14914 Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 46 / Friday, March 8, 2013 / Rules and Regulations 

254.6, as most recently amended in (73 

FR 70591, November 21, 2008) and is 

simply a ministerial inflation update 

based on a formula. Accordingly, we 

find that prior notice and comment are 

unnecessary, and we are issuing these 

revisions to Part 254 as a final rule. 

Although this final rule will become 

effective on June 6, 2013, in order to 

avoid imposing an undue burden the 

Department will defer enforcement of 

the notice provision in the rule (section 

254.5) as it pertains to printed notices 

about the new limit for a reasonable 

time period to allow carriers to replace 

or update any current paper ticket stock 

and ticket jackets or inserts. Electronic 

notices about the minimum domestic 

liability limit, including notices that are 

printed ‘‘on demand’’ from an electronic 

source (e.g., Web sites, email messages, 

and airport kiosks) should be updated 

no later than the effective date of this 

final rule. Carriers are subject to 

enforcement action from the effective 

date of this final rule if they fail to 

provide notice of the new minimum 

liability limit in the manner described 

above, or if they fail to apply the new 

limit. 

Executive Order 12866 

This final rule has been evaluated in 

accordance with existing policies and 

procedures and is considered not 

significant under both Executive Order 

12866 and DOT’s Regulatory Policies 

and Procedures. The rule has not been 

reviewed by the Office of Management 

and Budget (OMB) under Executive 

Order 12866. This revision of 14 CFR 

254.4 provides for an inflation 

adjustment to the amount of the 

minimum limit on baggage liability that 

air carriers may incur in cases of 

mishandled baggage, as required by 

section 254.6. The provisions are 

required by current regulatory language, 

without interpretation. 

This rule will pose minor additional 

costs to airlines only in those instances 

in which carriers lose, damage or delay 

baggage and where the amount of the 

passenger’s claim in those instances 

exceeds the prior minimum liability 

limit of $3,300. The maximum potential 

impact in those instances is $100 on 

each such claim. Reports filed each 

month with the Department by airlines 

that each account for at least one 

percent of total domestic scheduledservice passenger revenues show that, in 

2012, approximately 0.3 percent (.003) 

of domestic passengers experience a 

mishandled bag. The total number of 

domestic scheduled passenger 

enplanements in 2012 was 652,178,681. 

This means that approximately 2 

million domestic scheduled passengers 

experience a mishandled bag each year 

(.003 multiplied by 652.2 equals 

1,956,536). However, the vast majority 

of the instances of mishandled baggage 

do not result in a claim in an amount 

that is affected by the liability limit in 

this rule. We contacted a few carriers to 

determine how many of their domestic 

passengers have had claims that exceed 

the prior minimum liability limit of 

$3,300. Based on the information 

provided, we believe a little more than 

one half percent (0.0058) of the 

domestic passengers who experience a 

mishandled bag would benefit from an 

increase in the minimum limit on 

baggage liability, i.e., about 11,300 

passengers. Therefore, we expect that 

there would be a cost to the airline 

industry of $1.1 million each year (the 

number of domestic passengers who 

receive a baggage settlement that 

exceeds the prior minimum liability 

limit of $3,300, which is 11,300 

passengers multiplied by the maximum 

potential impact in those instances 

which is $100). There would also be a 

benefit to passengers in the same 

amount. 

Regulatory Flexibility Act 

The Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980 

(5 U.S.C. 601–612) requires an 

assessment of the impact of proposed 

and final rules on small entities unless 

the agency certifies that the proposed 

regulation will not have a significant 

economic impact on a substantial 

number of small entities. Since notice 

and comment rulemaking is not 

necessary for this rule, the provisions of 

the Regulatory Flexibility Act (Pub. L. 

96–354, 5 U.S.C. 601–612) do not apply. 

However, DOT has evaluated the effects 

of this action on small entities and has 

determined that the action would not 

have a significant economic impact on 

a substantial number of small entities. 

An air carrier is a small business if it 

provides air transportation only with 

small aircraft (i.e., aircraft with up to 60 

seats/18,000 pound payload capacity). 

See 14 CFR 399.73. This revision affects 

only flight segments operated with large 

aircraft and other flight segments 

appearing on the same ticket as a largeaircraft segment. As a result, many 

operations of small entities, such as air 

taxis and many commuter air carriers, 

are not covered by the rule. Moreover, 

any additional costs for small entities 

associated with the rule should be 

minimal and may be covered by 

insurance. Accordingly, we certify that 

this action will not have a significant 

economic impact on a substantial 

number of small entities. 

Paperwork Reduction Act 

This final rule imposes no new 

reporting or record keeping 

requirements necessitating clearance by 

OMB. 

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 254 

Air carriers, Administrative practice 

and procedure, Consumer protection, 

Department of Transportation. 

Accordingly, the Department of 

Transportation amends 14 CFR part 254 

as follows: 

PART 254—DOMESTIC BAGGAGE 

LIABILITY 

■ 1. The authority citation for part 254 

continues to read as follows: 

Authority: 49 U.S.C. 40113, 41501, 41504, 

41510, 41702 and 41707. 

§ 254.4 [Amended] 

■ 2. Section 254.4 is amended by 

removing ‘‘$3,300,’’ and adding 

‘‘$3,400’’ in its place. 

§ 254.5 [Amended] 

■ 3. In § 254.5, paragraph (b) is amended 

by removing ‘‘$3,300’’ and adding 

‘‘$3,400’’ in its place. 

Issued in Washington, DC, on March 4, 

2013, pursuant to authority delegated in 49 

CFR 1.27(n). 

Robert S. Rivkin, 

General Counsel. 

[FR Doc. 2013–05475 Filed 3–7–13; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4910–9X–P 

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE 

Bureau of Industry and Security 

15 CFR Part 744 

[Docket No. 121219726–2726–01] 

RIN 0694–AF85 

Addition of Certain Persons to the 

Entity List 

AGENCY: Bureau of Industry and 

Security, Commerce. 

ACTION: Final rule. 

SUMMARY: This rule amends the Export 

Administration Regulations (EAR) by 

adding three entries to the Entity List for 

one person who has been determined by 

the U.S. Government to be acting 

contrary to the national security or 

foreign policy interests of the United 

States. This person will be listed on the 

Entity List under Germany, Russia, and 

Taiwan. 

DATES: Effective date: This rule is 

effective March 8, 2013. 


tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 46 / Friday, March 8, 2013 / Rules and Regulations 14915 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Karen Nies-Vogel, Chair, End-User 

Review Committee, Office of the 

Assistant Secretary, Export 

Administration, Bureau of Industry and 

Security, Department of Commerce, 

Phone: (202) 482–5991, Fax: (202) 482– 

3911, Email: ERC@bis.doc.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Background 

The Entity List (Supplement No. 4 to 

Part 744) notifies the public about 

entities that have engaged in activities 

that could result in an increased risk of 

the diversion of exported, reexported, or 

transferred (in-country) items to 

weapons of mass destruction (WMD) 

programs. Since its initial publication, 

grounds for inclusion on the Entity List 

have expanded to activities sanctioned 

by the State Department and activities 

contrary to U.S. national security or 

foreign policy interests, including 

terrorism and export control violations 

involving abuse of human rights. 

Certain exports, reexports, and transfers 

(in-country) to entities identified on the 

Entity List require licenses from BIS and 

are usually subject to a policy of denial. 

The availability of license exceptions in 

such transactions is very limited. The 

license review policy for each entity is 

identified in the License Review Policy 

column on the Entity List and the 

availability of license exceptions is 

noted in the Federal Register notices 

adding persons to the Entity List. BIS 

places entities on the Entity List based 

on certain sections of part 744 (Control 

Policy: End-User and End-Use Based) of 

the EAR. 

The ERC, composed of representatives 

of the Departments of Commerce 

(Chair), State, Defense, Energy and, 

when appropriate, the Treasury, makes 

all decisions regarding additions to, 

removals from, or other modifications to 

the Entity List. The ERC makes all 

decisions to add an entry to the Entity 

List by majority vote and all decisions 

to remove or modify an entry by 

unanimous vote. 

ERC Entity List Decisions 

Additions to the Entity List 

This rule implements the decision of 

the ERC to add one person, under three 

entries, to the Entity List on the basis of 

§ 744.11 (License requirements that 

apply to entities acting contrary to the 

national security or foreign policy 

interests of the United States) of the 

EAR. The three entries, two of which are 

alternate addresses and slightly different 

names used in different countries for the 

person being added to the Entity List, 

consist of single entries in Russia, 

Germany, and Taiwan. The ERC 

reviewed § 744.11(b) (Criteria for 

revising the Entity List) in making the 

determination to add this one person 

under three entries to the Entity List. 

Under that paragraph, persons for which 

there is reasonable cause to believe, 

based on specific and articulable facts, 

that the persons have been involved, are 

involved, or pose a significant risk of 

being or becoming involved in, 

activities that are contrary to the 

national security or foreign policy 

interests of the United States and those 

acting on behalf of such persons may be 

added to the Entity List. Paragraphs 

(b)(1) through (5) of § 744.11 include an 

illustrative list of activities that could be 

contrary to the national security or 

foreign policy interests of the United 

States. The ERC has reasonable cause to 

believe that the one person being listed 

under three separate entries, T 

–Platforms, a company headquartered in 

Russia, has been listed as the ultimate 

consignee on multiple automated export 

system (AES) records filed for the export 

of dual-use items controlled for national 

security reasons but shipped without 

the required licenses. Further, the ERC 

has reason to believe that T-Platforms is 

associated with military procurement 

activities, including the development of 

computer systems for military end-users 

and the production of computers for 

nuclear research. T-Platforms has 

locations in Germany and Taiwan that 

are engaged in the same types of 

activities of concern. Based on TPlatforms’ activities, including those of 

its locations in Germany and Taiwan, 

the ERC determined that it is engaged in 

activities contrary to U.S. national 

security and foreign policy interests and 

poses a high risk of involvement in 

violations of the EAR. 

Therefore, pursuant to § 744.11(b)(3) 

and (5) of the EAR, the ERC determined 

that such conduct raises sufficient 

concern that prior review of exports, 

reexports, or transfers (in-country) of 

items subject to the EAR involving this 

one person being listed under three 

entries, and the possible imposition of 

license conditions or license denials, 

will enhance BIS’s ability to prevent 

violations of the EAR. 

For the one person being added to the 

Entity List under three entries, the ERC 

specified a license requirement for all 

items subject to the EAR and established 

a license application review policy of a 

presumption of denial. The license 

requirement applies to any transaction 

in which items are to be exported, 

reexported, or transferred (in-country) to 

such person or in which such person 

acts as purchaser, intermediate 

consignee, ultimate consignee, or enduser. In addition, no license exceptions 

are available for exports, reexports, or 

transfers (in-country) to this person 

being added to the Entity List under 

three entries. 

This final rule adds the following one 

person under three entries to the Entity 

List: 

Germany 

(1) T-Platforms GmbH, a.k.a., the 

following one alias: 

–tPlatforms GmbH. 

Woehlerstrasse 42, d–30163, Hanover, 

Germany (See alternate addresses 

under T-Platforms in Russia and T 

Platforms in Taiwan). 

Russia 

(1) T-Platforms, Leninsky Prospect 

113/1, Suite B–705, Moscow, Russia; 

and 8 Vvedenskogo Street, Suite K52B, 

Moscow, Russia (See alternate addresses 

under T-Platforms GmbH in Germany 

and T Platforms in Taiwan). 

Taiwan 

(1) T Platforms, a.k.a., the following 

one alias: 

–Platforms Solutions Development 

Limited. 

10F, No. 409, Sec. 2 Tiding Blvd., Neihu 

District, Taipei, Taiwan (See alternate 

addresses under T-Platforms GmbH in 

Germany and T-Platforms in Russia). 

Savings Clause 

Shipments of items removed from 

eligibility for a License Exception or 

export or reexport without a license 

(NLR) as a result of this regulatory 

action that were en route aboard a 

carrier to a port of export or reexport, on 

March 8, 2013, pursuant to actual orders 

for export or reexport to a foreign 

destination, may proceed to that 

destination under the previous 

eligibility for a License Exception or 

export or reexport without a license 

(NLR). 

Although the Export Administration 

Act expired on August 20, 2001, the 

President, through Executive Order 

13222 of August 17, 2001, 3 CFR, 2001 

Comp., p. 783 (2002), as extended by the 

Notice of August 15, 2012, 77 FR 49699 

(August 16, 2012), has continued the 

Export Administration Regulations in 

effect under the International 

Emergency Economic Powers Act. BIS 

continues to carry out the provisions of 

the Export Administration Act, as 

appropriate and to the extent permitted 

by law, pursuant to Executive Order 

13222. 


tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES
14916 Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 46 / Friday, March 8, 2013 / Rules and Regulations 

Rulemaking Requirements 

1. This rule has been determined to be 

not significant for purposes of Executive 

Order 12866. 

2. Notwithstanding any other 

provision of law, no person is required 

to respond to nor be subject to a penalty 

for failure to comply with a collection 

of information, subject to the 

requirements of the Paperwork 

Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501 

et seq.) (PRA), unless that collection of 

information displays a currently valid 

Office of Management and Budget 

(OMB) Control Number. This regulation 

involves collections previously 

approved by OMB under control 

number 0694–0088, Simplified Network 

Application Processing System, which 

includes, among other things, license 

applications and carries a burden 

estimate of 58 minutes for a manual or 

electronic submission. 

Total burden hours associated with 

the PRA and OMB control number 

0694–0088 are not expected to increase 

as a result of this rule. You may send 

comments regarding the collection of 

information associated with this rule, 

including suggestions for reducing the 

burden, to Jasmeet K. Seehra, Office of 

Management and Budget (OMB), by 

email to 

Jasmeet_K._Seehra@omb.eop.gov, or by 

fax to (202) 395–7285. 

3. This rule does not contain policies 

with Federalism implications as that 

term is defined in Executive Order 

13132. 

4. The provisions of the 

Administrative Procedure Act (5 U.S.C. 

553) requiring notice of proposed 

rulemaking, the opportunity for public 

comment and a 30-day delay in effective 

date are inapplicable because this 

regulation involves a military or foreign 

affairs function of the United States. 

(See 5 U.S.C. § 553(a)(1)). BIS 

implements this rule to protect U.S. 

national security or foreign policy 

interests by preventing items from being 

exported, reexported, or transferred (in 

country) to the person being added to 

the Entity List. If this rule were delayed 

to allow for notice and comment and a 

30-day delay in effective date, then the 

entity being added (one person under 

three entries) to the Entity List by this 

action would continue to be able to 

receive items without a license and to 

conduct activities contrary to the 

national security or foreign policy 

interests of the United States. In 

addition, because this party may receive 

notice of the U.S. Government’s 

intention to place this entity on the 

Entity List once a final rule was 

published, it would create an incentive 

for this person to either accelerate 

receiving items subject to the EAR to 

conduct activities that are contrary to 

the national security or foreign policy 

interests of the United States, and/or to 

take steps to set up additional aliases, 

change addresses, and other measures to 

try to limit the impact of the listing on 

the Entity List once a final rule was 

published. Further, no other law 

requires that a notice of proposed 

rulemaking and an opportunity for 

public comment be given for this rule. 

Because a notice of proposed 

rulemaking and an opportunity for 

public comment are not required to be 

given for this rule by 5 U.S.C. 553, or 

by any other law, the analytical 

requirements of the Regulatory 

Flexibility Act, 5 U.S.C. 601 et seq., are 

not applicable. 

List of Subject in 15 CFR Part 744 

Exports, Reporting and recordkeeping 

requirements, Terrorism. 

Accordingly, part 744 of the Export 

Administration Regulations (15 CFR 

parts 730–774) is amended as follows: 

PART 744—[AMENDED] 

■ 1. The authority citation for 15 CFR 

part 744 continues to read as follows: 

Authority: 50 U.S.C. app. 2401 et seq.; 50 

U.S.C. 1701 et seq.; 22 U.S.C. 3201 et seq.; 

42 U.S.C. 2139a; 22 U.S.C. 7201 et seq.; 22 

U.S.C. 7210; E.O. 12058, 43 FR 20947, 3 CFR, 

1978 Comp., p. 179; E.O. 12851, 58 FR 33181, 

3 CFR, 1993 Comp., p. 608; E.O. 12938, 59 

FR 59099, 3 CFR, 1994 Comp., p. 950; E.O. 

12947, 60 FR 5079, 3 CFR, 1995 Comp., p. 

356; E.O. 13026, 61 FR 58767, 3 CFR, 1996 

Comp., p. 228; E.O. 13099, 63 FR 45167, 3 

CFR, 1998 Comp., p. 208; E.O. 13222, 66 FR 

44025, 3 CFR, 2001 Comp., p. 783; E.O. 

13224, 66 FR 49079, 3 CFR, 2001 Comp., p. 

786; Notice of January 19, 2012, 77 FR 3067 

(January 20, 2012); Notice of August 15, 

2012, 77 FR 49699 (August 16, 2012); Notice 

of September 11, 2012, 77 FR 56519 

(September, 12, 2012); Notice of November 1, 

2012, 77 FR 66513 (November 5, 2012). 

■ 2. Supplement No. 4 to part 744 is 

amended: 

■ a. By adding under Germany, in 

alphabetical order, one German entity; 

■ b. By adding under Russia, in 

alphabetical order, one Russian entity; 

and 

■ c. By adding under Taiwan, in 

alphabetical order, one Taiwanese 

entity; 

The additions read as follows: 

Supplement No. 4 to Part 744—Entity 

List 

Country Entity License requirement License 

review policy Federal Register citation 

* * * * * * * 

GERMANY * * * * * * * 

T-Platforms GmbH, a.k.a., the following one 

alias: 

—tPlatforms GmbH Woehlerstrasse 42, 

d-30163, Hanover, Germany (See alternate addresses under T-Platforms 

in Russia and T Platforms in Taiwan). 

For all items subject to the 

EAR. (See § 744.11 of the 

EAR.) 

Presumption of denial ............ 78 FR [INSERT FR PAGE 

NUMBER] 3/8/13. 

* * * * * * * 

* * * * * * * 

* * * * * * * 

RUSSIA * * * * * * * 

T-Platforms, Leninsky Prospect 113/1, Suite 

B–705, Moscow, Russia; and 8 

Vvedenskogo Street, Suite K52B, Moscow, 

Russia (See alternate addresses under TPlatforms GmbH in Germany and T Platforms in Taiwan) 

For all items subject to the 

EAR. (See § 744.11 of the 

EAR) 

Presumption of denial ............ 78 FR [INSERT FR PAGE 

NUMBER] 3/8/13. 

* * * * * * * 


tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 46 / Friday, March 8, 2013 / Rules and Regulations 14917 

Country Entity License requirement License 

review policy Federal Register citation 

* * * * * * * 

TAIWAN * * * * * * * 

T Platforms, a.k.a., the following one alias: 

—Platforms Solutions Development Limited. 10F, No. 409, Sec. 2 Tiding 

Blvd., Neihu District, Taipei, Taiwan 

(See alternate addresses under TPlatforms GmbH in Germany and TPlatforms in Russia) 

For all items subject to the 

EAR. (See § 744.11 of the 

EAR) 

Presumption of denial ............ 78 FR [INSERT FR PAGE 

NUMBER] 3/8/13. 

* * * * * * * 

* * * * * * * 

Dated: March 1, 2013. 

Matthew S. Borman, 

Assistant Secretary for Export 

Administration. 

[FR Doc. 2013–05387 Filed 3–7–13; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 3510–33–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Part 55 

[OAR–2004–0091; FRL–9773–9] 

Outer Continental Shelf Air 

Regulations Consistency Update for 

California 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (‘‘EPA’’). 

ACTION: Final rule—consistency update. 

SUMMARY: EPA is finalizing the update 

of the Outer Continental Shelf (‘‘OCS’’) 

Air Regulations proposed in the Federal 

Register on October 9, 2012. 

Requirements applying to OCS sources 

located within 25 miles of States’ 

seaward boundaries must be updated 

periodically to remain consistent with 

the requirements of the corresponding 

onshore area (‘‘COA’’), as mandated by 

the Clean Air Act, as amended in 1990 

(‘‘the Act’’). The portion of the OCS air 

regulations that is being updated 

pertains to the requirements for OCS 

sources for which the Ventura County 

Air Pollution Control District (‘‘Ventura 

County APCD’’ or ‘‘District’’) is the 

designated COA. The intended effect of 

approving the OCS requirements for the 

Ventura County APCD is to regulate 

emissions from OCS sources in 

accordance with the requirements 

onshore. 

DATES: This rule is effective on April 8, 

2013. The incorporation by reference of 

certain publications listed in this rule is 

approved by the Director of the Federal 

Register as of April 8, 2013. 

ADDRESSES: EPA has established docket 

number OAR–2004–0091 for this action. 

The index to the docket is available 

electronically at www.regulations.gov 

and in hard copy at EPA Region IX, 75 

Hawthorne Street, San Francisco, 

California. While all documents in the 

docket are listed in the index, some 

information may be publicly available 

only at the hard copy location (e.g., 

copyrighted material), and some may 

not be publicly available in either 

location (e.g., CBI). To inspect the hard 

copy materials, please schedule an 

appointment during normal business 

hours with the contact listed in the FOR

FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Cynthia G. Allen, Air Division (Air-4), 

U.S. EPA Region 9, 75 Hawthorne 

Street, San Francisco, CA 94105, (415) 

947–4120, allen.cynthia@epa.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Throughout this document, the terms 

‘‘we,’’ ‘‘us,’’ or ‘‘our’’ refer to U.S. EPA. 

Organization of this document: The 

following outline is provided to aid in 

locating information in this preamble. 

Table of Contents 

I. Background 

II. Public Comment 

III. EPA Action 

IV. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews 

I. Background 

On October 9, 2012 (77 FR 61308), 

EPA proposed to incorporate various 

Ventura County APCD air pollution 

control requirements into the OCS Air 

Regulations at 40 CFR part 55. We are 

incorporating these requirements in 

response to the submittal of these rules 

by the District. EPA has evaluated the 

proposed requirements to ensure that 

they are rationally related to the 

attainment or maintenance of federal or 

state ambient air quality standards or 

Part C of title I of the Act, that they are 

not designed expressly to prevent 

exploration and development of the 

OCS and that they are applicable to OCS 

sources. 40 CFR 55.1. EPA has also 

evaluated the rules to ensure that they 

are not arbitrary or capricious. 40 CFR 

55.12(e). 

Section 328(a) of the Act requires that 

EPA establish requirements to control 

air pollution from OCS sources located 

within 25 miles of states’ seaward 

boundaries that are the same as onshore 

requirements. To comply with this 

statutory mandate, EPA must 

incorporate applicable onshore rules 

into 40 CFR part 55 as they exist 

onshore. This limits EPA’s flexibility in 

deciding which requirements will be 

incorporated into part 55 and prevents 

EPA from making substantive changes 

to the requirements it incorporates. As 

a result, EPA may be incorporating rules 

into part 55 that do not conform to all 

of EPA’s state implementation plan 

(SIP) guidance or certain requirements 

of the Act. Consistency updates may 

result in the inclusion of state or local 

rules or regulations into part 55, even 

though the same rules may ultimately be 

disapproved for inclusion as part of the 

SIP. Inclusion in the OCS rule does not 

imply that a rule meets the requirements 

of the Act for SIP approval, nor does it 

imply that the rule will be approved by 

EPA for inclusion in the SIP. 

II. Public Comment 

EPA’s proposed actions provided a 

30-day public comment period. During 

this period, we received no comments 

on the proposed actions. 

III. EPA Action 

In this document, EPA takes final 

action to incorporate the proposed 

changes into 40 CFR part 55. No 

changes were made to the proposed 

action except for minor technical 

corrections to the list of rules in the part 

55 regulatory text to accurately reflect 

the action we proposed. EPA is 

approving the proposed action under 

section 328(a)(1) of the Act, 42 U.S.C. 

7627. Section 328(a) of the Act requires 

that EPA establish requirements to 


tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES