Equities Rules regarding continuing education requirements to reflect the FINRA rule; adopting Commentary .06 to current Rule 341A regarding fingerprint information; adopting new Rule 2.1210 regarding registration requirements and related Commentary to new Rule 2.1210; adopting new Rule 2.1220 regarding registration categories
In its filing with the Commission, the self-regulatory organization 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 those 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 qualification, registration, and continuing education requirements applicable to members and member organizations and ETP Holders. The proposed amendments are intended to: (i) Provide transparency and clarity with respect to the Exchange's registration, qualification and examination
Current Rule 341 of the Office Rules requires registration, qualification and approval by the Exchange of registered representatives, securities lending representatives, Securities Traders, and a direct supervisor. Commentary .01(c) of current Rule 341 provides the definition of a Securities Trader as any person engaged in the purchase or sale of securities or other similar instruments for the account of a member or member organization with which he is associated, as an employee or otherwise, and who does not transact any business with the public.
The Exchange proposes to adopt FINRA's definition of Securities Trader (as described below) and, therefore, proposes to add a reference to Rule 2.1220(b)(3) as the appropriate rule in the Exchange's Rulebook where the definition of Securities Trader can be found. The Exchange also proposes to adopt rule text within the current rule that provides that a person registered as a Securities Trader would not be qualified to function in any other registration category unless he or she is also qualified and registered in such other registration category.
Current Commentary .01(d) of Rule 341 provides that a supervisor of registered representatives may satisfy the registration requirements under Commentary .01 by registering and qualifying as a General Securities Principal by passing the Series 7 and Series 24 examinations. Consistent with the proposed restructuring of the representative-level examination proposed in the FINRA Filing, the Exchange proposes to amend current Commentary .01(d) to require such persons to also complete the Securities Industry Essentials (“SIE”) examination.
Rule 2.4E of the Equities Rules currently requires traders of ETP Holders for which the Exchange is the Designated Examining Authority (“DEA”) to successfully complete the Series 7 Examination. The Exchange proposes to amend Rules 2.4E to require traders of ETP Holders for which the Exchange is the DEA to successfully complete the SIE examination in addition to the Series 7 Examination in order to satisfy the Exchange's registration requirement, consistent with the proposed restructuring of the representative-level examinations proposed in the FINRA Filing.
Rule 341A of the Office Rules and Rule 2.21E provide the continuing education requirements of registered persons
The Exchange proposes to amend Rules 341A(a) and 2.21E(d)(1) to provide, consistent with proposed Rule 2.1210, Commentary .08, that a waiver-eligible person would be subject to a Regulatory Element program that correlates to his or her most recent registration category, and that the content of the Regulatory Element would be based on the same cycle had the individual remain [sic] registered.
Further, the Exchange proposes to amend Rules 341A(a)(2) and 2.21E(d)(1)(B) to provide that any person whose registration has been deemed inactive under the rule may not accept or solicit business or receive any compensation for the purchase or sale of securities. The proposed amendment provides, however, that such person may receive trail or residual commissions resulting from transactions completed before the inactive status, unless the member organization or ETP Holder, respectively, with which the person is associated has a policy prohibiting such trail or residual commissions.
Additionally, under Rules 341A(a)(3) and 2.21E(d)(1)(C), a registered person is required to retake the Regulatory Element in the event that such person (i) is subject to any statutory disqualification as defined in Section 3(a)(39) of the Exchange Act; (ii) is subject to suspension or to the imposition of a fine of $5,000 or more for violation of any provision of any securities law or regulation, or any agreement with or rule or standard of conduct of any securities governmental agency, securities self-regulatory organization, or as imposed by any such regulatory or self-regulatory organization in connection with a disciplinary proceeding; or (iii) is
Current Rules 341A(b)(2)(ii) and 2.21E(d)(2)(B) provides that programs used to implement a training program must be appropriate for the business of the member or member organization or ETP Holder and, at a minimum must cover specific matters concerning securities products, services, and strategies offered by the member organization or ETP Holder. Current Rules 341A(b)(2)(ii) and 2.21E(d)(2)(B) also provides that programs used to implement a member organization's or ETP Holder's training program must be appropriate for the business of the member organization or ETP Holder and, at a minimum must cover specific matters concerning securities products, services, and strategies offered by the member organization or ETP Holder. The Exchange proposes to amend both Rules 341A(b)(2)(ii) and 2.21E(d)(2)(B) to expand the minimum standard for such training programs by requiring that, at a minimum, a firm's training program must also cover training in ethics and professional responsibility.
Rule 2.21E(b)(iii) provides that employees of ETP Holders seeking limited registration as Securities Traders must pass the Series 57 examination. Given the formulation of the SIE examination which all potential representative-level registrants would be required to pass, the Exchange proposes to amend the current rule to require that a Securities Trader must register as such on Web CRD and must pass both the SIE examination and the Series 57 examination. The Exchange proposes the same change for Rule 2.4E, Commentary 03. Finally, Rule 2.2E(c) provides that the Exchange may exempt an individual from the examination requirements if such individual has successfully completed comparable examinations such as the Series 7 Examination. Consistent with the proposed restructuring of the representative-level examinations proposed in the FINRA Filing, the Exchange proposes to add “and the Securities Industry Essentials Examination” after the reference to the Series 7 Examination.
The Exchange proposes to adopt a new Commentary .05 to Rule 341A regarding the submission of fingerprint information by member organizations or ETP Holders, respectively.
As proposed, upon filing an electronic Form U4 on behalf of a person applying for registration, a member organization or ETP Holder, as applicable, would be required to promptly submit fingerprint information for that person. If the member organization or ETP Holder, as applicable, fails to submit the fingerprint information within 30 days after the Exchange receives the electronic Form U4, the person's registration shall be deemed inactive and the person would be required to immediately cease all activities requiring registration and would be prohibited from performing any duties and functioning in any capacity requiring registration. The proposed rule further provides allows [sic] the Exchange to administratively terminate a registration that is inactive for a period of two years. However, a person whose registration is administratively terminated may seek to reactivate his or her registration by reapplying for registration and meeting the qualification requirements under Exchange rules.
As a general matter, FINRA administers qualification examinations that are designed to establish that persons associated with member organizations and ETP Holders have attained specified levels of competence and knowledge. Over time, the examination program has increased in complexity to address the introduction of new products and functions, and related regulatory concerns and requirements. As a result, today, there are a large number of examinations, considerable content overlap across the representative-level examinations and requirements for individuals in various segments of the industry to pass multiple examinations. To address these issues, FINRA formulated the SIE as a general knowledge examination that all potential representative-level registrants would take.
The Exchange proposes to create a new Section 4A titled “Registration” in its Office Rules to contain proposed Rules 2.1210 through 2.1230. Each proposed rule is discussed below.
Proposed Rule 2.1210 provides that each person engaged in the investment banking or securities business of a member organization or ETP Holder must register with the Exchange as a representative or principal in each category of registration appropriate to his or her functions and responsibilities as specified in proposed Rule 2.1220, unless exempt from registration pursuant to proposed Rule 2.1230. Proposed Rule 2.1210 also provides that such person is not qualified to function in any registered capacity other than that for which the person is registered, unless otherwise stated in the rules.
The Exchange currently does not have a specific rule that provides for permissive registrations. With this proposed rule change, and to conform its rules to the FINRA rules, the Exchange proposes to adopt a specific rule regarding permissive registrations. Proposed Rule 2.1210, Commentary .01, allows any associated person to obtain and maintain any registration permitted by a member organization or ETP Holder. For instance, an associated person of an ETP Holder working solely in a clerical or ministerial capacity, such as in an administrative capacity, would be able to obtain and maintain a General Securities Representative registration with the ETP Holder. As another example, an associated person
The Exchange is proposing to permit the registration of such individuals for several reasons. First, a member organization or ETP Holder may foresee a need to move a former representative or principal who has not been registered for two or more years back into a position that would require such person to be registered. Currently, such persons are required to requalify (or obtain a waiver of the applicable qualification examinations) and reapply for registration. Second, the proposed rule change would allow a member organization or ETP Holder to develop a depth of associated persons with registrations in the event of unanticipated personnel changes. Finally, allowing registration in additional categories encourages greater regulatory understanding.
Individuals maintaining a permissive registration under the proposed rule change would be considered registered persons and subject to all Exchange rules, to the extent relevant to their activities. Additionally, consistent with the requirements of the Exchange's supervision rules, as proposed, a member organization or ETP Holder would be required to have adequate supervisory systems and procedures reasonably designed to ensure that individuals with permissive registrations do not act outside the scope of their assigned functions. With respect to an individual who solely maintains a permissive registration, such as an individual working exclusively in an administrative capacity, the individual's day-to-day supervisor may be a non-registered person. However, for purposes of compliance with the Exchange's supervision rules, a member organization or ETP Holder would be required to assign a registered supervisor who would be responsible for periodically contacting such individual's day-to-day supervisor to verify that the individual is not acting outside the scope of his or her assigned functions. If such individual is permissively registered as a representative, the registered supervisor must be registered as a representative or principal. If the individual is permissively registered as a principal, the registered supervisor must be registered as a principal.
Proposed Rule 2.1210, Commentary .02, provides that before the registration of a person as a representative can become effective under proposed Rule 2.1210, such person must pass the SIE and an appropriate representative-level qualification examination as specified in proposed Rule 2.1220.
Further, proposed Rule 2.1210, Commentary .02, provides that if a registered person's job functions change and he or she needs to become registered in another representative-level category, he or she would not need to pass the SIE again. Rather, the registered person would need to pass only the appropriate representative-level qualification examination.
Moreover, proposed Rule 2.1210, Commentary .02, provides that all associated persons, such as associated persons whose functions are solely and exclusively clerical or ministerial, are eligible to take the SIE. Proposed Rule 2.1210, Commentary .02, also provides that individuals who are not associated persons of firms, such as members of the general public, are eligible to take the SIE. The Exchange believes that expanding the pool of individuals who are eligible to take the SIE would enable prospective securities industry professionals to demonstrate to prospective employers a basic level of knowledge prior to submitting a job application. Further, this approach would allow for more flexibility and career mobility within the securities industry. While all associated persons of firms as well as individuals who are not associated persons would be eligible to take the SIE pursuant to the proposed rule, passing the SIE alone would not qualify them for registration with the Exchange. Rather, to be eligible for registration with the Exchange, an individual must pass an applicable representative or principal qualification examination and complete the other requirements of the registration process.
Proposed Rule 2.1210, Commentary .02, also provides that the Exchange may, in exceptional cases and where good cause is shown, pursuant to the Rule 9600 Series, waive the applicable qualification examination(s) and accept other standards as evidence of an applicant's qualifications for registration. The proposed rule further provides that the Exchange will only consider examination waiver requests submitted by a member organization or ETP Holder for individuals associated with the a member organization or ETP Holder who are seeking registration in a representative- or principal-level registration category. Moreover, the proposed rule states that the Exchange will consider waivers of the SIE alone or the SIE and the representative- and principal-level examination(s) for such individuals. The Exchange would not consider a waiver of the SIE for non-associated persons or for associated persons who are not registering as representatives or principals.
Proposed Rule 2.1210, Commentary .03, provides that a member organization or ETP Holder may designate any person currently registered, or who becomes registered, with the member organization or ETP Holder as a representative to function as a principal for a limited period, provided that such person has at least 18 months of experience functioning as a registered representative with [sic] the five-year period immediately preceding the designation. The proposed rule is intended to ensure that representatives designated to function as principals for the limited period under the proposal have an appropriate level of registered representative experience. The proposed rule clarifies that the requirements of the rule apply to designations to any principal category, including those categories that are not subject to a prerequisite representative-level registration requirement, such as the Financial and Operations Principal registration category.
The proposed rule also clarifies that the individual must fulfill all applicable prerequisite registration, fee and examination requirements before his or her designation as a principal. Further, the proposed rule provides that in no event may such person function as a principal beyond the initial 120 calendar days without having successfully passed an appropriate principal qualification examination. The proposed rule also provides an exception to the experience requirement for principals who are designated by a member organization or ETP Holder to function in other principal categories for a limited period. Specifically, the proposed rule states that a member organization or ETP Holder may designate any person currently registered, or who becomes registered, with the ETP Holder as a principal to function in another principal category for 120 calendar days before passing any applicable examinations.
Proposed Rule 2.1210, Commentary .04 states that associated persons taking the SIE would be subject to the SIE Rules of Conduct, and associated persons taking a representative or principal examination would be subject to the Rules of Conduct for representative and principal examinations. Pursuant to proposed Rule 2.1210, Commentary .04, a violation of the SIE Rules of Conduct or the Rules of Conduct for representative and principal examinations by an associated person would be deemed to be a violation of Rules 16 and 2010—Equities. Moreover, if an associated person is deemed to have violated the SIE Rules of Conduct or the Rules of Conduct for representative and principal examinations, the associated person may forfeit the results of the examination and may be subject to disciplinary action by the Exchange.
Further, the proposed rule states that individuals taking the SIE who are not associated persons must agree to be subject to the SIE Rules of Conduct. Among other things, the SIE Rules of Conduct would require individuals to attest that they are not qualified to engage in the investment banking or securities business based on passing the SIE and would prohibit individuals from cheating on the examination or misrepresenting their qualifications to the public subsequent to passing the SIE. Moreover, non-associated persons may forfeit their SIE results and may be prohibited from retaking the SIE if the Exchange determines that they cheated on the SIE or that they misrepresented their qualifications to the public subsequent to passing the SIE.
The proposed rule further notes that the Exchange considers all qualification examinations [sic] content to be highly confidential and that the removal of examination content from an examination center, reproduction, disclosure, receipt from or passing to any person, or use for study purposes of any portion of such qualification examination or any other use that would compromise the effectiveness of the examinations and the use in any manner and at any time of the questions or answers to the examinations is prohibited and would be deemed a violation of Rules 16 and 2010—Equities.
Proposed Rule 2.1210, Commentary .05 provides that any person who fails a qualification examination may retake that examination after 30 calendar days from the date of the person's last attempt to pass that examination. The proposed rule further provides that if a person fails an examination three or more times in succession within a two-year period, he or she would be prohibited from retaking the examination either until a period of 180 calendar days from the date of the person's last attempt to pass it [sic]. These waiting periods would apply to the SIE and the representative- and principal-level examinations. Moreover, the proposed rule provides that non-associated persons taking the SIE must agree to be subject to the same waiting periods for retaking the SIE.
Pursuant to Rule 341A of the Office Rules and Rule 2.21E, the CE requirements applicable to registered persons consist of a Regulatory Element
The Exchange believes that all registered persons, regardless of their activities, should be subject to the Regulatory Element of the CE requirements so that they can keep their knowledge of the securities industry current. Therefore, the Exchange proposes to adopt Rule 2.1210, Commentary .06, to clarify that all registered persons, including those who solely maintain a permissive registration, are required to satisfy the Regulatory Element, as specified in Rules 341A(a) and 2.21E(d)(1). The Exchange is making corresponding changes to Rule 341A and Rule 2.21E. The Exchange is not proposing any changes to the Firm Element requirement at this time. Individuals who have passed the SIE but not a representative- or principal-level examination and do not hold a registered position would not be subject to any CE requirements.
Proposed Rule 2.1210, Commentary .06, also provides that a registered person of a member organization or ETP Holder who becomes CE inactive would not be permitted to be registered in another registration category with the a member organization or ETP Holder or be registered in any registration category
Proposed Rule 2.1210, Commentary .07, provides that any person who was last registered as a representative two or more years immediately preceding the date of receipt by the Exchange of a new application for registration as a representative is required to pass a qualification examination for representatives appropriate to the category of registration as specified in proposed Rule 2.1220(b). Proposed Rule 2.1210, Commentary .07, also sets forth that a passing result on the SIE would be valid for up to four years. Therefore, under the proposed rule change, an individual who passes the SIE and is an associated person of a member organization or ETP Holder at the time would have up to four years from the date he or she passes the SIE to pass a representative-level examination to register as a representative with that member organization or ETP Holder, or a subsequent member organization or ETP Holder, without having to retake the SIE. In addition, an individual who passes the SIE and is not an associated person at the time would have up to four years from the date he or she passes the SIE to become an associated person of a member organization or ETP Holder and pass a representative-level examination and register as a representative without having to retake the SIE.
Moreover, an individual holding a representative-level registration who leaves the industry after the effective date of this proposed rule change would have up to four years to reassociate with a member organization or ETP Holder and register as a representative without having to retake the SIE. However, the four-year expiration period in the proposed rule change extends only to the SIE, and not the representative- and principal-level registrations. The representative- and principal-level registrations would continue to be subject to a two-year expiration period as is the case today.
Finally, proposed Rule 2.1210, Commentary .07, clarifies that, for purposes of the proposed rule, an application would not be considered to have been received by the Exchange if that application does not result in a registration.
Proposed Rule 2.1210, Commentary .08, provides the process for individuals working for a financial services industry affiliate of a member organization or ETP Holder
Under the proposed waiver process, the first time a registered person is designated as eligible for a waiver based on the FSA criteria, the member organization or ETP Holder with which the individual is registered would notify the Exchange of the FSA designation. The member organization or ETP Holder would concurrently file a full Form U5 terminating the individual's registration with the firm, which would also terminate the individual's other SRO and state registrations. To be eligible for initial designation as an FSA-eligible person by a member organization or ETP Holder, an individual must have been registered for a total of five years within the most recent 10-year period prior to the designation, including for the most recent year with that member organization or ETP Holder. An individual would have to satisfy these preconditions only for purposes of his or her initial designation as an FSA-eligible person, and not for any subsequent FSA designation(s). Thereafter, the individual would be eligible for a waiver for up to seven years from the date of initial designation,
An individual designated as an FSA-eligible person would be subject to the Regulatory Element of CE while working for a financial services industry affiliate of a member organization or ETP Holder. The individual would be subject to a Regulatory Element program that correlates to his or her most recent registration category, and CE would be based on the same cycle had the individual remained registered. If the individual fails to complete the prescribed Regulatory Element during the 120-day window for taking the session, he or she would lose FSA eligibility (
Upon registering an FSA-eligible person, a firm would file a Form U4 and request the appropriate registration(s) for the individual. The firm would also submit an examination waiver request to the Exchange,
(1) Prior to the individual's initial designation as an FSA-eligible person, the individual was registered for a total of five years within the most recent 10-year period, including for the most recent year with the member organization or ETP Holder that initially designated the individual as an FSA-eligible person;
(2) The waiver request is made within seven years of the individual's initial designation as an FSA-eligible person by a member organization or ETP Holder;
(3) The initial designation and any subsequent designation(s) were made concurrently with the filing of the individual's related Form U5;
(4) The individual continuously worked for the financial services affiliate(s) of a member organization or ETP Holder since the last Form U5 filing;
(5) The individual has complied with the Regulatory Element of CE; and
(6) The individual does not have any pending or adverse regulatory matters, or terminations, that are reportable on the Form U4, and has not otherwise been subject to a statutory disqualification while the individual was designated as an FSA-eligible person with a member organization or ETP Holder.
Following the Form U5 filing, an individual could move between the financial services affiliates of a member organization or ETP Holder so long as the individual is continuously working for an affiliate. Further, an ETP Holder could submit multiple waiver requests for the individual, provided that the waiver requests are made during the course of the seven-year period.
Proposed Rule 2.1210, Commentary .09 provides specific relief to registered persons serving in the Armed Forces of the United States. Among other things, the proposed rule permits a registered person of a member organization or ETP Holder who volunteers for or is called into active duty in the Armed Forces of the United States to be registered in an inactive status and remain eligible to receive ongoing transaction-related compensation. The proposed rule also includes specific provisions regarding the deferment of the lapse of registration requirements for formerly registered persons serving in the Armed Forces of the United States. The proposed rule further requires that a member organization or ETP Holder with which such person is registered promptly notify the Exchange of such person's return to employment with a member organization or ETP Holder. The proposed rule would require a member organization or ETP Holder that is a sole proprietor to also similarly notify the Exchange of his or her return to participation in the investment banking or securities business. The proposed rule also provides that the Exchange would defer the lapse of the SIE for formerly registered persons serving in the Armed Forces of the United States.
As set forth in proposed Rule 2.1220(a)(1), for purposes of these registration rules, the term “Principal” means any Person Associated with a member organization or ETP Holder actively engaged in the management of the member organization's or ETP Holder's securities business, including supervision, solicitation, conduct of the member organization's or ETP Holder's business, or the training of Authorized Traders and Persons Associated with a member organization or ETP Holder for any of these functions. Such Persons include, among other, Sole Proprietors, Officers, Partners, and Directors of Corporations.
For purposes of proposed Rule 1220(a)(1), the phrase “actively engaged in the management of the member organization's or ETP Holder's securities business” includes the management of, and the implementation of corporate policies related to, such business. The term also includes managerial decision-making authority with respect to a member organization's or ETP Holder's securities business and management-level responsibilities for supervising any aspect of such business, such as serving as a voting member of the a member organization's or ETP Holder's executive, management or operations committee.
Proposed Rule 2.1220(a)(2)(A) states that each principal as defined in proposed Rule 2.1220(a)(1) is required to register with the Exchange as a General Securities Principal, subject to the following exceptions. The proposed rule provides that if a principal's activities include the functions of a Compliance Officer, a Financial and Operations Principal (or an Introducing Broker-Dealer Financial and Operations Principal, as applicable), a Principal Financial Officer, a Principal Operations Officer, a Securities Trader Principal, or a Registered Options Principal then the principal must appropriately register in one or more of these categories.
Proposed Rule 2.1220(a)(2)(A) further provides that if a principal's activities are limited solely to the functions of a General Securities Sales Supervisor, then the principal may appropriately register in that category in lieu of registering as a General Securities Principal.
Proposed Rule 2.1220(a)(2)(B) requires that an individual registering as a General Securities Principal satisfy the General Securities Representative prerequisite registration and pass the General Securities Principal qualification examination. Proposed Rule 2.1220(a)(2)(B) also clarifies that an
As a general matter, the Exchange currently recognizes the Corporate Securities Representative but would no longer recognize this registration category given its elimination by FINRA. Proposed Rule 2.1220(a)(2)(B), however, provides that, subject to the lapse of registration provisions in proposed Rule 2.1210, Commentary .07, each person registered with the Exchange as a Corporate Securities Representative and a General Securities Principal on October 1, 2018 and each person who was registered with the Exchange as a Corporate Securities Representative and a General Securities Principal within two years prior to October 1, 2018 would be qualified to register as a General Securities Principal without having to take any additional qualification examinations, provided that such person's supervisory responsibilities in the investment banking and securities business of a member organization or ETP Holder are limited to corporate securities activities of a member organization or ETP Holder. The proposed rule further provides that all other individuals registering as General Securities Principals after October 1, 2018 shall, prior to or concurrent with such registration, become registered as a General Securities Representative and either (1) pass the General Securities Principal qualification examination; or (2) register as a General Securities Sales Supervisor and pass the General Securities Sales Supervisor qualification examination.
Proposed Rule 2.1220(a)(3) establishes a Compliance Officer registration category and requires all persons designated as CCOs on Schedule A of Form BD to register as Compliance Officers, subject to an exception for member organizations or ETP Holders engaged in limited investment banking or securities business. The proposed rule only addresses the registration requirements for CCOs. However, consistent with proposed Rule 2.1210, Commentary .01 relating to permissive registrations, a firm may allow other associated persons to register as Compliance Officers. Chief Compliance Officers at ATP Holders, who are currently not subject to a registration requirement, would be excluded from the requirements of the proposed rule.
In addition, the Exchange is proposing to provide CCOs of firms that engage in limited investment banking or securities business with greater flexibility to satisfy the qualification requirements for CCOs. Specifically, proposed Rule 2.1220(a)(3) set forth the following qualification requirements for Compliance Officer registration:
• Subject to the lapse of registration provisions in proposed Rule 2.1210, Commentary .07, each person registered with the Exchange as a General Securities Representative and a General Securities Principal on October 1, 2018 and each person who was registered with the Exchange as a General Securities Representative and a General Securities Principal within two years prior to October 1, 2018 would be qualified to register as Compliance Officers without having to take any additional examinations. In addition, subject to the lapse of registration provisions in proposed Rule 2.1210, Commentary .07, individuals registered as Compliance Officials in the CRD system on October 1, 2018 and individuals who were registered as such within two years prior to October 1, 2018 would also be qualified to register as Compliance Officers without having to take any additional examinations; [sic]
• All other individuals registering as Compliance Officers after October 1, 2018 would have to: (1) Satisfy the General Securities Representative prerequisite registration and pass the General Securities Principal qualification examination; or (2) pass the Compliance Official qualification examination.
• An individual designated as a CCO on Schedule A of Form BD of a member organization or ETP Holder that is engaged in limited investment banking or securities business may be registered in a principal category under proposed Rule 2.1220(a) that corresponds to the limited scope of the A member organization's or ETP Holder's business.
Proposed Rule 2.1220(a)(4) provides that each principal who is responsible for the financial and operational management of a member organization or ETP Holder that has a minimum net capital requirement of $250,000 under SEA Rules 15c3-1(a)(1)(ii) and 15c3-1(a)(2)(i), or a member organization or ETP Holder that has a minimum net capital requirement of $150,000 under SEA Rule 15c-3-1(a)(8) must be designated as a Financial and Operations Principal. In addition, proposed Rule 2.1220(a)(4) provides that a principal who is responsible for the financial and operational management of a member organization or ETP Holder that is subject to the net capital requirements of SEA Rule 15c3-1, other than a member organization or ETP Holder that is subject to the net capital requirements of SEA Rules 15c3-1(a)(1)(ii), (a)(2)(i) or (a)(8), must be designated and registered as either a Financial and Operations Principal or an Introducing Broker-Dealer Financial and Operations Principal. Financial and Operations Principals and Introducing Broker-Dealer Financial and Operation Principals are not subject to a prerequisite representative registration, but they must pass the Financial and Operations Principal or Introducing Broker-Dealer Financial and Operations Principal examination, as applicable.
Additionally, proposed Rule 2.1220(a)(4)(B) requires a member organization or ETP Holder to designate a Principal Financial Officer with primary responsibility for the day-to-day operations of the business, including overseeing the receipt and delivery of securities and funds, safeguarding customer and firm assets, calculation and collection of margin from customers and processing dividend receivable and payables and reorganization redemptions and those books and records related to such activities. Further, the proposed rule requires that a firm's Principal Financial Officer and Principal Operations Officer qualify and register as Financial and Operations Principals or Introducing Broker-Dealer Financial and Operations Principals, as applicable.
Because the financial and operational activities of member organizations or ETP Holders that neither self-clear nor provide clearing services are more limited, such member organizations or ETP Holders may designate the same person as the Principal Financial Officer, Principal Operations Officer and Financial and Operations Principal or Introducing Broker-Dealer Financial and Operations Principal (that is, such member organizations or ETP Holders are not required to designate different persons to function in these capacities).
Given the level of financial and operational responsibility at clearing and self-clearing members, the Exchange believes that it is necessary for such member organizations or ETP
Proposed Rule 2.1220(a)(5) requires that a principal responsible for supervising the securities trading activities specified in proposed Rule 2.1220(b)(3) register as a Securities Trader Principal. The proposed rule requires that individuals registering as Securities Trader Principals must be registered as Securities Traders and pass the General Securities Principal qualification examination.
Proposed Rule 2.1220(a)(6) provides that a principal may register with the Exchange as a General Securities Sales Supervisor if his or her supervisory responsibilities in the investment banking or securities business of a member organization or ETP Holder are limited to the securities sales activities of a member organization or ETP Holder, including the approval of customer accounts, training of sales and sales supervisory personnel and the maintenance of records of original entry or ledger accounts of a member organization or ETP Holder required to be maintained in branch offices by Exchange Act record-keeping rules.
A person registering as a General Securities Sales Supervisor must satisfy the General Securities Representative prerequisite registration and pass the General Securities Sales Supervisor examinations.
Proposed Rule 2.1220(a)(7) provides that each ATP Holder engaged in options transactions with the public have at least one Registered Options Principal. The proposed rule further requires that a principal responsible for supervising an ATP Holder's options sales practices with the public, including a person designated pursuant to Rule 11.18(b)(2) register with the Exchange as a Registered Options Principal, unless such principal's options activities are limited solely to those activities that may be supervised by a General Securities Sales Supervisor, in which case, such person may register as a General Securities Sales Supervisor in lieu of registering as a Registered Options Principal.
Proposed Rule 2.1220(a)(7)(B) further provides that, subject to the lapse of registration provisions in proposed Rule 2.1210, Commentary .07, each person registered with the Exchange as a Registered Options Principal on October 1, 2018 and each person who was registered with the Exchange as a Registered Options Principal within two years prior to October 1, 2018 would be qualified to register as a Registered Options Principal without having to pass any additional qualification examinations. The proposed rule further provides that all other individuals registering as Registered Options Principals after October 1, 2018 shall, prior to or concurrent with such registration, become registered as a General Securities Representative and pass the Registered Options Principal qualification examination.
Proposed Rule 2.1220(b)(1) defines a representative as any person associated with a member organization or ETP Holder, including assistant officers other than principals, who is engaged in the a member organization's or ETP Holder's investment banking or securities business, such as supervision, solicitation, conduct of business in securities or the training of persons associated with a member organization or ETP Holder for any of these functions.
Proposed Rule 2.1220(b)(2)(A) states that each representative as defined in proposed Rule 2.1220(b)(1) is required to register with the Exchange as a General Securities Representative, subject to the following exceptions. The proposed rule provides that if a representative's activities include the function of a Securities Trader, then the representative must appropriately register in that category.
The proposed rule further provides that, subject to the lapse of registration provisions in proposed Rule 2.1210, Commentary .07, each person registered with the Exchange as a General Securities Representative on October 1, 2018 and each person who was registered with the Exchange as a General Securities Representative within two years prior to October 1, 2018 would be qualified to register as a General Securities Representative without having to take any additional qualification examinations. Additionally, the proposed rule would require that individuals registering as General Securities Representatives after October 1, 2018 shall, prior to or concurrent with such registration, pass the SIE and the General Securities Representative examination.
Proposed Rule 2.1220(b)(3) provides that each representative as defined in proposed Rule 2.1220(b)(1) is required to register as a Securities Trader if, with respect to transactions in equity (including equity options), preferred or convertible debt securities, such person is engaged in proprietary trading, the execution of transactions on an agency basis, or the direct supervision of such activities. The proposed rule provides an exception from the registration requirement for any associated person of a member organization or ETP Holder whose trading activities are conducted primarily on behalf of an investment company that is registered with the SEC pursuant to the Investment Company Act and that controls, is controlled by, or is under common control with a member organization or ETP Holder. The Exchange proposes to adopt FINRA's definition of Securities Trader in proposed Rule 2.1220(b)(3) in order
The proposed rule also requires that associated persons primarily responsible for the design, development or significant modification of algorithmic trading strategies (or responsible for the day-to-day supervision or direction of such activities) register as Securities Traders. Individuals registering as Securities Traders must pass the SIE and the Securities Trader examination.
Finally, the proposed rule provides that, subject to the lapse of registration provisions in proposed Rule 2.1210, Commentary .07, each person registered with the Exchange as a Securities Trader on October 1, 2018 and each person who was registered with the Exchange as a Securities Trader within two years prior to October 1, 2018 would be qualified to register as a Securities Trader without having to take any additional qualification examinations. Additionally, the proposed rule would require that individuals registering as Securities Traders after October 1, 2018 shall, prior to or concurrent with such registration, pass the SIE and the Securities Trader qualification examination.
Proposed Rule 2.1220, Commentary .01, states that individuals who are in good standing as representatives with the Financial Conduct Authority in the United Kingdom or with a Canadian stock exchange or securities regulator would be exempt from the requirement to pass the SIE, and thus would be required only to pass a specialized knowledge examination to register with the Exchange as a representative. The proposed approach would provide individuals with a United Kingdom or Canadian qualification more flexibility to obtain a representative-level registration. Additionally, proposed Rule 2.1220, Commentary .01, provides that, subject to the lapse of registration provisions in Rule 2.1210, Commentary .07, each person who is registered with the Exchange as a United Kingdom Securities Representative or a Canada Securities Representative on October 1, 2018 and each person who was registered with the Exchange in such categories within two years prior to October 1, 2018 would be eligible to maintain such registrations with the Exchange. However, if persons registered in such categories subsequently terminate such registration(s) with the Exchange and the registration remains terminated for two or more years, they would not be eligible to re-register in such categories.
Proposed Rule 2.1220, Commentary .02, states that each person who is registered with the Exchange as a General Securities Representative, United Kingdom Securities Representative, Canada Securities Representative, Options Representative, Registered Options Principal or General Securities Sales Supervisor shall be eligible to engage in security futures activities as a representative or principal, as applicable, provided that such individual completes a Firm Element program as set forth in Rule 341A(b) for member organizations and Rule 2.21E(d)(2) for ETP Holders that addresses security futures products before such person engages in security futures activities.
Proposed Rule 2.1220, Commentary .03, explains the purpose of the General Securities Sales Supervisor registration category. The General Securities Sales Supervisor category is an alternate category of registration designed to lessen the qualification burdens on principals of general securities firms who supervise sales. Without this category of limited registration, such principals would be required to separately qualify pursuant to the rules of FINRA, the MSRB, the NYSE and the options exchanges. While persons may continue to separately qualify with all relevant self-regulatory organizations, the General Securities Sales Supervisor examination permits qualification as a supervisor of sales of all securities through one registration category. Persons registered as General Securities Sales Supervisors may also qualify in any other category of principal registration. Persons who are already qualified in one or more categories of principal registration may supervise sales activities of all securities by also qualifying as General Securities Sales Supervisors.
The proposed rule further provides that any person required to be registered as a principal who supervises sales activities in corporate, municipal and option securities, investment company products, variable contracts, and security futures (subject to the requirements of Rule 2.1220, Commentary .02) may be registered solely as a General Securities Sales Supervisor. In addition to branch office managers, other persons such as regional and national sales managers may also be registered solely as General Securities Sales Supervisors as long as they supervise only sales activities.
Proposed Rule 2.1220, Commentary .03, requires that an ATP Holder that has one Registered Options Principal promptly notify the Exchange and agree to specified conditions if such person is terminated, resigns, becomes incapacitated or is otherwise unable to perform his or her duties.
Proposed Rule 2.1230 provides an exemption from registration with the Exchange for certain associated persons. Specifically, the proposed rule provides that persons associated with a member organization or ETP Holder whose functions are solely and exclusively clerical or ministerial would be exempt from registration.
Proposed Rule 2.1230, Commentary .01, clarifies that the function of accepting customer orders is not
Finally, consistent with the proposed restructuring of the representative-level examinations proposed in the FINRA Filing, the Exchange proposes to add “and the Securities Industry Essentials Examination” following the reference to the Series 7 Examination in Commentary .06 to Rules 920 and in 930NY(b)(1)(A) of the Options Rules and following the reference to the Series 57 Examination in Rules 921NY(a), 921.1NY(b)(2) and 931NY(a) of the Options Rules.
The proposed rule change is consistent with Section 6(b) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (the “Act”),
The Exchange believes that the proposed rule change will streamline, and bring consistency and uniformity to, the registration rules, which will, in turn, assist member organizations or ETP Holders and their associated persons in complying with these rules and improve regulatory efficiency. The proposed rule change will also improve the efficiency of the examination program, without compromising the qualification standards. In addition, the proposed rule change will expand the scope of permissive registrations, which, among other things, will allow member organizations or ETP Holders to develop a depth of associated persons with registrations to respond to unanticipated personnel changes and will encourage greater regulatory understanding. Further, the proposed rule change will provide a more streamlined and effective waiver process for individuals working for a financial services industry affiliate of a member organization or ETP Holder, and it will require such individuals to maintain specified levels of competence and knowledge while working in areas ancillary to the investment banking and securities business.
Finally, the Exchange believes that, with the introduction of the SIE and expansion of the pool of individuals who are eligible to take the SIE, the proposed rule change has the potential of enhancing the pool of prospective securities industry professionals by introducing them to securities laws, rules and regulations and appropriate conduct before they join the industry in a registered capacity.
The Exchange does not believe that the proposed rule change will impose any burden on competition that is not necessary or appropriate in furtherance of the purposes of the Act. The proposed amendments are intended to promote transparency in the Exchange's rules, and consistency with the rules of other SROs with respect to the examination, qualification, and continuing education requirements applicable to member organizations or ETP Holders and their registered personnel. The Exchange believes that in that regard that any burden on competition would be clearly outweighed by the important regulatory goal of ensuring clear and consistent requirements applicable across SROs, avoiding duplication, and mitigating any risk of SROs implementing different standards in these important areas.
Further, the Exchange does not believe that the proposed amendments will affect competition among securities markets since all SROs are expected to adopt similar rules with uniform standards for qualification, registration and continuing education requirements.
No written comments were solicited or received with respect to the proposed rule change.
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) of the Act
A proposed rule change filed under Rule 19b-4(f)(6) normally does not become operative for 30 days from the date of filing. However, Rule 19b-4(f)(6)(iii)
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 necessary or appropriate in the public interest, for the protection of investors, or otherwise in furtherance of the purposes 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 Brent J. Fields, 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.
Social Security Administration (SSA).
Notice.
We are giving notice of an agreement coordinating the United States (U.S.) and Brazilian social security programs effective on October 1, 2018. The Agreement with Brazil, which was signed on June 30, 2015, is similar to U.S. social security agreements already in force with 26 other countries—Australia, Austria, Belgium, Canada, Chile, the Czech Republic, Denmark, Finland, France, Germany, Greece, Hungary, Ireland, Italy, Japan, Korea (South), Luxembourg, the Netherlands, Norway, Poland, Portugal, the Slovak Republic, Spain, Sweden, Switzerland and the United Kingdom. Section 233 of the Social Security Act authorizes agreements of this type.
Like the other agreements, the U.S.-Brazilian Agreement eliminates dual social security coverage. This situation exists when a worker from one country works in the other country and has coverage under the social security systems of both countries for the same work. Without such agreements in force, when dual coverage occurs, the worker, the worker's employer, or both may be required to pay social security contributions to the two countries simultaneously. Under the U.S.-Brazilian Agreement, a worker who is sent by an employer in one country to work in the other country for 5 or fewer years remains covered only by the sending country. The Agreement includes additional rules that eliminate dual U.S. and Brazilian coverage in other work situations.
The Agreement also helps eliminate situations where workers suffer a loss of benefit rights because they have divided their careers between the two countries. Under the Agreement, workers may qualify for partial U.S. benefits or partial Brazilian benefits based on combined (totalized) work credits from both countries.
Persons who wish to obtain copies of the Agreement or want more information about its provisions may write to the Social Security Administration, Office of International Programs, Post Office Box 17741, Baltimore, MD 21235-7741 or visit the Social Security website at
Notice of request for public comment.
The Department of State is seeking Office of Management and Budget (OMB) approval for the information collection described below. In accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, we are requesting comments on this collection from all interested individuals and organizations. The purpose of this notice is to allow 60 days for public comment preceding submission of the collection to OMB.
The Department will accept comments from the public up to December 17, 2018.
You may submit comments by any of the following methods:
•
•
•
You must include the subject (PRA 60 Day Comment), information collection title Brokering Prior Approval (License), and OMB control number (1405-0142) in any correspondence.
Direct requests for additional information regarding this collection to Andrea Battista, who may be reached at
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
We are soliciting public comments to permit the Department to:
• Evaluate whether the proposed information collection is necessary for the proper functions of the Department.
• Evaluate the accuracy of our estimate of the time and cost burden for this proposed collection, including the validity of the methodology and assumptions used.
• Enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected.
• Minimize the reporting burden on those who are to respond, including the use of automated collection techniques or other forms of information technology.
Please note that comments submitted in response to this Notice are public record. Before including any detailed personal information, you should be aware that your comments as submitted, including your personal information, will be available for public review.
In accordance with part 129 of the International Traffic in Arms Regulations (ITAR), U.S. and foreign persons who wish to engage in ITAR-controlled brokering activity of defense articles and defense services must first register with DDTC. Brokers must then submit a written request for approval to DDTC and must receive DDTC's consent prior to engaging in such activities unless exempted. This information is currently used in the review of the brokering request submitted for approval and to ensure compliance with defense trade statutes and regulations. It is also used to monitor and control the transfer of sensitive U.S. technology.
Currently submissions are made via hardcopy documentation. Applicants are referred to ITAR part 129 for guidance on information to submit regarding proposed brokering activity. Upon implementation of DDTC's new case management system, the Defense Export Control and Compliance System (DECCS), a DS-4294 may be submitted electronically.
On September 6, 2018, BNSF Railway Company (BNSF) filed a petition under 49 U.S.C. 10502 seeking exemption from the prior approval requirements under 49 U.S.C. 11323-25 for BNSF to lease from Union Pacific Railroad Company (UP) an approximately 13.62-mile rail line (Line) in Pueblo County, Colo., between milepost 591.66 at NA Junction and milepost 605.28 at Avondale (Nyberg).
BNSF explains that, its predecessor, The Atchison, Topeka and Santa Fe Railway Company (ATSF), and UP's predecessor, Missouri Pacific Railroad Company (Missouri Pacific), entered into an agreement in 1967 relating to ownership and operation, maintenance, and joint use of ATSF's and Missouri Pacific's railroad tracks and facilities between NA Junction and Pueblo, which includes the Line. Pursuant to this agreement, BNSF and UP have jointly operated over the Line for the last 50 years, and UP has been responsible for maintaining the Line. BNSF has been the primary user of the Line and currently dispatches it.
BNSF and UP have recently entered into a lease agreement that would modify certain roles and responsibilities set forth in the 1967 agreement. BNSF would “non-exclusively lease the Line in order [] to maintain, construct, repair and renew the Line's track and appurtenant structures and facilities.” (Pet. 2.)
BNSF asks for expedited consideration of its petition so that the exemption can become effective by November 1, 2018. BNSF explains that this would allow it to plan for and commence maintenance work necessary to remove slow orders and improve track conditions before winter weather makes maintenance difficult.
Under 49 U.S.C. 11323(a)(2), prior Board approval is required for a rail carrier to lease the property of another rail carrier. Under 49 U.S.C. 10502, however, the Board must exempt a transaction or service from regulation when it finds that: (1) Regulation is not necessary to carry out the rail transportation policy of 49 U.S.C. 10101; and (2) either (a) the transaction or service is of limited scope, or (b) regulation is not needed to protect shippers from the abuse of market power.
Detailed scrutiny of the proposed transaction through an application for review and approval under 49 U.S.C. 11323-25 is not necessary here to carry out the rail transportation policy. The proposed transaction would align track and signal maintenance with dispatching and further align maintenance of the Line with BNSF's maintenance activities on contiguous lines, which would result in improved operations along the route. As such, the proposed transaction would, among other things, promote a safe and efficient rail transportation system (49 U.S.C. 10101(3)), ensure continuation of a sound rail transportation system with effective competition among rail carriers (49 U.S.C. 10101(4)), foster sound economic conditions in transportation and ensure effective competition (49 U.S.C. 10101(5)), and encourage honest
Regulation of the proposed transaction is also not necessary to protect shippers from the abuse of market power.
Under 49 U.S.C. 10502(g), the Board may not use its exemption authority to relieve a carrier of its statutory obligation to protect the interests of employees. Accordingly, as a condition to granting this exemption, the Board will impose the standard employee protective conditions in
The proposed lease is exempt from both the environmental reporting requirements under 49 CFR 1105.6(c) and the historic reporting requirements under 49 CFR 1105.8(b).
As noted above, BNSF seeks an expedited effective date so that it can commence maintenance improvements as soon as possible to avoid complications from winter weather conditions. For that reason, the exemption will be effective October 31, 2018, and petitions to stay, petitions for reconsideration, and petitions to reopen will be due by October 24, 2018.
1. Under 49 U.S.C. 10502, the Board exempts from the prior approval requirements of 49 U.S.C. 11323-25 BNSF's lease of the Line, subject to the employee protective conditions in
2. Notice of the exemption will be published in the
3. The exemption will become effective on October 31, 2018.
4. Petitions to stay, petitions for reconsideration, and petitions to reopen must be filed by October 24, 2018.
By the Board, Board Members Begeman and Miller.
Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration (PHMSA), DOT.
Notice of emergency waiver order.
PHMSA is issuing an emergency waiver order to persons conducting operations under the direction of Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Region 4 or United States Coast Guard (USCG) Seventh or Eighth Districts within the Hurricane Michael emergency area of Florida. The Waiver is granted to support the EPA and USCG in taking appropriate actions to prepare for, respond to, and recover from a threat to public health, welfare, or the environment caused by actual or potential oil and hazardous materials incidents resulting from Hurricane Michael. This Waiver Order is effective immediately and shall remain in effect for 30 days from the date of issuance.
Adam Horsley, Deputy Assistant Chief Counsel for Hazardous Materials Safety, Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration, telephone: (202) 366-4400.
In accordance with the provisions of 49 U.S.C. 5103(c), the Administrator for PHMSA, hereby declares that an emergency exists that warrants issuance of a Waiver of the Hazardous Materials Regulations (HMR, 49 CFR parts 171-180) to persons conducting operations under the direction of EPA Region 4 or USCG Seventh or Eighth Districts within the Hurricane Michael emergency area of Florida. The Waiver is granted to support the EPA and USCG in taking appropriate actions to prepare for, respond to, and recover from a threat to public health, welfare, or the environment caused by actual or potential oil and hazardous materials incidents resulting from Hurricane Michael.
On October 9, 2018, the President issued an Emergency Declaration for Hurricane Michael for 35 Florida counties (EM 3405). This Waiver Order covers all areas identified in the declaration, as amended. Pursuant to 49 U.S.C. 5103(c), PHMSA has authority delegated by the Secretary (49 CFR 1.97(b)(3)) to waive compliance with any part of the HMR provided that the grant of the waiver is: (1) In the public interest; (2) not inconsistent with the safety of transporting hazardous materials; and (3) necessary to facilitate the safe movement of hazardous materials into, from, and within an area of a major disaster or emergency that has been declared under the Robert T. Stafford Disaster Relief and Emergency Assistance Act (42 U.S.C. 5121
Given the continuing impacts caused by Hurricane Michael, PHMSA's Administrator has determined that regulatory relief is in the public interest and necessary to ensure the safe transportation in commerce of hazardous materials while the EPA and USCG execute their recovery and cleanup efforts in Florida. Specifically, PHMSA's Administrator finds that issuing this Waiver Order will allow the EPA and USCG to conduct their Emergency Support Function #10 response activities under the National Response Framework to safely remove, transport, and dispose of hazardous materials. By execution of this Waiver Order, persons conducting operations under the direction of EPA Region 4 or USCG Seventh or Eighth Districts within the Hurricane Michael emergency areas of Florida are authorized to offer and transport non-radioactive hazardous materials under alternative safety requirements imposed by EPA Region 4 or USCG Seventh or Eighth Districts when compliance with the HMR is not practicable. Under this Waiver Order, non-radioactive hazardous materials may be transported to staging areas within 50 miles of the point of origin. Further transportation of the hazardous materials from staging
This Waiver Order is effective immediately and shall remain in effect for 30 days from the date of issuance.
Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration (PHMSA), DOT.
Notice of emergency waiver order.
PHMSA is issuing an emergency waiver order to persons conducting operations under the direction of Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Region 4 or United States Coast Guard (USCG) Seventh or Eighth Districts within the Hurricane Michael emergency area of Georgia. The Waiver is granted to support the EPA and USCG in taking appropriate actions to prepare for, respond to, and recover from a threat to public health, welfare, or the environment caused by actual or potential oil and hazardous materials incidents resulting from Hurricane Michael. This Waiver Order is effective immediately and shall remain in effect for 30 days from the date of issuance.
Adam Horsley, Deputy Assistant Chief Counsel for Hazardous Materials Safety, Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration, telephone: (202) 366-4400.
In accordance with the provisions of 49 U.S.C. 5103(c), the Administrator for PHMSA, hereby declares that an emergency exists that warrants issuance of a Waiver of the Hazardous Materials Regulations (HMR, 49 CFR parts 171-180) to persons conducting operations under the direction of EPA Region 4 or USCG Seventh or Eighth Districts within the Hurricane Michael emergency area of Georgia. The Waiver is granted to support the EPA and USCG in taking appropriate actions to prepare for, respond to, and recover from a threat to public health, welfare, or the environment caused by actual or potential oil and hazardous materials incidents resulting from Hurricane Michael.
On October 10, 2018, the President issued an Emergency Declaration for Hurricane Michael for Georgia for the counties of Appling, Atkinson, Bacon, Baker, Baldwin, Ben Hill, Berrien, Bibb, Bleckley, Brantley, Brooks, Bryan, Bulloch, Burke, Butts, Calhoun, Camden, Candler, Charlton, Chatham, Chattahoochee, Clarke, Clay, Clinch, Coffee, Colquitt, Columbia, Cook, Crawford, Crisp, Decatur, Dodge, Dooly, Dougherty, Early, Echols, Effingham, Elbert, Emanuel, Evans, Glascock, Glynn, Grady, Greene, Hancock, Houston, Irwin, Jasper, Jeff Davis, Jefferson, Jenkins, Johnson, Jones, Lamar, Lanier, Laurens, Lee, Liberty, Lincoln, Long, Lowndes, Macon, Marion, McDuffie, McIntosh, Miller, Mitchell, Monroe, Montgomery, Morgan, Muscogee, Oconee, Oglethorpe, Peach, Pierce, Pulaski, Putnam, Quitman, Randolph, Richmond, Schley, Screven, Seminole, Stewart, Sumter, Talbot, Taliaferro, Tattnall, Taylor, Telfair, Terrell, Thomas, Tift, Toombs, Treutlen, Turner, Twiggs, Upson, Ware, Warren, Washington, Wayne, Webster, Wheeler, Wilcox, Wilkes, Wilkinson, and Worth (EM-3406).
This Waiver Order covers all areas identified in the declaration, as amended. Pursuant to 49 U.S.C. 5103(c), PHMSA has authority delegated by the Secretary (49 CFR 1.97(b)(3)) to waive compliance with any part of the HMR provided that the grant of the waiver is: (1) In the public interest; (2) not inconsistent with the safety of transporting hazardous materials; and (3) necessary to facilitate the safe movement of hazardous materials into, from, and within an area of a major disaster or emergency that has been declared under the Robert T. Stafford Disaster Relief and Emergency Assistance Act (42 U.S.C. 5121
Given the continuing impacts caused by Hurricane Michael, PHMSA's Administrator has determined that regulatory relief is in the public interest and necessary to ensure the safe transportation in commerce of hazardous materials while the EPA and USCG execute their recovery and cleanup efforts in Georgia. Specifically, PHMSA's Administrator finds that issuing this Waiver Order will allow the EPA and USCG to conduct their Emergency Support Function #10 response activities under the National Response Framework to safely remove, transport, and dispose of hazardous materials. By execution of this Waiver Order, persons conducting operations under the direction of EPA Region 4 or USCG Seventh or Eighth Districts within the Hurricane Michael emergency area of Georgia are authorized to offer and transport non-radioactive hazardous materials under alternative safety requirements imposed by EPA Region 4 or USCG Seventh or Eighth Districts when compliance with the HMR is not practicable. Under this Waiver Order, non-radioactive hazardous materials may be transported to staging areas within 50 miles of the point of origin. Further transportation of the hazardous materials from staging areas must be in full compliance with the HMR.
This Waiver Order is effective immediately and shall remain in effect for 30 days from the date of issuance.
Internal Revenue Service (IRS), Treasury.
Notice and request for comments.
The Internal Revenue Service, as part of its continuing effort to reduce paperwork and respondent burden, invites the public and other Federal agencies to take this opportunity to comment on proposed and/or continuing information collections, as required by the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995. Currently, the IRS is soliciting comments concerning guidance under section 6708, failure to maintain list of advisees with respect to reportable transactions.
Written comments should be received on or before December 17, 2018 to be assured of consideration.
Direct all written comments to Carolyn Brown, Internal Revenue Service, Room 6236, 1111 Constitution Avenue NW, Washington, DC 20224. Requests for additional information or copies of the regulations should be
The following paragraph applies to all the collections of information covered by this notice:
An agency may not conduct or sponsor, and a person is not required to respond to, a collection of information unless the collection of information displays a valid OMB control number.
Books or records relating to a collection of information must be retained if their contents may become material in the administration of any internal revenue law. Generally, tax returns and tax return information are confidential, as required by 26 U.S.C. 6103.
• Evaluate whether the proposed collection of information is necessary for the proper performance of the functions of the agency, including whether the information will have practical utility;
• Evaluate the accuracy of the agency's estimate of the burden of the proposed collection of information, including the validity of the methodology and assumptions used;
• Enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected; and
• Minimize the burden of the collection of information on those who are to respond, including using appropriate automated, electronic, mechanical, or other technological collection techniques or other forms of information technology,
Comments submitted in response to this notice will be summarized and/or included in the ICR for OMB approval of the extension of the information collection; they will also become a matter of public record.
Internal Revenue Service (IRS), Treasury.
Notice of meeting.
The Information Reporting Program Advisory Committee (IRPAC) will hold a public meeting on Wednesday, October 24, 2018.
Ms. Tonjua Menefee, National Public Liaison, CL:NPL: BSRM, Rm. 7559, 1111 Constitution Avenue NW, Washington, DC 20224.
Phone: 202-317-6851 (not a toll-free number). Email address:
Notice is hereby given pursuant to section 10(a)(2) of the Federal Advisory Committee Act, 5 U.S.C. App. (1988), that a public meeting of the IRPAC will be held on Wednesday, October 24, 2018 from 9:00 a.m. to 1:00 p.m. at the Melrose Georgetown Hotel, 2430 Pennsylvania Ave. NW, Washington, DC 20037. Report recommendations on issues that may be discussed include: FIRE System Latency, IRC § 6050S and Form 1098-T Reporting; Business Master File Entity Addresses; Form W-9 Enhancements; Form W-4 2018 & 2019 versions; Expansion of IRS Direct Pay Program for Estimated Individual Income Tax Payments; Inclusion of Adjusted Gross Amount for Reporting on Form 1099-K; Tax Identification Number Identity Theft Resulting in False Forms 1099; Validity period of documentary evidence and treaty statement under the Qualified Intermediary (QI) Agreement; Foreign Account Tax Compliance Act including Section 871(m).
Last minute agenda changes may preclude notice. Due to limited seating and security requirements, please call or email Tonjua Menefee to confirm your attendance. Ms. Menefee can be reached at 202-317-6851 or
Internal Revenue Service (IRS), Treasury.
Notice and request for comments.
The Internal Revenue Service, as part of its continuing effort to reduce paperwork and respondent burden, invites the general public and other Federal agencies to take this opportunity to comment on proposed and/or continuing information collections, as required by the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995. The IRS is soliciting comments concerning information collection requirements related to guidance for qualification as an acceptance agent, and execution of an agreement between an acceptance agent and the Internal Revenue Service relating to the issuance of certain taxpayer identifying numbers.
Written comments should be received on or before December 17, 2018 to be assured of consideration.
Direct all written comments to Laurie Brimmer, Internal Revenue Service, Room 6529, 1111 Constitution Avenue NW, Washington, DC 20224.
Requests for additional information or
The following paragraph applies to all of the collections of information covered by this notice:
An agency may not conduct or sponsor, and a person is not required to respond to, a collection of information unless the collection of information displays a valid OMB control number. Books or records relating to a collection of information must be retained as long as their contents may become material in the administration of any internal revenue law. Generally, tax returns and tax return information are confidential, as required by 26 U.S.C. 6103.
U.S.-China Economic and Security Review Commission.
Notice of open public event.
Notice is hereby given of the following open public event of the U.S.-China Economic and Security Review Commission. The Commission is mandated by Congress to investigate, assess, and report to Congress annually on “the national security implications of the economic relationship between the United States and the People's Republic of China.” Pursuant to this mandate, the Commission will hold a public release of its 2018 Annual Report to Congress in Washington, DC on November 14, 2018.
The release is scheduled for Wednesday, November 14, 2018 from 10:30 a.m. to 11:30 a.m.
Hart Senate Office Building, Room 902, Washington, DC. Please check the Commission's website at
Any member of the public seeking further information concerning the event should contact Leslie Tisdale, 444 North Capitol Street NW, Suite 602, Washington DC 20001; telephone: 202-624-1496, or via email at
• U.S.-China Economic and Trade Relations, including: Year in Review: Economics and Trade; Tools to Address U.S.-China Economic Challenges; and China's Agricultural Policies: Trade, Investment, Safety, and Innovation.
• U.S.-China Security Relations, including: Year in Review: Security and Foreign Affairs; and China's Military Reorganization and Modernization: Implications for the United States.
• China and the World, including: Belt and Road Initiative; China's Relations with U.S. Allies and Partners; China and Taiwan; China and Hong Kong; and China's Evolving North Korea Strategy.
• China's High-Tech Development, including Next Generation Connectivity.
Congress created the U.S.-China Economic and Security Review Commission in 2000 in the National Defense Authorization Act (Public Law 106-398), as amended by Division P of the Consolidated Appropriations Resolution, 2003 (Public Law 108-7), as amended by Public Law 109-108 (November 22, 2005), as amended by Public Law 113-291 (December 19, 2014).
Veterans Health Administration, Department of Veterans Affairs.
Notice.
In compliance with the Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA) of 1995, this notice announces that the Veterans Health Administration, Department of Veterans Affairs, will submit the collection of information abstracted below to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for review and comment. The PRA submission describes the nature of the information collection and its expected cost and burden and it includes the actual data collection instrument.
Comments must be submitted on or before November 15, 2018.
Submit written comments on the collection of information through
Brian McCarthy, VHA National Policy, Department of Veterans Affairs, 810 Vermont Avenue NW, Washington, DC 20420, (202) 615-9241 or email
An agency may not conduct or sponsor, and a person is not required to respond to a collection of information unless it displays a currently valid OMB control number. The
By direction of the Secretary.
Veterans Benefits Administration, Department of Veterans Affairs.
Notice.
In compliance with the Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA) of 1995, this notice announces that the Veterans Benefits Administration, Department of Veterans Affairs, will submit the collection of information abstracted below to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for review and comment. The PRA submission describes the nature of the information collection and its expected cost and burden and it includes the actual data collection instrument.
Comments must be submitted on or before November 15, 2018.
Submit written comments on the collection of information through
Nancy Kessinger, Administration & Facilities (20M3), Department of Veterans Affairs, 810 Vermont Avenue NW, Washington, DC 20420, (202) 632-8924 or email
An agency may not conduct or sponsor, and a person is not required to respond to a collection of information unless it displays a currently valid OMB control number. The
| 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 |