This section of the FEDERAL REGISTER

contains regulatory documents having general

applicability and legal effect, most of which

are keyed to and codified in the Code of

Federal Regulations, which is published under

50 titles pursuant to 44 U.S.C. 1510.

The Code of Federal Regulations is sold by

the Superintendent of Documents. Prices of

new books are listed in the first FEDERAL

REGISTER issue of each week.

Rules and Regulations Federal Register

739 

Vol. 75, No. 3 

Wednesday, January 6, 2010 

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

Federal Aviation Administration 

14 CFR Part 121 

[Docket No. FAA–2009–0767; SFAR 106] 

RIN 2120–AJ55 

Use of Additional Portable Oxygen 

Concentrator Devices on Board 

Aircraft 

AGENCY: Federal Aviation 

Administration (FAA), DOT. 

ACTION: Final rule. 

SUMMARY: This action amends Special 

Federal Aviation Regulation 106 (SFAR 

106), Use of Certain Portable Oxygen 

Concentrator Devices on Board Aircraft, 

to allow for the use of four additional 

portable oxygen concentrator (POC) 

devices on board aircraft, provided 

certain conditions in the SFAR are met. 

This action is necessary to allow all 

POC devices deemed acceptable by the 

FAA to be available to the traveling 

public in need of oxygen therapy, for 

use in air commerce. When this rule 

becomes effective, there will be a total 

of 11 different POC devices the FAA 

finds acceptable for use on board 

aircraft, and passengers will be able to 

carry these devices on board the aircraft 

and use them with the approval of the 

aircraft operator. 

DATES: This final rule amending SFAR 

106 will become effective on January 6, 

2010. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

David Catey, Air Transportation 

Division, Flight Standards Service, 

Federal Aviation Administration, 800 

Independence Avenue, SW., 

Washington, DC 20591. Telephone: 

(202) 267–8166. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Authority for This Rulemaking 

The FAA’s authority to issue rules 

regarding aviation safety is found in 

Title 49 of the United States Code (49 

U.S.C.). 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. 

The FAA is authorized to issue this 

final rule pursuant to 49 U.S.C. Section 

44701. Under that section, the FAA is 

authorized to establish regulations and 

minimum standards for other practices, 

methods, and procedures the 

Administrator finds necessary for air 

commerce and national security. 

Background 

On July 12, 2005, the FAA published 

Special Federal Aviation Regulation 106 

(SFAR 106) entitled, ‘‘Use of Certain 

Portable Oxygen Concentrator Devices 

on Board Aircraft’’ (70 FR 40156). SFAR 

106 is the result of a notice the FAA 

published in July 2004 (69 FR 42324) to 

address the needs of passengers who 

must travel with medical oxygen. Prior 

to publication of SFAR 106, passengers 

in need of medical oxygen during air 

transportation faced many obstacles 

when requesting service. Many aircraft 

operators did not provide medical 

oxygen service aboard flights, and those 

that did often provided service at a price 

that travelers could not afford. 

Coordinating service between operators 

and suppliers at airports was also 

difficult, and passengers frequently 

chose not to fly because of these 

difficulties. 

New medical oxygen technologies 

approved by the Food and Drug 

Administration (FDA) reduce the risks 

typically associated with compressed 

oxygen and provide a safe alternative for 

passengers who need oxygen therapy. 

Several manufacturers have developed 

small portable oxygen concentrators 

(POC) that work by separating oxygen 

from nitrogen and other gases contained 

in ambient air and dispensing it in 

concentrated form to the user with an 

oxygen concentration of about 90%. The 

POCs operate using either rechargeable 

batteries or, if the aircraft operator 

obtains approval from the FAA, aircraft 

electrical power. 

In addition, the Pipeline and 

Hazardous Materials Safety 

Administration (PHMSA) has 

determined that the POCs covered by 

this amendment are not hazardous 

materials. Thus, they do not require the 

same level of special handling as 

compressed oxygen, and are safe for use 

on board aircraft, provided certain 

conditions for their use are met. 

SFAR 106 permits passengers to carry 

on and use certain POCs on board 

aircraft if the aircraft operator ensures 

that the conditions specified in the 

SFAR for their use are met. The devices 

initially determined acceptable for use 

in SFAR 106, published July 12, 2005, 

were the AirSep Corporation’s LifeStyle 

and the Inogen, Inc.’s Inogen One POCs. 

SFAR 106 was amended on September 

12, 2006, (71 FR 53954) to add three 

additional POC devices, AirSep 

Corporation’s FreeStyle, SeQual 

Technologies’ Eclipse, and Repironics 

Inc.’s EverGo, to the original SFAR. 

SFAR 106 was amended again on 

January 15, 2009, (74 FR 2351) in a 

similar manner to add two more POC 

devices, Delphi Medical Systems’ RS– 

00400 and Invacare Corporation’s 

XPO2, to the original SFAR. This final 

rule adds four additional POC devices, 

DeVilbiss Healthcare Inc.’s iGo, 

International Biophysics Corporation’s 

LifeChoice, Inogen Inc.’s Inogen One G2, 

and Oxlife LLC.’s Oxlife Independence 

Oxygen Concentrator, that may be 

carried on and used by a passenger on 

board an aircraft. 

Aircraft operators can now offer 

medical oxygen service as they did 

before SFAR 106 was enacted, or they 

can meet certain conditions and allow 

passengers to carry on and use one of 

the POC devices covered in SFAR 106. 

SFAR 106 is an enabling rule, which 

means that no aircraft operator is 

required to allow passengers to operate 

these POC devices on board its aircraft, 

but it may allow them to be operated on 

board. If one of these devices is allowed 

by the aircraft operator to be carried on 

board, the conditions in the SFAR must 

be met. 

When SFAR 106 was published, the 

FAA committed to establishing a single 

standard for all POCs so that regulations 

wouldn’t apply to specific 

manufacturers and models of device. 

Whenever possible, the FAA tries to 

regulate by creating performance-based 

standards rather than approving by 

manufacturer. In the case of SFAR 106, 

the quickest and easiest way to serve 

both the passenger and the aircraft 

operator was to allow the use of the 


cprice-sewell on DSK2BSOYB1PROD with RULES
740 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 3 / Wednesday, January 6, 2010 / Rules and Regulations 

devices determined to be acceptable by 

the FAA in SFAR 106 in a special, 

temporary regulation. As we stated in 

the preamble discussion of the final rule 

that established SFAR 106, ‘‘while we 

are committed to developing a 

performance-based standard for all 

future POC devices, we do not want to 

prematurely develop standards that 

have the effect of stifling new 

technology of which we are unaware.’’ 

We developed and published SFAR 106 

so that passengers who otherwise could 

not fly could do so with an affordable 

alternative to what existed before SFAR 

106 was published. 

We continue to pursue the 

performance-based standard for all 

POCs. This process is time-consuming 

and we intend to publish a notice in the 

Federal Register and offer the public a 

chance to comment on the proposal 

when it is complete. In the meantime, 

manufacturers continue to create new 

and better POCs, and several have 

requested that their product also be 

included as an acceptable device in 

SFAR 106. These manufacturers include 

DeVilbiss Healthcare Inc., International 

Biophysics Corporation, Inogen Inc., 

and Oxlife LLC. Each of these 

companies has formally petitioned the 

FAA for inclusion in SFAR 106 by 

submitting documentation of the 

devices to the Department of 

Transportation’s Docket Management 

System. That documentation is available 

at http://www.regulations.gov under the 

following docket numbers: 

1. DeVilbiss Healthcare Inc.—FAA– 

2008–0963; 

2. International Biophysics 

Corporation—FAA–2009–0087; 

3. Inogen Inc.—FAA–2009–0620; and 

4. Oxlife LLC—FAA–2009–0065. 

As stated in Section 2 of SFAR 106, 

no covered device may contain 

hazardous materials as determined by 

PHMSA (written documentation 

necessary), and each device must also 

be regulated by the FDA. Each petitioner 

included technical specifications for the 

devices in their request for approval, 

along with the required documentation 

from PHMSA and the FDA. The 

petitioners provided the FAA with the 

required documentation for the 

following POC devices: 

1. DeVilbiss Healthcare Inc.’s iGo; 

2. International Biophysics 

Corporation’s LifeChoice; 

3. Inogen Inc.’s Inogen One G2; and 

4. Oxlife LLC.’s Oxlife Independence 

Oxygen Concentrator. 

The Rule 

This amendment to SFAR 106 will 

include the DeVilbiss Healthcare Inc.’s 

iGo, International Biophysics 

Corporation’s LifeChoice, Inogen Inc.’s 

Inogen One G2, and Oxlife LLC.’s Oxlife 

Independence Oxygen Concentrator 

devices in the list of POC devices 

authorized for use in air commerce. The 

FAA has reviewed each individual 

device and accepted the documentation 

provided by the manufacturers. That 

documentation includes letters 

provided to the manufacturer by 

PHMSA and the FDA affirming the 

status of each device as it pertains to the 

requisites stated in SFAR 106. 

After reviewing the applicable FDA 

safety standards and the PHMSA 

findings, these devices were determined 

by the FAA to be acceptable for use in 

air commerce. 

Good Cause for Adoption of This Final 

Rule Without Notice and Comment 

As stated above, SFAR 106 was 

published on July 12, 2005. We stated 

in the preamble of that final rule that 

the AirSep LifeStyle and Inogen One 

POC devices were the only known 

acceptable devices when the rule was 

published. We also stated in that final 

rule that ‘‘we cannot predict how future 

products may be developed and work.’’ 

We initiated a notice and comment 

period for the use of POC devices on 

board aircraft on July 14, 2004, (69 FR 

42324) and responded to the comments 

received in response to that NPRM in 

the final rule published in 2005. 

Therefore, it is unnecessary to publish 

a notice to request comments on this 

amendment because all issues related to 

the use of POC devices on board an 

aircraft have already been discussed. 

Further notice and comment would also 

delay the acceptance of the DeVilbiss 

Healthcare Inc.’s iGo, International 

Biophysics Corporation’s LifeChoice, 

Inogen Inc.’s Inogen One G2, and Oxlife 

LLC.’s Oxlife Independence Oxygen 

Concentrator POC devices as authorized 

for use on board aircraft, which would 

delay their availability for passengers in 

need of oxygen therapy. 

Therefore, I find that notice and 

public comment under 5 U.S.C. 553(b) 

is unnecessary and contrary to the 

public interest. Further, I find that good 

cause exists for making this rule 

effective immediately upon publication. 

International Compatibility 

In keeping with U.S. obligations 

under the Convention on International 

Civil Aviation, it is FAA policy to 

comply with International Civil 

Aviation Organization (ICAO) Standards 

and Recommended Practices to the 

maximum extent practicable. The FAA 

determined that there are no ICAO 

Standards and Recommended Practices 

that correspond to these regulations. I 

find that this action is fully consistent 

with my obligations under 49 U.S.C. 

40105(b)(1)(A) to ensure that I exercise 

my duties consistently with the 

obligations of the United States under 

international agreements. 

Paperwork Reduction Act 

As required by the Paperwork 

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

3507(d)), the FAA submitted a copy of 

the new information collection 

requirements in SFAR 106 to the Office 

of Management and Budget for its 

review. OMB approved the collection of 

this information and assigned OMB 

Control Number 2120–0702. 

This final rule requires that if a 

passenger carries a POC device on board 

the aircraft with the intent to use it 

during the flight, he or she must inform 

the pilot in command of that flight. 

Additionally, the passenger who plans 

to use the device must provide a written 

statement signed by a licensed 

physician that verifies the passenger’s 

ability to operate the device, respond to 

any alarms, the extent to which the 

passenger must use the POC (all or a 

portion of the flight), and prescribes the 

maximum oxygen flow rate. 

Please note that 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 Paperwork Reduction Act 

paragraph in the final rule that 

established SFAR 106 still applies to 

this amendment. The availability of four 

new POC devices will likely increase 

the availability and options for a 

passenger in need of oxygen therapy, 

but the paperwork burden discussed in 

the original final rule is unchanged. 

Therefore, the OMB Control Number 

associated with this collection remains 

2120–0702. 

Regulatory Evaluation, Regulatory 

Flexibility Determination, International 

Trade Impact Assessment, and 

Unfunded Mandates Assessment 

Changes to Federal regulations must 

undergo several economic analyses. 

First, Executive Order 12866 directs that 

each Federal agency shall propose or 

adopt a regulation only upon a reasoned 

determination that the benefits of the 

intended regulation justify its costs. 

Second, the Regulatory Flexibility Act 

of 1980 (Pub. L. 96–354) requires 

agencies to analyze the economic 

impact of regulatory changes on small 

entities. Third, the Trade Agreements 

Act (Pub. L. 96–39) prohibits agencies 

from setting standards that create 

unnecessary obstacles to the foreign 

commerce of the United States. In 


cprice-sewell on DSK2BSOYB1PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 3 / Wednesday, January 6, 2010 / Rules and Regulations 741 

developing U.S. standards, this Trade 

Act requires agencies to consider 

international standards and, where 

appropriate, that they be the basis of 

U.S. standards. Fourth, the Unfunded 

Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (Pub. L. 

104–4) requires agencies to prepare a 

written assessment of the costs, benefits, 

and other effects of proposed or final 

rules that include a Federal mandate 

likely to result in the expenditure by 

State, local, or Tribal governments, in 

the aggregate, or by the private sector, of 

$100 million or more annually (adjusted 

for inflation with base year of 1995). 

This portion of the preamble 

summarizes the FAA’s analysis of the 

economic impacts of this final rule. 

Department of Transportation Order 

DOT 2100.5 prescribes policies and 

procedures for simplification, analysis, 

and review of regulations. If the 

expected cost impact is so minimal that 

a proposed or final rule does not 

warrant a full evaluation, this order 

permits that a statement to that effect 

and the basis for it be included in the 

preamble if a full regulatory evaluation 

of the cost and benefits is not prepared. 

Such a determination has been made for 

this final rule. The reasoning for this 

determination follows: 

This action amends Special Federal 

Aviation Regulation 106 (SFAR 106), 

Use of Certain Portable Oxygen 

Concentrator Devices On Board Aircraft, 

to allow for the use of the DeVilbiss 

Healthcare Inc.’s iGo, International 

Biophysics Corporation’s LifeChoice, 

Inogen Inc.’s Inogen One G2, and Oxlife 

LLC.’s Oxlife Independence Oxygen 

Concentrator portable oxygen 

concentrator (POC) devices on board 

aircraft, provided certain conditions in 

the SFAR are met. This action is 

necessary to allow additional POC 

devices deemed acceptable by the FAA 

to be available to the traveling public in 

need of oxygen therapy, for use in air 

commerce. When this rule becomes 

effective, there will be a total of eleven 

different POC devices the FAA finds 

acceptable for use on board aircraft, and 

passengers will be able to carry these 

devices on board the aircraft and use 

them with the approval of the aircraft 

operator. 

FAA has, therefore, determined that 

this final rule is not a ‘‘significant 

regulatory action’’ as defined in section 

3(f) of Executive Order 12866, and is not 

‘‘significant’’ as defined in DOT’s 

Regulatory Policies and Procedures. 

Regulatory Flexibility Determination 

The Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980 

(Pub. L. 96–354) (RFA) establishes ‘‘as a 

principle of regulatory issuance that 

agencies shall endeavor, consistent with 

the objectives of the rule and of 

applicable statutes, to fit regulatory and 

informational requirements to the scale 

of the businesses, organizations, and 

governmental jurisdictions subject to 

regulation. To achieve this principle, 

agencies are required to solicit and 

consider flexible regulatory proposals 

and to explain the rationale for their 

actions to assure that such proposals are 

given serious consideration.’’ The RFA 

covers a wide-range of small entities, 

including small businesses, not-forprofit organizations, and small 

governmental jurisdictions. 

Agencies must perform a review to 

determine whether a rule will have a 

significant economic impact on a 

substantial number of small entities. If 

the agency determines that it will, the 

agency must prepare a regulatory 

flexibility analysis as described in the 

RFA. 

However, if an agency determines that 

a rule is not expected to have a 

significant economic impact on a 

substantial number of small entities, 

section 605(b) of the RFA provides that 

the head of the agency may so certify 

and a regulatory flexibility analysis is 

not required. The certification must 

include a statement providing the 

factual basis for this determination, and 

the reasoning should be clear. 

This final rule adds DeVilbiss 

Healthcare Inc.’s iGo, International 

Biophysics Corporation’s LifeChoice, 

Inogen Inc.’s Inogen One G2, and Oxlife 

LLC.’s Oxlife Independence Oxygen 

Concentrator to the list of authorized 

POC devices in SFAR 106. Its economic 

impact is minimal. Therefore, as the 

FAA Administrator, I certify that this 

action will not have a significant 

economic impact on a substantial 

number of small entities. 

International Trade Analysis 

The Trade Agreements Act of 1979 

(Pub. L. 96–39), as amended by the 

Uruguay Round Agreements Act (Pub. 

L. 103–465), prohibits Federal agencies 

from establishing any standards or 

engaging in related activities that create 

unnecessary obstacles to the foreign 

commerce of the United States. 

Pursuant to these Acts, the 

establishment of standards are not 

considered unnecessary obstacles to the 

foreign commerce of the United States, 

so long as the standards have a 

legitimate domestic objective, such the 

protection of safety, and do not operate 

in a manner that excludes imports that 

meet this objective. The statute also 

requires consideration of international 

standards and, where appropriate, that 

they be the basis for U.S. standards. The 

FAA notes the purpose is to ensure the 

safety of the American public, and has 

assessed the effects of this rule to ensure 

it does not exclude imports that meet 

this objective. As a result, this final rule 

is not considered as creating an 

unnecessary obstacle to foreign 

commerce. 

Unfunded Mandates Reform Act 

Title II of the Unfunded Mandates 

Reform Act of 1995 (Pub. L. 104–4) 

requires each Federal agency to prepare 

a written statement assessing the effects 

of any Federal mandate in a proposed or 

final agency rule that may result in an 

expenditure of $100 million or more (in 

1995 dollars) in any one year by State, 

local, and Tribal governments, in the 

aggregate, or by the private sector; such 

a mandate is deemed to be a ‘‘significant 

regulatory action.’’ The FAA currently 

uses an inflation-adjusted value of 

$136.1 million in lieu of $100 million. 

This final rule does not contain such 

a mandate; therefore, the requirements 

of Title II of the Act do not apply. 

Executive Order 13132, Federalism 

The FAA has analyzed this final rule 

under the principles and criteria of 

Executive Order 13132, Federalism. We 

determined that this action will not 

have a substantial direct effect on the 

States, or the relationship between the 

national Government and the States, or 

on the distribution of power and 

responsibilities among the various 

levels of government. Therefore, we 

have determined that this final rule does 

not have federalism implications. 

Plain Language 

In response to the June 1, 1998, 

Presidential Memorandum regarding the 

use of plain language, the FAA reexamined the writing style currently 

used in the development of regulations. 

The memorandum requires Federal 

agencies to communicate clearly with 

the public. We are interested in your 

comments on whether the style of this 

document is clear, and in any other 

suggestions you might have to improve 

the clarity of FAA communications that 

affect you. You can get more 

information about the Presidential 

memorandum and the plain 

language initiative at 

http://www.plainlanguage.gov. 

Environmental Analysis 

FAA Order 1050.1E identifies FAA 

actions that are categorically excluded 

from preparation of an environmental 

assessment or environmental impact 

statement under the National 

Environmental Policy Act in the 

absence of extraordinary circumstances. 

The FAA has determined this 


cprice-sewell on DSK2BSOYB1PROD with RULES
742 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 3 / Wednesday, January 6, 2010 / Rules and Regulations 

rulemaking action qualifies for the 

categorical exclusion identified in 

paragraph 312f and involves no 

extraordinary circumstances. 

Regulations That Significantly Affect 

Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use 

The FAA analyzed this final rule 

under Executive Order 13211, Actions 

Concerning Regulations that 

Significantly Affect Energy Supply, 

Distribution, or Use (May 18, 2001). We 

have determined that it is not a 

‘‘significant energy action’’ under the 

executive order because it is not a 

‘‘significant regulatory action’’ and it is 

not likely to have a significant adverse 

effect on the supply, distribution, or use 

of energy. 

Availability of Rulemaking Documents 

You can get an electronic copy using 

the Internet by: 

(1) Searching the Federal 

eRulemaking Portal at http:// 

www.regulations.gov; 

(2) Visiting the FAA’s Regulations and 

Policies Web page at http:// 

www.faa.gov/regulations_policies/; or 

(3) Accessing the Government 

Printing Office’s Web page at http:// 

www.gpoaccess.gov/fr/index.html. 

You can also get a copy by sending a 

request to the Federal Aviation 

Administration, Office of Rulemaking, 

ARM–1, 800 Independence Avenue, 

SW., Washington, DC 20591, or by 

calling (202) 267–9680. Make sure to 

identify the amendment number or 

docket number of this rulemaking. 

Small Business Regulatory Enforcement 

Fairness Act 

The Small Business Regulatory 

Enforcement Fairness Act (SBREFA) of 

1996 requires FAA to comply with 

small entity requests for information or 

advice about compliance with statutes 

and regulations within its jurisdiction. 

Therefore, any small entity that has a 

question regarding this document may 

contact their local FAA official, or the 

person listed under FOR FURTHER

INFORMATION CONTACT. You can find out 

more about SBREFA on the Internet at 

our site, http://www.faa.gov/ 

regulations_policies/rulemaking/ 

sbre_act/. 

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 121 

Air carriers, Aircraft, Airmen, Alcohol 

abuse, Drug abuse, Reporting and 

recordkeeping requirements. 

The Amendment 

■ In consideration of the foregoing, the 

Federal Aviation Administration 

amends SFAR No. 106 to Chapter II of 

Title 14, Code of Federal Regulations, as 

follows: 

PART 121—OPERATING 

REQUIREMENTS: DOMESTIC, FLAG, 

AND SUPPLEMENTAL OPERATIONS 

■ 1. The authority citation for part 121 

continues to read as follows: 

Authority: 49 U.S.C. 106(g), 1153, 40101, 

40102, 40103, 40113, 41721, 44105, 44106, 

44111, 44701–44717, 44722, 44901, 44903, 

44904, 44906, 44912, 44914, 44936, 44938, 

46103, 46105. 

■ 2. Amend SFAR 106 by revising 

sections 2 and 3(a) introductory text to 

read as follows: 

Special Federal Aviation Regulation 

106—Rules for Use of Portable Oxygen 

Concentrator Systems on Board 

Aircraft 

* * * * * 

Section 2. Definitions—For the 

purposes of this SFAR the following 

definitions apply: Portable Oxygen 

Concentrator: means the AirSep 

FreeStyle, AirSep LifeStyle, Delphi RS– 

00400, DeVilbiss Healthcare iGo, Inogen 

One, Inogen One G2, International 

Biophysics LifeChoice, Invacare 

XPO100, Oxlife Independence Oxygen 

Concentrator, Respironics EverGo, and 

SeQual Eclipse Portable Oxygen 

Concentrator medical device units as 

long as those medical device units: (1) 

Do not contain hazardous materials as 

determined by the Pipeline and 

Hazardous Materials Safety 

Administration; (2) are also regulated by 

the Food and Drug Administration; and 

(3) assist a user of medical oxygen under 

a doctor’s care. These units perform by 

separating oxygen from nitrogen and 

other gases contained in ambient air and 

dispensing it in concentrated form to 

the user. 

Section 3. Operating Requirements— 

(a) No person may use and no aircraft 

operator may allow the use of any 

portable oxygen concentrator device, 

except the AirSep FreeStyle, AirSep 

LifeStyle, Delphi RS–00400, DeVilbiss 

Healthcare iGo, Inogen One, Inogen One 

G2, International Biophysics LifeChoice, 

Invacare XPO100, Oxlife Independence 

Oxygen Concentrator, Respironics 

EverGo, and SeQual Eclipse Portable 

Oxygen Concentrator units. These units 

may be carried on and used by a 

passenger on board an aircraft provided 

the aircraft operator ensures that the 

following conditions are satisfied: 

* * * * * 

Issued in Washington, DC, on December 

22, 2009. 

J. Randolph Babbitt, 

Administrator. 

[FR Doc. E9–31380 Filed 1–5–10; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4910–13–P 

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE 

COMMISSION 

17 CFR Part 275 

[Release No. IA–2965A; File No. S7–23–07] 

RIN 3235–AJ96 

Temporary Rule Regarding Principal 

Trades With Certain Advisory Clients 

AGENCY: Securities and Exchange 

Commission. 

ACTION: Final rule; correction. 

SUMMARY: On December 30, 2009, the 

Securities and Exchange Commission 

published a Federal Register document 

adopting as final Rule 206(3)–3T under 

the Investment Advisers Act of 1940, 

the interim final temporary rule that 

establishes an alternative means for 

investment advisers who are registered 

with the Commission as broker-dealers 

to meet the requirements of Section 

206(3) of the Investment Advisers Act 

when they act in a principal capacity in 

transactions with certain of their 

advisory clients. As adopted, the only 

change to the rule was the expiration 

date in paragraph (d) of the section. 

Rule 206(3)–3T will sunset on December 

31, 2010. This document makes a 

correction to that document. 

DATES: Effective December 31, 2009. The 

DATES section for FR Doc. 2009–30877, 

published on December 30, 2009 (74 FR 

69009) is corrected to read ‘‘DATES: The 

amendments in this document are 

effective December 30, 2009 and the 

expiration date for 17 CFR 275.206(3)– 

3T is extended to December 31, 2010’’. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Sarah A. Bessin, Assistant Director, 

Daniel S. Kahl, Branch Chief, or 

Matthew N. Goldin, Senior Counsel, at 

(202) 551–6787 or IArules@sec.gov, 

Office of Investment Adviser 

Regulation, Division of Investment 

Management, Securities and Exchange 

Commission, 100 F Street, NE., 

Washington, DC 20549–5041. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The 

Securities and Exchange Commission is 

correcting the DATES section for FR Doc. 

2009–30877, published on December 30, 

2009 (74 FR 69009), to read ‘‘DATES: The 

amendments in this document are 

effective December 20, 2009 and the 

expiration date for 17 CFR 275.206(3)– 

3T is extended to December 31, 2010.’’ 


cprice-sewell on DSK2BSOYB1PROD with RULES