Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 69 / Monday, April 11, 2011 / Notices 20067 

5 In approving this proposed rule change, the 

Commission has considered the proposed rule’s 

impact on efficiency, competition, and capital 

formation. See 15 U.S.C. 78c(f). 6 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5). 

7 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(2). 

8 17 CFR 200.30–3(a)(12). 

1 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1). 

2 17 CFR 240.19b–4. 3 15 U.S.C. 78f(b). 

securities, and believes that it is 

appropriate to designate strike price 

intervals and ranges for series in such 

options that are comparable to those 

strike price intervals and ranges in effect 

for the SPX option series. The Exchange 

hopes that this will permit calculation 

of volatility index values that are 

recognized to be as accurate and reliable 

as the VIX values. The Exchange stated 

that allowing smaller strike price 

intervals for options overlying single 

stocks, ETFs, and indexes with prices of 

$150 or less will allow the Exchange to 

calculate volatility indexes that are 

better estimates of the expected 

volatility of option classes with 

underlying prices that are low relative 

to the level of the S&P 500. 

The Exchange also stated its belief 

that the expansion of strike prices 

resulting from the proposal is limited 

because the proposal will apply only to 

options that are used to calculate a 

volatility index. CBOE further stated 

that it has analyzed its capacity and 

represented that it believes that the 

Exchange and the Options Price 

Reporting Authority have the necessary 

systems capacity to handle the 

additional traffic associated with the 

listing series with strike prices in $0.50 

intervals where the strike price is less 

than $75, and series with strike prices 

in $1.00 intervals where the strike price 

is between $75 and $150 for option 

classes used to calculate volatility 

indexes that would result from the 

Exchange’s proposal. 

III. Discussion 

The Commission finds that the 

proposed rule change is consistent with 

the requirements of the Act and the 

rules and regulations thereunder 

applicable to a national securities 

exchange.5 Specifically, the 

Commission finds that the proposal is 

consistent with Section 6(b)(5) of the 

Act,6 which requires, among other 

things, that the rules of a national 

securities exchange be designed to 

promote just and equitable principles of 

trade, to prevent fraudulent and 

manipulative acts, to remove 

impediments to and perfect the 

mechanism of a free and open market 

and a national market system, and, in 

general, to protect investors and the 

public interest. 

The proposal appears to strike a 

reasonable balance between the 

Exchange’s desire to offer a wider array 

of investment opportunities and the 

need to avoid unnecessary proliferation 

of options series and the corresponding 

increase in quotes and market 

fragmentation. The Commission expects 

the Exchange to monitor the trading 

volume associated with the additional 

options series listed as a result of this 

proposal and the effect of these 

additional series on market 

fragmentation and on the capacity of the 

Exchange’s, OPRA’s, and vendors’ 

automated systems. The Commission 

notes that CBOE has represented that it 

believes the Exchange and the Options 

Price Reporting Authority have the 

necessary systems capacity to handle 

the additional traffic associated with the 

newly permitted listings. 

IV. Conclusion 

It is therefore ordered, pursuant to 

Section 19(b)(2) of the Act,7 that the 

proposed rule change (SR–CBOE–2011– 

008) be, and it hereby is, approved. 

For the Commission, by the Division of 

Trading and Markets, pursuant to delegated 

authority.8

Cathy H. Ahn, 

Deputy Secretary. 

[FR Doc. 2011–8498 Filed 4–8–11; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 8011–01–P 

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE 

COMMISSION 

[Release No. 34–64187; File No. SR–EDGA– 

2011–08] 

Self-Regulatory Organizations; EDGA 

Exchange, Inc.; Notice of Filing and 

Order Granting Accelerated Approval 

of Proposed Rule Change To Adopt 

Rule 3.22 (Proxy Voting), in 

Accordance With the Provisions of 

Section 957 of the Dodd-Frank Wall 

Street Reform and Consumer 

Protection Act 

April 5, 2011. 

Pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the 

Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (the 

‘‘Exchange Act’’ or ‘‘Act’’),1 and Rule 

19b–4 thereunder,2 notice is hereby 

given that on March 24, 2011, EDGA 

Exchange, Inc. (the ‘‘Exchange’’ or 

‘‘EDGA’’) filed with the Securities and 

Exchange Commission (the 

‘‘Commission’’) the proposed rule 

change as described in Items I and II 

below, which items have been prepared 

by the Exchange. The Commission is 

publishing this notice to solicit 

comments on the proposed rule change 

from interested persons, and is 

approving the proposed rule change on 

an accelerated basis. 

I. Self-Regulatory Organization’s 

Statement of the Terms of Substance of 

the Proposed Rule Change 

The Exchange proposes to adopt Rule 

3.22 (Proxy Voting), in accordance with 

the provisions of Section 957 of the 

Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and 

Consumer Protection Act (the ‘‘DoddFrank Act’’). The text of the proposed 

rule change is attached as Exhibit 5 and 

is available on the Exchange’s Web site 

at http://www.directedge.com, at the 

Exchange’s principal office, and at the 

Public Reference Room of the 

Commission. 

II. Self-Regulatory Organization’s 

Statement of the Purpose of, and 

Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule 

Change 

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 III below. The 

self-regulatory organization has 

prepared summaries, set forth in 

Sections A, B and C below, of the most 

significant aspects of such statements. 

A. Self-Regulatory Organization’s 

Statement of the Purpose of, and 

Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule 

Change 

Purpose 

The Exchange is proposing to adopt 

EDGA Rule 3.22 (Proxy Voting), in 

accordance with the provisions of 

Section 957 of the Dodd-Frank Act, to 

prohibit Members from voting 

uninstructed shares if the matter voted 

on relates to (i) the election of a member 

of the board of directors of an issuer 

(other than an uncontested election of a 

director of an investment company 

registered under the Investment 

Company Act of 1940 (the ‘‘Investment 

Company Act’’)), (ii) executive 

compensation, or (iii) any other 

significant matter, as determined by the 

Securities and Exchange Commission 

(the ‘‘Commission’’), by rule. 

Section 957 of the Dodd-Frank Act 

amends Section 6(b) 3 of the Securities 

Exchange Act of 1934 (the ‘‘Exchange 

Act’’) [sic] to require the rules of each 

national securities exchange to prohibit 

any member organization that is not the 

beneficial owner of a security registered 


srobinson on DSKHWCL6B1PROD with NOTICES
20068 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 69 / Monday, April 11, 2011 / Notices 

4 15 U.S.C. 781. 

5 15 U.S.C. 78a et seq. 

6 15 U.S.C. 78f(b). 

7 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(10). 

8 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5). 

under Section 12 4 of the Exchange Act 

from granting a proxy to vote the 

security in connection with certain 

stockholder votes, unless the beneficial 

owner of the security has instructed the 

member organization to vote the proxy 

in accordance with the voting 

instructions of the beneficial owner. The 

stockholder votes covered by Section 

957 include any vote with respect to (i) 

the election of a member of the board of 

directors of an issuer (other than an 

uncontested election of a director of an 

investment company registered under 

the Investment Company Act), (ii) 

executive compensation, or (iii) any 

other significant matter, as determined 

by the Commission, by rule. 

Accordingly, in order to carry out the 

requirements of Section 957 of the 

Dodd-Frank Act, the Exchange proposes 

to adopt proposed EDGA Rule 3.22 to 

prohibit any Member from giving a 

proxy to vote stock that is registered in 

its name, unless: (i) Such Member is the 

beneficial owner of such stock; (ii) 

pursuant to the written instructions of 

the beneficial owner; or (iii) pursuant to 

the rules of any national securities 

exchange or association of which it is a 

member provided that the records of the 

Member clearly indicate the procedure 

it is following. The Exchange is 

proposing to adopt these rules because 

other national securities exchanges and 

associations do allow proxy voting 

under certain limited circumstances 

while the current Exchange Rules are 

silent on such matters. Therefore, a 

Member that is also a member of 

another national securities exchange or 

association may vote the shares held for 

a customer when allowed under its 

membership at another national 

securities exchange or association, 

provided that the records of the Member 

clearly indicate the procedure it is 

following. 

Notwithstanding the foregoing, a 

Member that is not the beneficial owner 

of a security registered under Section 12 

of the Exchange Act is prohibited from 

granting a proxy to vote the security in 

connection with a shareholder vote with 

respect to the election of a member of 

the board of directors of an issuer 

(except for a vote with respect to 

uncontested election of a member of the 

board of directors of any investment 

company registered under the 

Investment Company Act), executive 

compensation, or any other significant 

matter, as determined by the 

Commission, by rule, unless the 

beneficial owner of the security has 

instructed the Member to vote the proxy 

in accordance with the voting 

instructions of the beneficial owner. 

Because Section 957 of the DoddFrank Act does not provide for a 

transition phase, the Exchange is 

proposing to adopt the proposed rule 

change pursuant to Section 19(b) of the 

Exchange Act to comply with Section 

957 of the Dodd-Frank Act and is 

requesting that the Commission approve 

the proposal on an accelerated basis. 

Additionally, proposed EDGA Rule 

3.22(a) is based on NYSE Arca, Inc. 

(‘‘NYSE Arca’’) rule 9.4 and Financial 

Industry Regulatory Authority 

(‘‘FINRA’’) rule 2251, International 

Securities Exchange, LLC (‘‘ISE’’) rule 

421(a) and proposed EDGA Rule 3.22(b) 

is based on Nasdaq rule 2251(d) and ISE 

rule 421(b). 

Basis 

The Exchange believes the proposed 

rule change is consistent with the Act 5

and the rules and regulations 

thereunder and, in particular, the 

requirements of Section 6(b) of the Act.6

Specifically, the Exchange believes the 

proposed rule change is consistent with 

Section 6(b)(10) 7 requirements that all 

national securities exchanges adopt 

rules prohibiting members from voting, 

without receiving instructions from the 

beneficial owner of shares, on the 

election of a member of a board of 

directors of an issuer (except for a vote 

with respect to the uncontested election 

of a member of the board of directors of 

any investment company registered 

under the Investment Company Act of 

1940), executive compensation, or any 

other significant matter, as determined 

by the Commission, by rule. The 

Exchange also believes that the 

proposed rule change is consistent with 

the requirements under Section 6(b)(5) 8

that an exchange have rules that are 

designed to prevent fraudulent and 

manipulative acts and practices, to 

promote just and equitable principles of 

trade, to remove impediments to, and 

perfect the mechanism of a free and 

open market and, in general, to protect 

investors and the public interest. The 

Exchange is adopting this proposed rule 

change to comply with the requirements 

of Section 957 of the Dodd-Frank Act, 

and therefore believes the proposed rule 

change to be consistent with the Act, 

particularly with respect to the 

protection of investors and the public 

interest. 

B. Self-Regulatory Organization’s 

Statement on Burden on Competition 

The proposed rule change does not 

impose any burden on competition that 

is not necessary or appropriate in 

furtherance of the purposes of the Act. 

C. Self-Regulatory Organization’s 

Statement on Comments on the 

Proposed Rule Change Received From 

Members, Participants or Others 

The Exchange has not solicited, and 

does not intend to solicit, comments on 

this proposed rule change. The 

Exchange has not received any 

unsolicited written comments from 

members or other interested parties. 

III. Solicitation of Comments 

Interested persons are invited to 

submit written data, views, and 

arguments concerning the foregoing, 

including whether the proposed rule 

change is consistent with the Act. 

Comments may be submitted by any of 

the following methods: 

Electronic Comments 

• Use the Commission’s Internet 

comment form (http://www.sec.gov/ 

rules/sro.shtml); or 

• Send an e-mail to rulecomments@sec.gov. Please include File 

Number SR–EDGA–2011–08 on the 

subject line. 

Paper Comments 

• Send paper comments in triplicate 

to Elizabeth M. Murphy, Secretary, 

Securities and Exchange Commission, 

100 F Street, NE., Washington, DC 

20549–1090. 

All submissions should refer to File 

Number SR–EDGA–2011–08. This file 

number should be included on the 

subject line if e-mail is used. To help the 

Commission process and review your 

comments more efficiently, please use 

only one method. The Commission will 

post all comments on the Commission’s 

Internet Web site (http://www.sec.gov/ 

rules/sro.shtml). Copies of the 

submission, all subsequent 

amendments, all written statements 

with respect to the proposed rule 

change that are filed with the 

Commission, and all written 

communications relating to the 

proposed rule change between the 

Commission and any person, other than 

those that may be withheld from the 

public in accordance with the 

provisions of 5 U.S.C. 552, will be 

available for Web site viewing and 

printing in the Commission’s Public 

Reference Room, 100 F Street, NE., 

Washington, DC 20549, on official 

business days between the hours of 


srobinson on DSKHWCL6B1PROD with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 69 / Monday, April 11, 2011 / Notices 20069 

9See Securities Exchange Act Release 63139 

(October 20, 2010), 75 FR 65680 (October 26, 2010) 

(SR–ISE–2010–99); 61052 (November 23, 2009), 74 

FR 62857 (December 1, 2009) (SR–FINRA–2009– 

066) (finding that the proposed rule change was 

consistent with the Act because the Rule ‘‘will 

continue to provide FINRA members with guidance 

on the forwarding of proxy and other issuer-related 

materials.’’); 62992 (September 24, 2010), 75 FR 

60844 (October 1, 2010) (SR–NASDAQ–2010–114); 

and 48735 (October 31, 2003), 68 FR 63173 

(November 7, 2003) (SR–PCX–2003–50). 

10 In approving this rule change, the Commission 

notes that it has considered the proposed rule’s 

impact on efficiency, competition, and capital 

formation. See 15 U.S.C. 78c(f). 

11 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5). 

12See supra note 9. 

13 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(10). 

14See S. Rep. No. 111–176, at 136 (2010). 

15The Commission has not, to date, adopted rules 

concerning other significant matters where 

uninstructed broker votes should be prohibited, 

although it may do so in the future. Should the 

Commission adopt such rules, we would expect the 

Exchange to adopt coordinating rules promptly to 

comply with the statute. 

16 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5). 

17As the Commission stated in approving NYSE 

rules prohibiting broker voting in the election of 

directors, having those with an economic interest in 

the company vote the shares, rather than the broker 

who has no such economic interest, furthers the 

goal of enfranchising shareholders. See Securities 

Exchange Act Release No. 60215 (July 1, 2009), 

74 FR 33293 (July 10, 2009) (SR–NYSE–2006–92). 

18 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(2). 

10 a.m. and 3 p.m. Copies of such filing 

also will be available for inspection and 

copying at the principal office of the 

Exchange. All comments received will 

be posted without change; the 

Commission does not edit personal 

identifying information from 

submissions. You should submit only 

information that you wish to make 

available publicly. All submissions 

should refer to File Number SR–EDGA– 

2011–08 and should be submitted on or 

before May 2, 2011. 

IV. Commission’s Findings and Order 

Granting Accelerated Approval of the 

Proposed Rule Change 

In its filing, the Exchange requested 

that the Commission approve the 

proposal on an accelerated basis so that 

the Exchange could immediately 

comply with the requirements imposed 

by the Dodd-Frank Act, and because the 

proposed rule text is based upon ISE 

Rule 421, FINRA Rule 2251, Nasdaq 

Rule 2251(d), and NYSE Arca Rule 9.4.9

After careful consideration, the 

Commission finds that the proposed 

rule change is consistent with the 

requirements of the Act and the rules 

and regulations thereunder applicable to 

a national securities exchange.10

The Commission believes that 

proposed Rule 3.22(a) is consistent with 

Section 6(b)(5) 11 of the Act, which 

provides, among other things, that the 

rules of the Exchange must be designed 

to promote just and equitable principles 

of trade, remove impediments to and 

perfect the mechanism of a free and 

open market and a national market 

system, and, in general, to protect 

investors and the public interest, and 

are not designed to permit unfair 

discrimination between customers, 

issuers, brokers, or dealers. 

Under proposed Rule 3.22(a), a 

Member shall be prohibited from voting 

uninstructed shares unless (1) That 

Member is the beneficial owner of the 

stock; (2) pursuant to the written 

instructions of the beneficial owner; or 

(3) pursuant to the rules of any national 

securities exchange or association of 

which it is also a member, provided that 

the Member’s records clearly indicate 

the procedure it is following. This 

provision is based on ISE Rule 421, 

FINRA Rule 2251 and NYSE Arca Rule 

9.4, which were previously approved by 

the Commission.12 The Commission 

notes that the proposed change will 

provide clarity to Exchange Members 

going forward on whether broker 

discretionary voting is permitted by 

Exchange Members under limited 

circumstances when the Member is also 

a member of another national securities 

exchange that permits broker 

discretionary voting. In approving this 

portion of the proposal, the Commission 

notes that Rule 3.22(a) is consistent with 

the approach taken under the rules of 

other national securities exchanges or 

national securities association, and for 

Exchange Members who are not also 

members of another national securities 

exchange prohibits broker discretionary 

voting on any matter, consistent with 

investor protection and the public 

interest. 

The Commission believes that 

proposed Rule 3.22(b) is consistent with 

Section 6(b)(10) 13 of the Act, which 

requires that national securities 

exchanges adopt rules prohibiting 

members that are not beneficial holders 

of a security from voting uninstructed 

proxies with respect to the election of a 

member of the board of directors of an 

issuer (except for uncontested elections 

of directors for companies registered 

under the Investment Company Act), 

executive compensation, or any other 

significant matter, as determined by the 

Commission by rule. 

The Commission believes that 

proposed Rule 3.22(b) is consistent with 

Section 6(b)(10) of the Act because it 

adopts revisions that comply with that 

section. As noted in the accompanying 

Senate Report, Section 957, which 

enacted Section 6(b)(10), reflects the 

principle that ‘‘final vote tallies should 

reflect the wishes of the beneficial 

owners of the stock and not be affected 

by the wishes of the broker that holds 

the shares.’’ 14 The proposed rule change 

will make the Exchange compliant with 

the new requirements of Section 

6(b)(10) by specifically prohibiting 

broker-dealers, who are not beneficial 

owners of a security, from voting 

uninstructed shares in connection with 

a shareholder vote on the election of a 

member of the board of directors of an 

issuer (except for a vote with respect to 

the uncontested election of a member of 

the board of directors of any investment 

company registered under the 

Investment Company Act of 1940), 

executive compensation, or any other 

significant matter, as determined by the 

Commission by rule, unless the member 

receives voting instructions from the 

beneficial owner of the shares.15

The Commission also believes that 

proposed Rule 3.22(b) is consistent with 

Section 6(b)(5) 16 of the Act, which 

provides, among other things, that the 

rules of the Exchange must be designed 

to promote just and equitable principles 

of trade, remove impediments to and 

perfect the mechanism of a free and 

open market and a national market 

system, and, in general, to protect 

investors and the public interest, and 

are not designed to permit unfair 

discrimination between customers, 

issuers, brokers, or dealers. 

The Commission believes that the rule 

assures that shareholder votes on the 

election of the board of directors of an 

issuer (except for a vote with respect to 

the uncontested election of a member of 

the board of directors of any investment 

company registered under the 

Investment Company Act of 1940) and 

on executive compensation matters are 

made by those with an economic 

interest in the company, rather than by 

a broker that has no such economic 

interest, which should enhance 

corporate governance and accountability 

to shareholders.17

Based on the above, the Commission 

finds that the Exchange’s proposal will 

further the purposes of Sections 6(b)(5) 

and 6(b)(10) of the Act because it should 

enhance corporate accountability to 

shareholders while also serving to fulfill 

the Congressional intent in adopting 

Section 6(b)(10) of the Act. 

The Commission also finds good 

cause, pursuant to Section 19(b)(2) of 

the Act,18 for approving the proposed 

rule change prior to the 30th day after 

the date of publication of notice in the 

Federal Register. The Commission 

believes that good cause exists to grant 

accelerated approval to proposed Rule 

3.22(a), because this proposed rule will 

conform the Exchange rule to ISE Rule 


srobinson on DSKHWCL6B1PROD with NOTICES
20070 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 69 / Monday, April 11, 2011 / Notices 

19See supra notes 9. 

20See supra note 9. 

21 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(2). 

22 17 CFR 200.30–3(a)(12). 

421, NYSE Arca Rule 9.4 and FINRA 

Rule 2251, which were published for 

public comment in the Federal Register 

and approved by the Commission, and 

for which no comments were received.19

Because proposed Rule 3.22(a) is 

substantially similar to the ISE, NYSE 

Arca and FINRA rules, it raises no new 

regulatory issues. 

The Commission also believes that 

good cause exists to grant accelerated 

approval to proposed Rule 3.22(b), 

which conforms the Exchange’s rules to 

the requirements of Section 6(b)(10) of 

the Act. Section 6(b)(10) of the Act, 

enacted under Section 957 of the DoddFrank Act, does not provide for a 

transition phase, and requires rules of 

national securities exchanges to prohibit 

broker voting on the election of a 

member of the board of directors of an 

issuer (except for a vote with respect to 

the uncontested election of a member of 

the board of directors of any investment 

company registered under the 

Investment Company Act of 1940), 

executive compensation, or any other 

significant matter, as determined by the 

Commission by rule. The Commission 

believes that good cause exists to grant 

accelerated approval to proposed Rule 

3.22(b), because it will conform the 

Exchange rule to the requirements of 

Section 6(b)(10) of the Act. Moreover, 

proposed Rule 3.22(b) is substantially 

similar to ISE Rule 421 and Nasdaq Rule 

2251.20

V. Conclusion 

It is therefore ordered, pursuant to 

Section 19(b)(2) of the Act,21 that the 

proposed rule change (SR–EDGA–2011– 

08) be, and it hereby is, approved on an 

accelerated basis. 

For the Commission, by the Division of 

Trading and Markets, pursuant to delegated 

authority.22

Cathy H. Ahn, 

Deputy Secretary. 

[FR Doc. 2011–8477 Filed 4–8–11; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 8011–01–P 

DEPARTMENT OF STATE 

[Public Notice: 7411] 

30-Day Notice of Proposed Information 

Collection: DS–156, Nonimmigrant 

Visa Application, OMB Control Number 

1405–0018 

ACTION: Notice of request for public 

comment and submission to OMB of 

proposed collection of information. 

SUMMARY: The Department of State has 

submitted the following information 

collection request to the Office of 

Management and Budget (OMB) for 

approval in accordance with the 

Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995. 

• Title of Information Collection: 

Nonimmigrant Visa Application. 

• OMB Control Number: 1405–0018. 

• Type of Request: Extension of a 

Currently Approved Collection. 

• Originating Office: Bureau of 

Consular Affairs (CA/VO). 

• Form Number: DS–156. 

• Respondents: Nonimmigrant visa 

applicants. 

• Estimated Number of Respondents: 

800,000. 

• Estimated Number of Responses: 

800,000. 

• Average Hours per Response: 1 

hour. 

• Total Estimated Burden: 800,000 

hours per year. 

• Frequency: Once per respondent. 

• Obligation to Respond: Required to 

Obtain or Retain a Benefit. 

DATES: Submit comments to the Office 

of Management and Budget (OMB) for 

up to 30 days from April 11, 2011. 

ADDRESSES: Direct comments to the 

Department of State Desk Officer in the 

Office of Information and Regulatory 

Affairs at the Office of Management and 

Budget (OMB). You may submit 

comments by the following methods: 

• E-mail: 

oira_submission@omb.eop.gov. You 

must include the DS form number, 

information collection title, and OMB 

control number in the subject line of 

your message. 

• Fax: 202–395–5806. Attention: Desk 

Officer for Department of State. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Direct requests for additional 

information regarding the collection 

listed in this notice, including requests 

for copies of the proposed information 

collection and supporting documents, to 

Stefanie Claus of the Office of Visa 

Services, U.S. Department of State, 2401 

E. Street, NW., L–603, Washington, DC 

20522, who may be reached at (202) 

663–2910. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

We are soliciting public comments to 

permit the Department to: 

• Evaluate whether the proposed 

information collection is necessary to 

properly perform our functions. 

• Evaluate the accuracy of our 

estimate of the burden of the 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. 

Abstract of proposed collection: 

Form DS–156 is required by 

regulation of all nonimmigrant visa 

applicants who do not use the Online 

Application for Nonimmigrant Visa 

(Form DS–160). Posts will use the DS– 

156 to elicit information necessary to 

determine an applicant’s visa eligibility. 

Methodology: 

The DS–156 is completed by 

applicants online or, in exceptional 

circumstances, applicants may submit a 

paper application to posts abroad. The 

applicant prints the application and a 

2–D barcode. When the applicant 

appears at the interview the barcode is 

scanned and the information 

electronically received. 

Dated: March 31, 2011. 

David T. Donahue, 

Deputy Assistant Secretary, Bureau of 

Consular Affairs, Department of State. 

[FR Doc. 2011–8539 Filed 4–8–11; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4710–06–P 

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

Federal Aviation Administration 

Commercial Space Transportation 

Safety Approval Performance Criteria 

AGENCY: Federal Aviation 

Administration (FAA), DOT. 

ACTION: Notification of criteria used to 

evaluate the National Aerospace 

Training and Research (NASTAR) 

Center safety approval application. 

SUMMARY: NASTAR was issued a safety 

approval, subject to the provisions of 

Title 51 U.S.C. subtitle V, chapter 509, 

and the orders, rules and regulations 

issued under it. Pursuant to 14 CFR 

414.35, this Notice publishes the criteria 

that were used to evaluate the safety 

approval application. 

Background: NASTAR applied for, 

and received, a safety approval for the 

ability of its Space Training System: 

Model 400 (STS–400) to replicate G 

levels. The performance criteria for this 

safety approval are applicant developed 

per 14 CFR 414.19 (a)(4). NASTAR’s 


srobinson on DSKHWCL6B1PROD with NOTICES