[Federal Register Volume 77, Number 146 (Monday, July 30, 2012)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 44509-44511]
[FR Doc No: 2012-18454]

=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. FAA-2012-0795; Directorate Identifier 2008-SW-53-AD]
RIN 2120-AA64

Airworthiness Directives; Eurocopter France Helicopters

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM).

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: We propose to adopt a new airworthiness directive (AD) for
Eurocopter France (Eurocopter) Model AS332C, L, and L1 helicopters to
require a one-time inspection of the main rotor head (MRH) swash-plate
upper bearing (bearing) for a non-smooth point (friction point). This
proposed AD is prompted by a report of the premature deterioration of
the MRH bearing of the rotating star installed on a Model AS332L1
helicopter. The proposed actions are intended to detect deterioration
of the MRH bearing and to prevent overloading the scissor links which
drive the main rotor system, failure of the scissors links, and
subsequent loss of control of the helicopter.

DATES: We must receive comments on this proposed AD by September 28,
2012.

ADDRESSES: You may send comments by any of the following methods:
     Federal eRulemaking Docket: Go to http://www.regulations.gov. Follow the online instructions for sending your
comments electronically.
     Fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>.
     Mail: Send comments to the U.S. Department of
Transportation, Docket Operations, M-30, West Building Ground Floor,
Room W12-140, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., Washington, DC 20590-0001.
     Hand Delivery: Deliver to the ``Mail'' address between 9
a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays.
    Examining the AD Docket: You may examine the AD docket on the
Internet at http://www.regulations.gov or in person at the Docket
Operations Office between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday,
except Federal holidays. The AD docket contains this proposed AD, the
economic evaluation, any comments received, and other information. The
street address for the Docket Operations Office (telephone 800-647-
5527) is in the ADDRESSES section. Comments will be available in the AD
docket shortly after receipt.
    For service information identified in this proposed AD, contact
American Eurocopter Corporation, 2701 Forum Drive, Grand Prairie, Texas
75053-4005; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>; or at http://www.eurocopter.com.
You may review the referenced service information at the FAA, Office of
the Regional Counsel, Southwest Region, 2601 Meacham Blvd., Room 663,
Fort Worth, Texas 76137.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Gary Roach, Aviation Safety Engineer,
Regulations and Policy Group, Rotorcraft Directorate, FAA, 2601 Meacham
Blvd., Fort Worth, Texas 76137; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>; email
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Comments Invited

    We invite you to participate in this rulemaking by submitting
written comments, data, or views. We also invite comments relating to
the economic, environmental, energy, or federalism impacts that might
result from adopting the proposals in this document. The most helpful
comments reference a specific portion of the proposal, explain the
reason for any recommended change, and include supporting data. To
ensure the docket does not contain duplicate comments, commenters
should send only one copy of written comments, or if comments are filed
electronically, commenters should submit only one time.
    We will file in the docket all comments that we receive, as well as
a

report summarizing each substantive public contact with FAA personnel
concerning this proposed rulemaking. Before acting on this proposal, we
will consider all comments we receive on or before the closing date for
comments. We will consider comments filed after the comment period has
closed if it is possible to do so without incurring expense or delay.
We may change this proposal in light of the comments we receive.

Discussion

    The European Aviation Safety Agency (EASA), which is the Technical
Agent for the Member States of the European Union, has issued EASA
Emergency AD No. 2008-0172-E, dated September 9, 2008 (EAD No. 2008-
0172-E), for the Eurocopter Model AS 332 C, C1, L, and L1 helicopters,
with an MRH, part number (P/N) 332A31-0001-05 or P/N 332A31-0001-06,
having a serial number (S/N) of M172, M216, M261, M308, M547, M677,
M811, or M936, and having ``logged less than 275 flight hours since the
last overhaul or repair.'' EASA states that Eurocopter received a
report of deterioration of an MRH bearing on an MRH that was installed
on an AS 332 L1 helicopter. The AS 332 L1 helicopter had logged 72
flight hours since the last overhaul. The EASA states that there was an
onset of vibrations in flight and these vibrations were due to
premature deterioration of the upper bearing of the MRH swash-plate.
They state that this condition, if not corrected, ``could lead to
failure of the scissors links and consequently to the control loss of
the helicopter.''

FAA's Determination

    These helicopters have been approved by the aviation authority of
the France and are approved for operation in the United States.
Pursuant to our bilateral agreement with France, EASA, its technical
representative, has notified us of the unsafe condition described in
the EASA AD. We are proposing this AD because we evaluated all
information provided by EASA and determined that an unsafe condition
exists and is likely to exist or develop on other products of these
same type designs.

Related Service Information

    Eurocopter has issued one Emergency Alert Service Bulletin (EASB)
with two different numbers, both Revision 0, and both dated September
8, 2008: EASB No. 62.00.73 for Model AS332C, L, and L1 helicopters and
non-FAA type certificated Model C1 helicopters; and EASB No. 62.00.30
for non-FAA type certificated Model 532 UC, AC, UL, AL, SC, and UE
military helicopters. EASB No. 62.00.73 specifies checking for the
absence of a friction point in the MRH bearing. If there is no friction
point, EASB No. 62.00.73 specifies checking the condition of the grease
in the swash-plate assembly by lubricating the swash-plate, rotating it
by hand, and determining if the expelled grease contains traces of
metal particles. If the expelled grease does not contain traces of
metal particles, EASB No. 62.00.73 specifies checking the swash-plate
``rotation torque'' using a spring scale. If the rotation torque is
less than 5.5 kg, EASB No. 62.00.73 specifies checking the bearing for
vertical play. If there is a friction point, the expelled grease
contains traces of metal particles, the rotation torque is equal to or
greater than 5.5 kg, or there is vertical play in the bearing, EASB No.
62.00.73 specifies removing the MRH and sending it to an approved
repair station. EASA classified this EASB as mandatory and issued EAD
No. 2008-0172-E to ensure the continued airworthiness of these
helicopters.

Proposed AD Requirements

    This proposed AD would require, within 5 hours time-in-service
(TIS), for the specified model helicopters having less than 275 hours
TIS since the last MRH overhaul, the following:
     Inspect the MRH bearing for a non-smooth point (friction
point) by rotating the MRH swash-plate and:
    [cir] If there is a friction point in the bearing, before further
flight, replace the MRH with an airworthy MRH.
    [cir] If there is not a friction point in the bearing, lubricate
the MRH swash-plate and rotate it until grease is expelled; inspect the
expelled grease for metal particles.
     If there is a metal particle in the grease, before further
flight, replace the MRH with an airworthy MRH.
     If there is not a metal particle in the grease, measure
the force required to rotate the MRH swash-plate using a spring scale
attached to the pitch change rod attachment yokes.
    [cir] If the force to rotate the MRH swash-plate is equal to or
greater than 5.5 kg, before further flight, replace the MRH with an
airworthy MRH.
    [cir] If the force to rotate the MRH swash-plate is less than 5.5
kg, inspect the MRH swash-plate assembly for vertical play in the
bearing. If there is vertical play in the bearing, before further
flight, replace the MRH with an airworthy MRH.
     Before installing an MRH, P/N 332A31-0001-05 or P/N
332A31-001-06, with S/N M172, M216, M261, M308, M547, M561, M677, M811,
M859, M935, M936, M938, or M942 on any helicopter, inspect the MRH in
accordance with the requirements of this AD.

Differences Between This Proposed AD and the EASA AD

    The EASA Emergency AD includes Model AS332C1 helicopters. This
proposed AD does not include this model helicopter since it is not type
certificated in the U.S. The EASA AD does not include S/Ns M561, M859,
M935, M938, and M942, whereas this proposed AD does include those S/Ns.
The EASA Emergency AD requires operators to comply with the
requirements no later than the ``next last flight of the day.'' Our
proposed AD would require the actions to be accomplished within 5 hours
TIS. Also, the EASA Emergency AD is applicable to the specified
helicopters having logged less than 275 flight hours since the last
overhaul or repair, whereas our proposed AD would only be applicable to
the specified helicopters having less than 275 hours TIS since the last
overhaul of the MRH.

Costs of Compliance

    We estimate that this proposed AD would affect 6 helicopters of
U.S. registry. We estimate that operators may incur the following costs
in order to comply with this AD. It would take approximately 1 work-
hour per helicopter to accomplish the inspection of the MRH bearing for
a friction point, inspection of the swash-plate grease for any metal
particles, measurement of the swash-plate force to rotate, and
inspection of the bearing for vertical play. It would take
approximately 60 work-hours to replace the MRH. These proposed actions
would be accomplished at an average labor rate of $85 per work-hour. We
estimate the parts cost of replacing an MRH would be approximately
$20,000. Based on these figures, we estimate the total cost of the
proposed AD on U.S. operators to be $25,610, assuming that all affected
helicopters are inspected and that one MRH in the fleet would need to
be replaced.

Authority for This Rulemaking

    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.

Regulatory Findings

    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, 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 to the extent that
it justifies making a regulatory distinction; 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.
    We prepared an economic evaluation of the estimated costs to comply
with this proposed AD and placed it in the AD docket.

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39

    Air transportation, Aircraft, Aviation safety, Incorporation by
Reference, Safety.

The Proposed Amendment

    Accordingly, under the authority delegated to me by the
Administrator, the FAA proposes to amend 14 CFR part 39 as follows:

PART 39--AIRWORTHINESS DIRECTIVES

    1. The authority citation for part 39 continues to read as follows:

    Authority:  49 U.S.C. 106(g), 40113, 44701.

Sec.  39.13  [Amended]

    2. The FAA amends Sec.  39.13 by adding the following new
airworthiness directive (AD):

Eurocopter France (Eurocopter): Docket No. FAA-2012-0795;
Directorate Identifier 2008-SW-53-AD.

(a) Applicability

    This AD applies to Eurocopter Model AS332C, L, and L1
helicopters with a main rotor head (MRH), part number (P/N) 332A31-
0001-05 or P/N 332A31-0001-06, with a serial number (S/N) M172,
M216, M261, M308, M547, M561, M677, M811, M859, M935, M936, M938, or
M942 installed; having less than 275 hours time-in-service (TIS)
since the last overhaul of the MRH; certificated in any category.

(b) Unsafe Condition

    This AD defines the unsafe condition as deterioration of the MRH
swash-plate upper bearing (bearing), which could result in
overloading the scissor links which drive the main rotor system,
failure of the scissors links, and subsequent loss of control of the
helicopter.

(c) Compliance

    You are responsible for performing each action required by this
AD within the specified compliance time unless it has already been
accomplished prior to that time.

(d) Required Actions

    Within 5 hours TIS:
    (1) Inspect the MRH bearing for a non-smooth point (friction
point) by rotating the MRH swash-plate and:
    (i) If there is a friction point in the bearing, before further
flight, replace the MRH with an airworthy MRH.
    (ii) If there is not a friction point in the bearing, lubricate
the MRH swash-plate and rotate it until grease is expelled; inspect
the expelled grease for metal particles.
    (A) If there is a metal particle in the grease, before further
flight, replace the MRH with an airworthy MRH.
    (B) If there is not a metal particle in the grease, measure the
force required to rotate the MRH swash-plate using a spring scale
attached to the pitch change rod attachment yokes.
    (1) If the force to rotate the MRH swash-plate is equal to or
greater than 5.5 kg, before further flight, replace the MRH with an
airworthy MRH.
    (2) If the force to rotate the MRH swash-plate is less than 5.5
kg, inspect the MRH swash-plate assembly for vertical play in the
bearing. If there is vertical play in the bearing, before further
flight, replace the MRH with an airworthy MRH.
    (2) Before installing an MRH, P/N 332A31-0001-05 or P/N 332A31-
001-06, with S/N M172, M216, M261, M308, M547, M561, M677, M811,
M859, M935, M936, M938, or M942 on any helicopter, inspect the MRH
in accordance with paragraph (d)(1) of this AD.

(e) Alternative Methods of Compliance (AMOC)

    (1) The Manager, Safety Management Group, FAA, may approve AMOCs
for this AD. Send your proposal to: Gary Roach, Aviation Safety
Engineer, Regulations and Policy Group, Rotorcraft Directorate, FAA,
2601 Meacham Blvd., Fort Worth, Texas 76137; telephone (817) 222-
5110; email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>    (2) For operations conducted under a 14 CFR part 119 operating
certificate or under 14 CFR part 91, subpart K, we suggest that you
notify your principal inspector, or lacking a principal inspector,
the manager of the local flight standards district office or
certificate holding district office before operating any aircraft
complying with this AD through an AMOC.

(f) Additional Information

    (1) Eurocopter Emergency Alert Service Bulletin, No. 62.00.73,
Revision 0, dated September 8, 2008, which is not incorporated by
reference, contains additional information about the subject of this
AD. For this service information, contact American Eurocopter
Corporation, 2701 Forum Drive, Grand Prairie, Texas 75053-4005;
telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>; or at http://www.eurocopter.com. You may
review this service information at the FAA, Office of the Regional
Counsel, Southwest Region, 2601 Meacham Blvd., Room 663, Fort Worth,
Texas 76137.
    (2) The subject of this AD is addressed in the European Aviation
Safety Agency (France) Emergency AD No. 2008-0172-E, dated September
9, 2008.

(g) Subject

    Joint Aircraft Service Component (JASC) Code: 6400,Tail Rotor
System.

    Issued in Fort Worth, Texas, on July 20, 2012.
Kim Smith,
Manager, Rotorcraft Directorate, Aircraft Certification Service.
[FR Doc. 2012-18454 Filed 7-27-12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


[Federal Register Volume 87, Number 184 (Friday, September 23, 2022)]
[Notices]
[Page 58085]
[FR Doc No: 2022-20618]

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

[EPA-HQ-OAR-2022-0021; FRL-10235-01-OMS]

Information Collection Request Submitted to OMB for Review and
Approval; Comment Request; NESHAP for Secondary Aluminum Production
(Renewal)

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Notice.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has submitted an
information collection request (ICR), NESHAP for Secondary Aluminum
Production (EPA ICR Number 1894.11, OMB Control Number 2060-0433), to
the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for review and approval in
accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act. This is a proposed
extension of the ICR, which is currently approved through November 30,
2022. Public comments were previously requested, via the Federal
Register, on April 8, 2022 during a 60-day comment period. This notice
allows for an additional 30 days for public comments. A fuller
description of the ICR is given below, including its estimated burden
and cost to the public. An agency may neither conduct nor sponsor, and
a person is not required to respond to a collection of information
unless it displays a currently valid OMB control number.

DATES: Additional comments may be submitted on or before October 24,
2022.

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, referencing Docket ID Number EPA-HQ-
OAR-2022-0021, online using https://www.regulations.gov/ (our preferred
method), or by email to [email protected], or by mail to: EPA Docket
Center, Environmental Protection Agency, Mail Code 28221T, 1200
Pennsylvania Ave. NW, Washington, DC 20460.
    The EPA's policy is that all comments received will be included in
the public docket without change, including any personal information
provided, unless the comment includes profanity, threats, information
claimed to be Confidential Business Information (CBI), or other
information whose disclosure is restricted by statute.
    Submit written comments and recommendations to OMB for the proposed
information collection within 30 days of publication of this notice to
www.reginfo.gov/public/do/PRAMain. Find this particular information
collection by selecting ``Currently under 30-day Review--Open for
Public Comments'' or by using the search function.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Muntasir Ali, Sector Policies and
Program Division (D243-05), Office of Air Quality Planning and
Standards, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Research Triangle
Park, North Carolina, 27711; telephone number:<PHONE_NUMBER>; email
address: [email protected].

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Supporting documents, which explain in
detail the information that the EPA will be collecting, are available
in the public docket for this ICR. The docket can be viewed online at
https://www.regulations.gov, or in person at the EPA Docket Center, WJC
West Building, Room 3334, 1301 Constitution Ave. NW, Washington, DC.
The telephone number for the Docket Center is<PHONE_NUMBER>. For
additional information about EPA's public docket, visit: http://www.epa.gov/dockets.
    Abstract: The National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air
Pollutants (NESHAP) for Secondary Aluminum Production (40 CFR part 63,
subpart RRR) were proposed on February 11, 1999; and promulgated on
March 23, 2000; and amended on the following dates: December 30, 2002
(67 FR 79808); September 3, 2004 (69 FR 53980); October 3, 2005 (70 FR
57513); December 19, 2005 (70 FR 75320); September 18, 2015 (80 FR
56700); and June 13, 2016 (81 FR 38085). These regulations apply to
existing facilities and new facilities that are secondary aluminum
production facilities and major sources of hazardous air pollutants
(HAP) either commencing construction, or reconstruction, after the date
of proposal. This includes facilities that operate aluminum scrap
shredders, thermal chip dryers, scrap dryers/delacquering kilns/
decoating kilns, group 1 furnaces, group 2 furnaces, sweat furnaces,
dross only furnaces, rotary dross coolers, and secondary aluminum
processing units (SAPUs). The SAPUs include group 1 furnaces and in-
line fluxers. The regulations also apply to secondary aluminum
production facilities that are area sources of HAP only with respect to
emissions of dioxins/furans (D/F) from thermal chip dryers, scrap
dryers/delacquering kilns/decoating kilns, group 1 furnaces, sweat
furnaces, and SAPUs. New facilities include those that either commenced
construction, or reconstruction, after the date of proposal. This
information is being collected to assure compliance with 40 CFR part
63, subpart RRR.
    In general, all NESHAP standards require initial notifications,
performance tests, and periodic reports by the owners/operators of the
affected facilities. They are also required to maintain records of the
occurrence and duration of any startup, shutdown, or malfunction in the
operation of an affected facility, or any period during which the
monitoring system is inoperative. These notifications, reports, and
records are essential in determining compliance, and are required of
all affected facilities subject to NESHAP.
    Form Numbers: None.
    Respondents/affected entities: Secondary aluminum production
facilities.
    Respondent's obligation to respond: Mandatory (40 CFR part 63
subpart RRR).
    Estimated number of respondents: 161 (total).
    Frequency of response: Initially and semiannually.
    Total estimated burden: 12,400 hours (per year). Burden is defined
at 5 CFR 1320.3(b).
    Total estimated cost: $5,590,000 (per year), which includes
$4,110,000 in annualized capital/startup and/or operation & maintenance
costs.
    Changes in the Estimates: There is no change in burden from the
most-recently approved ICR as currently identified in the OMB Inventory
of Approved Burdens. This is due to two considerations; (1) the
regulations have not changed over the past three years and are not
anticipated to change over the next three years; and (2) the growth
rate for this industry is very low or non-existent, so there is no
significant change in the overall burden. Since there are no changes in
the regulatory requirements and there is no significant industry
growth, there are also no changes in the capital/startup or operation
and maintenance (O&M) costs. There is a slight decrease in the number
of responses, based on the correction of a mathematical error in the
calculation of the number of responses from the currently approved ICR.

Courtney Kerwin,
Director, Regulatory Support Division.
[FR Doc. 2022-20618 Filed 9-22-22; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


Comment Info: =================

General Comment:I am writing to request an extension of the 75 day comment period. A 75 day comment period is insufficient time for the vaping industry and the wider vaping community to comment on the proposed deeming regulations. I would respectfully request that the period for comment be extended to 180 days.


[Federal Register Volume 77, Number 11 (Wednesday, January 18, 2012)]
[Notices]
[Pages 2576-2577]
[FR Doc No: 2012-764]

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Securities Act of 1933 Release No. 33-9294/January 11, 2012 Securities
Exchange Act of 1934 Release No. 34-66141/January 11, 2012]

Order Approving Public Company Accounting Oversight Board Budget
and Annual Accounting Support Fee for Calendar Year 2012

    The Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, as amended (the ``Sarbanes-Oxley
Act''),\1\ established the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board
(``PCAOB'') to oversee the audits of companies that are subject to the
securities laws, and related matters, in order to protect the interests
of investors and further the public interest in the preparation of
informative, accurate and independent audit reports. The PCAOB is to
accomplish these goals through registration of public accounting firms
and standard setting, inspection, and disciplinary programs. The PCAOB
is subject to the comprehensive oversight of the Securities and
Exchange Commission (the ``Commission'').
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ 15 U.S.C. 7201 et seq.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Section 109 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act provides that the PCAOB shall
establish a reasonable annual accounting support fee, as may be
necessary or appropriate to establish and maintain the PCAOB. Under
Section 109(f) of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act, the aggregate annual
accounting support fee shall not exceed the PCAOB's aggregate
``recoverable budget expenses,'' which may include operating, capital
and accrued items. The PCAOB's annual budget and accounting support fee
is subject to approval by the Commission.
    Section 982 of the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer
Protection Act (the ``Dodd-Frank Act'') \2\ amended the Sarbanes-Oxley
Act to provide the PCAOB with explicit authority to oversee auditors of
broker-dealers registered with the Commission. In addition, the PCAOB
must allocate the annual accounting support fee among issuers and among
brokers and dealers.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \2\ Public Law 111-203, 124 Stat. 1376 (2010).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Section 109(b) of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act directs the PCAOB to
establish a budget for each fiscal year in accordance with the PCAOB's
internal procedures, subject to approval by the Commission. Rule 190 of
Regulation P facilitates the Commission's review and approval of PCAOB
budgets and annual accounting support fees.\3\ This budget rule
provides, among other things, a timetable for the preparation and
submission of the PCAOB budget and for Commission actions related to
each budget, a description of the information that should be included
in each budget submission, limits on the PCAOB's ability to incur
expenses and obligations except as provided in the approved budget,
procedures relating to supplemental budget requests, requirements for
the PCAOB to furnish on a quarterly basis certain budget-related
information, and a list of definitions that apply to the rule and to
general discussions of PCAOB budget matters.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ 17 CFR 202.190.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In accordance with the budget rule, in March 2011 the PCAOB
provided the Commission with a narrative description of its program
issues and outlook for the 2012 budget year. In response, the
Commission provided the PCAOB with economic assumptions and budgetary
guidance for the 2012 budget year. The PCAOB subsequently delivered a
preliminary budget and budget justification to the Commission. Staff
from the Commission's Offices of the Chief Accountant and Financial
Management dedicated a substantial amount of time to the review and
analysis of the PCAOB's programs, projects and budget estimates;
reviewed the PCAOB's estimates of 2011 actual spending; and attended
several meetings with management and staff of the PCAOB to further
develop an understanding of the PCAOB's budget and operations. During
the course of this review, Commission staff relied upon representations
and supporting documentation from the PCAOB. Based on this review, the
Commission issued a ``pass back'' letter to the PCAOB.
    On November 30, 2011, the PCAOB approved its 2012 budget during an
open meeting and submitted that budget to the Commission for approval.
Upon review of the submitted budget and budget justification,
Commission staff raised questions regarding the calculation and
presentation of the accounting support fee in the budget justification.
On December 23, 2011, the PCAOB supplemented the original budget
justification with additional materials, including a revised
calculation and presentation of the accounting support fee. Due to the
time needed to resolve this matter, consideration of the budget and
accounting support fee was delayed beyond the normal expected date of
December 23rd.\4\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ See 17 CFR 202.190(c). The budget rule also provides that in
the event the Commission has not approved a budget prior to the
beginning of the fiscal year, the PCAOB may spend funds from its
reserve and continue to incur obligations as if the budget most
recently approved by the Commission were continuing in effect. See
17 CFR 202.190(e)(3).

---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    After considering the above, the Commission did not identify any
proposed disbursements in the 2012 budget adopted by the PCAOB that are
not properly recoverable through the annual accounting support fee, and
the Commission believes that the aggregate proposed 2012 annual
accounting support fee does not exceed the PCAOB's aggregate
recoverable budget expenses for 2012. The Commission also acknowledges
the PCAOB's updated strategic plan and looks forward to providing views
to the PCAOB as future updates are made to the plan.
    In light of the recent report on information technology (``IT'')
governance and staffing by the PCAOB's Office of Internal Oversight and
Performance Assurance,\5\ the Commission understands that the PCAOB has
recently taken, and plans to continue to take, significant steps
designed to improve its IT program. These steps include IT staffing
changes, conducting a review of the IT program, implementing IT
governance structures, and strengthening Board oversight over its IT
program. In addition to these important steps, the Commission directs
the Board to continue to provide in its quarterly reports to the
Commission detailed information about the state of the PCAOB's IT
program, including planned, estimated, and actual costs for IT
projects, and the level of involvement of consultants. These reports
also should include: (a) a discussion of the Board's assessment of the
progress and implementation of the Board actions mentioned above; and
(b) the quarterly IT report that will be prepared by PCAOB staff and
submitted to the Board.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ The PCAOB's Office of Internal Oversight and Performance
Assurance provides internal examination of the programs and
operations of the PCAOB. A public summary of the Office's report on
IT is available here: http://pcaobus.org/InternalOversight/Documents/2011_Information_Technology.pdf.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Commission also directs the PCAOB during the 2012 budget cycle
to continue to include in its quarterly reports to the Commission
information about the PCAOB's inspections program. Such information is
to include: (a) Statistics relative to the numbers and types of firms
budgeted and expected to be inspected in 2012, including by location
and by year the inspections that are required to be conducted in
accordance with the Sarbanes-Oxley Act and PCAOB rules; (b) information
about the timing of the issuance of inspections reports for domestic
and non-U.S. inspections; and (c) updates on the PCAOB's efforts to
establish cooperative arrangements with respective non-U.S. authorities
for inspections required in those countries.
    The Commission has determined that the PCAOB's 2012 budget and
annual accounting support fee are consistent with Section 109 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act. Accordingly,
    It is ordered, pursuant to Section 109 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act,
that the PCAOB budget and annual accounting support fee for calendar
year 2012 are approved.

    By the Commission.
Kevin M. O'Neill,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2012-764 Filed 1-17-12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 78, Number 152 (Wednesday, August 7, 2013)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 48078-48079]
[FR Doc No: 2013-19090]

=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 71

[Docket No. FAA-2013-0513; Airspace Docket No. 13-ASO-13]

Proposed Amendment of Class E Airspace; Tazewell, TN

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM).

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: This action proposes to amend Class E Airspace at Tazewell,
TN, as new Standard Instrument Approach Procedures have been developed
at New Tazewell Municipal Airport. This action would enhance the safety
and airspace management of Instrument Flight Rules (IFR) operations at
the airport.

DATES: Comments must be received on or before September 23, 2013.

ADDRESSES: Send comments on this rule to: U.S. Department of
Transportation, Docket Operations, West Building Ground Floor, Room
W12-140, 1200 New Jersey, SE., Washington, DC 20590-0001; Telephone: 1-
800-647-5527; Fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>. You must identify the Docket Number
FAA-2013-0513; Airspace Docket No. 13-ASO-13, at the beginning of your
comments. You may also submit and review received comments through the
Internet at http://www.regulations.gov.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: John Fornito, Operations Support
Group, Eastern Service Center, Federal Aviation Administration, P.O.
Box 20636, Atlanta, Georgia 30320; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Comments Invited

    Interested persons are invited to comment on this rule by
submitting such written data, views, or arguments, as they may desire.
Comments that provide the factual basis supporting the views and
suggestions presented are particularly helpful in developing reasoned
regulatory decisions on the proposal. Comments are specifically invited
on the overall regulatory, aeronautical, economic, environmental, and
energy-related aspects of the proposal.
    Communications should identify both docket numbers (FAA Docket No.
FAA-2013-0513; Airspace Docket No. 13-ASO-13) and be submitted in
triplicate to the Docket Management System (see ADDRESSES section for
address and phone number). You may also submit comments through the
Internet at http://www.regulations.gov.
    Persons wishing the FAA to acknowledge receipt of their comments on
this action must submit with those comments a self-addressed stamped
postcard on which the following statement is made: ``Comments to Docket
No. FAA-2013-0513; Airspace Docket No. 13-ASO-13.'' The postcard will
be date/time stamped and returned to the commenter.
    All communications received before the specified closing date for
comments will be considered before taking action on the proposed rule.
The proposal contained in this notice may be changed in light of the
comments received. A report summarizing each substantive public contact
with FAA personnel concerned with this rulemaking will be filed in the
docket.

Availability of NPRMs

    An electronic copy of this document may be downloaded from and
comments submitted through http://www.regulations.gov. Recently
published rulemaking documents can also be accessed through the FAA's
Web page at  http://www.faa.gov/airports_airtraffic/air_traffic/publications/airspace_amendments/.
    You may review the public docket containing the proposal, any
comments received, and any final disposition in person in the Dockets
Office (see the ADDRESSES section for address and phone number) between
9:00 a.m. and 5:00 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal
Holidays. An informal docket may also be examined between 8:00 a.m. and
4:30 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal Holidays at the office
of the Eastern Service Center, Federal Aviation Administration, room
350, 1701 Columbia Avenue, College Park, Georgia 30337.
    Persons interested in being placed on a mailing list for future
NPRM's should contact the FAA's Office of Rulemaking,<PHONE_NUMBER>,
to request a copy of Advisory circular No. 11-2A, Notice of Proposed
Rulemaking distribution System, which describes the application
procedure.

The Proposal

    The FAA is considering an amendment to Title 14, Code of Federal
Regulations (14 CFR) part 71 to amend Class E airspace extending upward
from 700 feet above the surface within a 13.4-mile radius to support
new Standard Instrument Approach Procedures developed at New Tazewell
Municipal Airport, Tazewell, TN. Airspace reconfiguration is necessary
due to the development of the RNAV (GPS) RWY 7 approach and for
continued safety and management of IFR operations at the airport.
    Class E airspace designations are published in Paragraph 6005 of
FAA Order 7400.9W, dated August 8, 2012, and effective September 15,
2012, which is incorporated by reference in 14 CFR 71.1. The Class E
airspace designation listed in this document will be published
subsequently in the Order.
    The FAA has determined that this proposed regulation only involves
an established body of technical regulations for which frequent and
routine amendments are necessary to keep them operationally current.
It, therefore, (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
will only affect air traffic procedures and air navigation, it is
certified that this proposed rule, when promulgated, would not have a
significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities
under the criteria of the Regulatory Flexibility Act.
    The FAA's authority to issue rules regarding aviation safety is
found in Title 49 of the United States Code. 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. This proposed 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 proposed regulation is within the scope
of that authority as it would amend Class E airspace at New Tazewell
Municipal Airport, Tazewell, TN.
    This proposal would be subject to an environmental analysis in
accordance with FAA Order 1050.1E,

``Environmental Impacts: Policies and Procedures'' prior to any FAA
final regulatory action.

Lists of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 71

    Airspace, Incorporation by reference, Navigation (Air).

The Proposed Amendment:

    In consideration of the foregoing, the Federal Aviation
Administration proposes to amend 14 CFR Part 71 as follows:

PART 71--DESIGNATION OF CLASS A, B, C, D, AND E AIRSPACE AREAS; AIR
TRAFFIC SERVICE ROUTES; AND REPORTING POINTS

0
1. The authority citation for Part 71 continues to read as follows:

    Authority:  49 U.S.C. 106(g); 40103, 40113, 40120; E.O. 10854,
24 FR 9565, 3 CFR, 1959-1963 Comp., p. 389.

Sec.  71.1  [Amended]

0
2. The incorporation by reference in 14 CFR 71.1 of Federal Aviation
Administration Order 7400.9W, Airspace Designations and Reporting
Points, dated August 8, 2012, effective September 15, 2012, is amended
as follows:

Paragraph 6005. Class E Airspace Areas Extending Upward from 700
feet or More Above the Surface of the Earth.

* * * * *

ASO TN E5 Tazewell, TN [Amended]

New Tazewell Municipal Airport, TN
    (lat. 36[deg]24'32'' N., long. 83[deg]33'26'' W.)

    That airspace extending upward from 700 feet above the surface
within a 13.4-mile radius of New Tazewell Municipal Airport.

    Issued in College Park, Georgia, on July 31, 2013.
Paul Lore,
Acting Manager, Operations Support Group, Eastern Service Center, Air
Traffic Organization.
[FR Doc. 2013-19090 Filed 8-6-13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


[Federal Register Volume 79, Number 145 (Tuesday, July 29, 2014)]
[Notices]
[Page 44026]
[FR Doc No: 2014-17757]

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Docket No. RP14-638-000, Docket No. CP14-125-000 and Docket No. CP14-
126-000]

Atmos Energy Corporation v. American Midstream (Midla) LLC,
American Midstream (Midla) LLC, American Midstream (Midla) LLC; Notice
of Informal Settlement Conference

    On March 24, 2014, in Docket No. RP14-638-000, Atmos Energy
Corporation (Atmos) filed a complaint against American Midstream
(Midla) LLC (Midla) alleging, among other things, that Midla's open
season notice and process violate the requirements of section 7(b) of
the Natural Gas Act. On March 28, 2014, in Docket No. CP14-125-000,
Midla filed an application under section 7(b) of the NGA to abandon
segments of its jurisdictional pipeline that are currently used to
provide service to Atmos, as well as other shippers. Concurrently,
Midla filed a prior notice filing in Docket No. CP14-126-000 requesting
to abandon the remainder of its jurisdictional pipeline by sale to an
affiliate.
    The parties met with the Director of the Dispute Resolution and
agreed upon a mediation process to attempt to resolve issues in the
above complaints. Another mediation session is scheduled for July 24
and July 25, 2014 beginning on July 24 at 1:30 p.m. in Hearing Room 5,
and on July 25 at a time to be determined in Conference Room 3M-3 at
the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street NE.,
Washington, DC. The parties will continue to work toward resolution of
the issues through the mediation efforts. At the conclusion of the ADR
process, if successful, the parties will submit a settlement agreement
for Commission review and approval. If a party has any questions and
for access to the building, please contact Dispute Resolution Division,
Support Specialist, Sara Klynsma, at<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    FERC conferences are accessible under section 508 of the
Rehabilitation Act of 1973. For accessibility accommodations please
send an email to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or call toll free 1-866-208-
3372 (voice) or<PHONE_NUMBER> (TTY), or send a FAX to<PHONE_NUMBER> with
the required accommodations.

    Dated: July 18, 2014.
Kimberly D. Bose,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2014-17757 Filed 7-28-14; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


Mr. Marco Gonzalez Secretariat for the Montreal Protocol P. O. Box 30552, Nairobi, Kenya Dr. H. J. Banks 10 Beltana Road Pialligo, ACT 2609 Australia Dr. Nahum Marban Mendoza Autonomic University of Chapingo PO Box 56230 Chapingo, Mexico Dear Mr. Gonzalez, Dr. Banks, and Dr. Mendoza:

Please find attached the United States government response to the questions provided by MBTOC regarding the U. S. 2005 supplemental and 2006 CUE request. These responses are organized by sector for your convenience.

In preparing the CUE nominations and these responses, we have considered all resources available to us, including but not limited to: MBTOC reports, published articles, research reports, and personal communications with researchers and growers. We strive to answer MBTOC questions based on a thorough examination of all relevant material. In the future, it may facilitate our understanding of specific aspects of questions if MBTOC could provide data, or references to the relevant data, that are the basis for some of its questions. We believe this could assist us in providing MBTOC with as complete and accurate a response as possible.

With respect to the U. S. requests in two tobacco related sectors, we have recently consulted with these applicant groups and the U. S. Government withdraws our nominations for these two sectors that were considered by MBTOC in its June 2004 report. Specifically, we withdraw for consideration our CUE requests for CUN2003/ 056UScN7 ( Nursery float trays for tobacco seedlings) and US56N13 ( tobacco   seedlings).

In our bilateral meeting at the Open Ended Working Group, information was requested on the precise details of any movement of CUE applicants to different sectors between the 2005 and 2006 CUE requests. Table 1 below summarizes all such changes. 2 August 13, 2004 Table 1. Description of What U. S. A. Applications Have Been Moved To New Sectors Recategorized Applicants: From 2005 To 2006 Ham Commodities Ham CA Rose Nursery Ornamentals Fruit, Nut, and Flower Nursery Western Raspberry Nursery Orchard Seedlings Fruit, Nut, and Flower Nursery CA Assoc. of Nurserymen  Deciduous Fruit & Nut Tree Growers Orchard Seedlings Fruit, Nut, and Flower Nursery For your convenience, Table 2 below displays the name of each of the sector specific responses to MBTOC questions in separate electronic files.

Table 2. List of Electronic Filenames Title of Electronic Files CUN2003 Stru USA NPMA Dried Commodities and Structures Reply to June 2004 Questions. doc CUN2003 Comm USA Dry Cured Pork Products Reply to June 2004 Questions. doc CUN2003 Soil USA Eggplant & Peppers Reply to June 2004 Questions. doc CUN2003 Soil USA Orchard Replant Request to Reconsider June 2004. doc CUN2003 Soil USA Ornamentals Reply to June 2004 Questions. doc CUN2003 Soil USA Strawberry Fruit Reply to June 2004 Questions. doc CUN2003 Soil USA Strawberry Runners Reply to June 2004 Questions. doc CUN2003 Stru USA 01 Mills & Processors Reply to June 2004 Questions. doc CUN2003 Stru USA 02 Mills & Processors Reply to June 2004 Questions. xls CUN2003 Soil USA Tomato Reply to June 2004 Questions. doc USA 2006 BUNI   Refined Nomination Package. xls As a final point, the United States requests that MBTOC reconsider its recommendation to cut our request in the orchard replant sector. A detailed explanation describing the need for the amount of methyl bromide included in our request is attached.

I hope that the information provided in this response helps the MBTOC in its deliberations at its next meeting. Should you need further clarification on these questions, please contact John Thompson ( ThompsonJE2@ state. gov or 1 202 647 9799) on these matters.

Sincerely,

Claudia A. McMurray Deputy Assistant Secretary for Environment


[Federal Register Volume 79, Number 46 (Monday, March 10, 2014)]
[Notices]
[Pages 13289-13290]
[FR Doc No: 2014-05116]

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Docket No. CP14-83-000]

El Paso Natural Gas Company, LLC; Notice of Application

    Take notice that on February 13, 2014, El Paso Natural Gas Company,
LLC (EPNG), Post Office Box 1087, Colorado Springs, Colorado 80944,
filed an application pursuant to section 7(b) of the Natural Gas Act
and section 157.18 of the Commission's regulations to abandon by sale
two 16-inch diameter of 42 mile pipeline segments; EPNG's Line Nos.
1000 and 1001 located in El Paso County and Hudspeth County, Texas.
EPNG constructed the 16-inch diameter Line No. 1001 as a loop of Line
No. 1000. EPNG intends to sell the two lines to DKM Enterprises, L.L.C.
(DKM), a pipe and steel salvage company not affiliated with EPNG. DKM
will purchase these segments of Line Nos. 1000 and 1001 and thereafter
remove the 42 mile pipeline segments, all as more fully set forth in
the application which is on file with the Commission and open to public
inspection. The filing may also be viewed on the web at http://www.ferc.gov using the ``eLibrary'' link. Enter the docket number
excluding the last three digits in the docket number field to access
the document. For assistance, contact FERC at
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or call toll-free,<PHONE_NUMBER> or TTY,
(202) 502-8659.
    Any questions regarding this application should be directed to
Francisco Tarin, Director, Regulatory Affairs, El Paso Natural Gas
Company, LLC, PO Box 1087 Colorado Springs, Colorado 80944, or call
(719) 667-7517, or fax<PHONE_NUMBER> or to David R. Cain, Assistant
General Counsel, El Paso Natural Gas Company, LLC, PO Box 1087 Colorado
Springs, Colorado 80944, or call<PHONE_NUMBER>, or by fax (719) 520-
4415.
    Pursuant to section 157.9 of the Commission's rules, 18 CFR 157.9,
within 90 days of this Notice the Commission staff will either:
Complete its environmental assessment (EA) and place it into the
Commission's public record (eLibrary) for this proceeding; or issue a
Notice of Schedule for Environmental Review. If a Notice of Schedule
for Environmental Review is issued, it will indicate, among other
milestones, the anticipated date for the Commission staff's issuance of
the final environmental impact statement (FEIS) or EA for this
proposal. The filing of the EA in the Commission's public record for
this proceeding or the issuance of a Notice of Schedule for
Environmental Review will serve to notify federal and state agencies of
the timing for the completion of all necessary reviews, and the
subsequent need to complete all federal authorizations within 90 days
of the date of issuance of the Commission staff's FEIS or EA.
    There are two ways to become involved in the Commission's review of
this project. First, any person wishing to obtain legal status by
becoming a party to the proceedings for this project should, on or
before the comment date stated below file with the Federal Energy
Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street NE., Washington, DC 20426,

a motion to intervene in accordance with the requirements of the
Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedure (18 CFR 385.214 or
385.211) and the Regulations under the NGA (18 CFR 157.10). A person
obtaining party status will be placed on the service list maintained by
the Secretary of the Commission and will receive copies of all
documents filed by the applicant and by all other parties. A party must
submit 7 copies of filings made in the proceeding with the Commission
and must mail a copy to the applicant and to every other party. Only
parties to the proceeding can ask for court review of Commission orders
in the proceeding.
    However, a person does not have to intervene in order to have
comments considered. The second way to participate is by filing with
the Secretary of the Commission, as soon as possible, an original and
two copies of comments in support of or in opposition to this project.
The Commission will consider these comments in determining the
appropriate action to be taken, but the filing of a comment alone will
not serve to make the filer a party to the proceeding. The Commission's
rules require that persons filing comments in opposition to the project
provide copies of their protests only to the party or parties directly
involved in the protest.
    Persons who wish to comment only on the environmental review of
this project should submit an original and two copies of their comments
to the Secretary of the Commission. Environmental commentors will be
placed on the Commission's environmental mailing list, will receive
copies of the environmental documents, and will be notified of meetings
associated with the Commission's environmental review process.
Environmental commentors will not be required to serve copies of filed
documents on all other parties. However, the non-party commentors will
not receive copies of all documents filed by other parties or issued by
the Commission (except for the mailing of environmental documents
issued by the Commission) and will not have the right to seek court
review of the Commission's final order.
    The Commission strongly encourages electronic filings of comments,
protests and interventions in lieu of paper using the ``eFiling'' link
at http://www.ferc.gov. Persons unable to file electronically should
submit an original and 5 copies of the protest or intervention to the
Federal Energy regulatory Commission, 888 First Street NE., Washington,
DC 20426.
    Comment Date: 5:00 p.m. Eastern Time on March 6, 2014.

    Dated: February 27, 2014.
 Kimberly D. Bose,
 Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2014-05116 Filed 3-7-14; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 86, Number 36 (Thursday, February 25, 2021)]
[Notices]
[Pages 11567-11568]
[FR Doc No: 2021-03883]

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[SEC File No. 270-625, OMB Control No. 3235-0686]

Submission for OMB Review; Comment Request

Upon Written Request Copies Available From: Securities and Exchange
Commission, Office of FOIA Services, 100 F Street NE, Washington, DC
20549-2736

Extension:
    Form TCR and Form WB-APP--Implementing the Whistleblower
Provisions of Section 21F of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934

    Notice is hereby given that, pursuant to the Paperwork Reduction
Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.) (``PRA''), the Securities and
Exchange Commission (``Commission'') is soliciting comments on the
collection of information summarized below. The Commission plans to
submit an extension for this current collection of information to the
Office of Management and Budget for approval.
    In Release No. 34-64545,\1\ the Commission adopted rules
(``Rules'') and forms to implement Section 21F of the Securities
Exchange Act of 1934 entitled ``Securities Whistleblower Incentives and
Protection,'' which was created by Section 922 of the Dodd-Frank Wall
Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act (``Dodd-Frank Act'').\2\ The
Rules describe the whistleblower program that the Commission has
established pursuant to the Dodd-Frank Act which requires the
Commission to pay an award, subject to certain limitations and
conditions, to whistleblowers who voluntarily provide the Commission
with original information about a violation of the federal securities
laws that leads to the successful enforcement of a covered judicial or
administrative action, or of a related action. The Rules define certain
terms critical to the operation of the whistleblower program, outline
the procedures for applying for awards and the Commission's procedures
for making decisions on claims, and generally explain the scope of the
whistleblower program to the public and to potential whistleblowers.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ Implementation of the Whistleblower Provisions of Section
21F of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, Release No. 34-64545;
File No. S7-33-10 (adopted May 25, 2011).
    \2\ Public Law 111-203, 922(a), 124 Stat 1841 (2010).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Form TCR is a form submitted by whistleblowers who wish to provide
information to the Commission and its staff regarding potential
violations of the securities laws. Form TCR is required for submission
of information under the Rules. The Commission estimates that it takes
a whistleblower, on average, one and one-half hours to complete Form
TCR. Based on the receipt of an average of approximately 560 annual
Form TCR submissions for the past three fiscal years, the Commission
estimates that the annual reporting burden of Form TCR is 840 hours.
    Form WB-APP is a form that is submitted by whistleblowers filing a
claim for a whistleblower award. Form WB-APP is required for
application for an award under the Rules. On December 4, 2020, the
Commission approved an updated version of the WB-APP in conjunction
with its newly amended rules. The updated WB-APP removes the
requirement for the filer to submit their Social Security Number and
modified the order of the questions on the form. No substantive changes
were made to the WB-APP. The Commission estimates that it takes a
whistleblower, on average, two hours to complete Form WB-APP. The
completion time depends largely on the complexity of the alleged
violation and the amount of information the whistleblower possesses in
support of his or her application for an award. Based on the receipt of
an average of approximately 215 \3\ annual Form WB-APP submissions for
the past six fiscal years, the Commission estimates that the annual
reporting burden of Form WB-APP is 430 hours.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ This figure does not include Form WB-APP submissions which
were facially deficient, subsequently withdrawn, or submitted by
individuals who have been barred by the Commission from
participation in the whistleblower program.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Estimated annual reporting burden = 1,270 hours.

    The public may view background documentation for this information
collection at the following website: www.reginfo.gov. Find this
particular information collection by selecting ``Currently under 30-day
Review--Open for Public Comments'' or by using the search function.
Written comments and recommendations for the proposed information
collection should be sent within 30 days of publication of this notice
to (i) www.reginfo.gov/public/do/PRAMain and (ii) David Bottom,
Director/Chief Information Officer, Securities and Exchange Commission,
c/o Cynthia Roscoe, 100 F Street NE, Washington, DC 20549, or by
sending an email to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
    Dated: February 22, 2021.
J. Matthew DeLesDernier,
Assistant Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2021-03883 Filed 2-24-21; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 76, Number 95 (Tuesday, May 17, 2011)]
[Notices]
[Pages 28432-28433]
[FR Doc No: 2011-12013]

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

Combined Notice of Filings 2

    Take notice that the Commission received the following electric
corporate filings:

    Docket Numbers: EC11-57-000.
    Applicants: Morgan Stanley Capital Group Inc., Mitsubishi UFJ
Financial Group, Inc.
    Description: Amended Joint Application of Morgan Stanley Capital
Group Inc. and Mitsubishi UFJ Financial Group, Inc.
    Filed Date: 05/06/2011.
    Accession Number: 20110506-5181.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Monday, May 23, 2011.

    Take notice that the Commission received the following electric
rate filings:

    Docket Numbers: ER11-3540-000.
    Applicants: Southern California Edison Company.
    Description: Southern California Edison Company submits tariff
filing

per 35.13(a)(2)(iii: Letter Agreement for Pacific Wind, LLC for Pacific
Wind Project to be effective 4/27/2011.
    Filed Date: 05/10/2011.
    Accession Number: 20110510-5001.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Tuesday, May 31, 2011.

    Docket Numbers: ER11-3541-000.
    Applicants: Public Service Company of Colorado.
    Description: Public Service Company of Colorado submits tariff
filing per 35.13(a)(2)(iii: 2011-5-10--PSCo In-Kind Losses to be
effective 7/1/2011.
    Filed Date: 05/10/2011.
    Accession Number: 20110510-5066.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Tuesday, May 31, 2011.

    Any person desiring to intervene or to protest in any of the above
proceedings must file in accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of the
Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedure (18 CFR 385.211 and
385.214) on or before 5 p.m. Eastern time on the specified comment
date. It is not necessary to separately intervene again in a subdocket
related to a compliance filing if you have previously intervened in the
same docket. Protests will be considered by the Commission in
determining the appropriate action to be taken, but will not serve to
make protestants parties to the proceeding. Anyone filing a motion to
intervene or protest must serve a copy of that document on the
Applicant. In reference to filings initiating a new proceeding,
interventions or protests submitted on or before the comment deadline
need not be served on persons other than the Applicant.
    As it relates to any qualifying facility filings, the notices of
self-certification [or self-recertification] listed above, do not
institute a proceeding regarding qualifying facility status. A notice
of self-certification [or self-recertification] simply provides
notification that the entity making the filing has determined the
facility named in the notice meets the applicable criteria to be a
qualifying facility. Intervention and/or protest do not lie in dockets
that are qualifying facility self-certifications or self-
recertifications. Any person seeking to challenge such qualifying
facility status may do so by filing a motion pursuant to 18 CFR
292.207(d)(iii). Intervention and protests may be filed in response to
notices of qualifying facility dockets other than self-certifications
and self-recertifications.
    The Commission encourages electronic submission of protests and
interventions in lieu of paper, using the FERC Online links at http://www.ferc.gov. To facilitate electronic service, persons with Internet
access who will eFile a document and/or be listed as a contact for an
intervenor must create and validate an eRegistration account using the
eRegistration link. Select the eFiling link to log on and submit the
intervention or protests.
    Persons unable to file electronically should submit an original and
14 copies of the intervention or protest to the Federal Energy
Regulatory Commission, 888 First St. NE., Washington, DC 20426.
    The filings in the above proceedings are accessible in the
Commission's eLibrary system by clicking on the appropriate link in the
above list. They are also available for review in the Commission's
Public Reference Room in Washington, DC. There is an eSubscription link
on the Web site that enables subscribers to receive e-mail notification
when a document is added to a subscribed docket(s). For assistance with
any FERC Online service, please e-mail<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or
call<PHONE_NUMBER> (toll free). For TTY, call<PHONE_NUMBER>.

    Dated: May 10, 2011.
Nathaniel J. Davis, Sr.,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2011-12013 Filed 5-16-11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 79, Number 41 (Monday, March 3, 2014)]
[Notices]
[Pages 11783-11787]
[FR Doc No: 2014-04611]

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

[EPA-HQ-OEI-2013-0803; FRL 9907-40-OEI]

Agency Information Collection Activities; Submission to OMB for
Review and Approval; Proposed Collection; Toxic Chemical Release
Reporting; Request for Comments on Proposed Renewal of Form R and Form
A

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Notice.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency plans to submit a request
to renew an existing approved Information Collection Request (ICR),
``Toxic

Chemical Release Reporting; Request for Comments on Proposed Renewal of
Form R and Form A'' to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for
review and approval in accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act (44
U.S.C. 3501 et seq.). The current ICR expires on October 31, 2014.
Before submitting a request to renew this ICR, EPA is soliciting public
comments on specific aspects of the proposed information collection as
described below.

DATES: Comments must be submitted on or before May 2, 2014.

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-
OEI-2013-0803, by one of the following methods:
     http://www.regulations.gov: Follow the on-line
instructions for submitting comments.
     Email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>     Fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>.
     Mail: Office of Environmental Information (OEI) Docket,
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Mail Code 28221T, 1200
Pennsylvania Ave. NW., Washington, DC 20460.
     Hand Delivery: Public Reading Room, EPA West Building,
Room 3334, 1301 Constitution Avenue NW., Washington, DC 20004. Such
deliveries are only accepted during the docket's normal hours of
operations, 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., Monday through Friday, excluding
legal holidays. Special arrangements should be made for deliveries of
boxed information.
    Instructions: Direct your comments to Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-OEI-
2013-0803. EPA's policy is that all comments received will be included
in the public docket without change and made available online at
www.regulations.gov, including any personal information provided,
unless the comment includes information claimed to be Confidential
Business Information (CBI) or other information whose disclosure is
restricted by statute. Do not submit information that you consider to
be CBI or otherwise protected through www.regulations.gov or email. The
www.regulations.gov Web site is an ``anonymous access'' system, which
means EPA will not know your identity or contact information unless you
provide it in the body of your comment. If you send an email comment
directly to EPA without going through www.regulations.gov, your email
address will be automatically captured and included as part of the
comment that is placed in the public docket and made available on the
Internet. If you submit an electronic comment, EPA recommends that you
include your name and other contact information in the body of your
comment and with any disk or CD-ROM you submit. If EPA cannot read your
comment due to technical difficulties and cannot contact you for
clarification, EPA may not be able to consider your comment. Electronic
files should avoid the use of special characters or any form of
encryption and must be free of any defects or viruses. For additional
information about EPA's public docket, visit the EPA Docket Center
homepage at http://www.epa.gov/epahome/dockets.htm.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Cassandra Vail, Toxics Release
Inventory Program Division, Office of Information Analysis and Access
(2844T), Environmental Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave. NW.,
Washington, DC 20460; telephone number,<PHONE_NUMBER>; email address,
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

How can I access the docket and/or submit comments?

    EPA has established a public docket for the ICR described in this
notice under Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-OEI-2013-0803, which is available for
on-line viewing at www.regulations.gov. Go to www.regulations.gov to
obtain a copy of the proposed collection of information, to submit or
view public comments, to obtain an index of the docket contents, and to
obtain those documents in the public docket that are available
electronically. Once in the system, select ``search,'' then enter the
docket ID number identified in this document.
    The docket is also available for viewing in person at the OEI
Docket, EPA Docket Center, WJC West, Room 3334, 1301 Constitution Ave.
NW., Washington, DC. The telephone number for the Docket Center is 202-
566-1744. For additional information about EPA's public docket, visit
http://www.epa.gov/dockets.

In which information is EPA particularly interested?

    Pursuant to section 3506(c)(2)(A) of the PRA, EPA solicits comments
and information to enable it to: (i) 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; (ii) 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; (iii)
enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be
collected; and (iv) 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, e.g.,
permitting electronic submission of responses. In particular, EPA
requests comments from very small businesses (those with fewer than 25
employees) on examples of specific additional efforts that EPA could
make to reduce the paperwork burden for very small businesses affected
by this collection.

What should I consider when I prepare my comments for EPA?

    You may find the following suggestions helpful for preparing your
comments:
    1. Explain your views as clearly as possible and provide specific
examples;
    2. Describe any assumptions that you used;
    3. Provide copies of any technical information and/or data you used
that support your views;
    4. If you provide estimates of potential burden hours or labor
costs, explain how you arrived at your estimates;
    5. Offer alternative ways to improve the collection activity;
    6. Make sure to submit your comments by the deadline identified
under Dates; and
    7. To ensure proper receipt by EPA, identify the docket ID number
assigned to this action in the subject line on the first page of your
response. You may also provide the name, date, and Federal Register
citation.

What information collection activity or ICR does this apply to?

    Affected Entities: This ICR applies to facilities that submit
annual reports under section 313 of the Emergency Planning and
Community Right-to-Know Act (EPCRA) and section 6607 of the Pollution
Prevention Act (PPA). The applicability criteria are outlined in part
372, subpart B, of Title 40 of the Code Federal Regulations, and
potentially affected categories and entities may include, but are not
limited to the following:

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                      Examples of Potentially Affected
             Category                             Entities
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Industry..........................  Facilities included in the following
                                     NAICS manufacturing codes
                                     (corresponding to SIC codes 20
                                     through 39): 311*, 312*, 313*,
                                     314*, 315*, 316, 321, 322, 323*,
                                     324, 325*, 326*, 327, 331, 332,
                                     333, 334*, 335*, 336, 337*, 339*,
                                     111998*, 211112*, 212324*, 212325*,
                                     212393*, 212399*, 488390*, 511110,
                                     511120, 511130, 511140*, 511191,
                                     511199, 512220, 512230*, 519130*,
                                     541712*, or 811490*.
                                    *Exceptions and/or limitations exist
                                     for these NAICS codes.
                                    Facilities included in the following
                                     NAICS codes (corresponding to SIC
                                     codes other than SIC codes 20
                                     through 39): 212111, 212112, 212113
                                     (correspond to SIC 12, Coal Mining
                                     (except 1241)); or 212221, 212222,
                                     212231, 212234, 212299 (correspond
                                     to SIC 10, Metal Mining (except
                                     1011, 1081, and 1094)); or 221111,
                                     221112, 221113, 221118, 221121,
                                     221122, 221330 (Limited to
                                     facilities that combust coal and/or
                                     oil for the purpose of generating
                                     power for distribution in commerce)
                                     (correspond to SIC 4911, 4931, and
                                     4939, Electric Utilities); or
                                     424690, 425110, 425120 (Limited to
                                     facilities previously classified in
                                     SIC 5169, Chemicals and Allied
                                     Products, Not Elsewhere
                                     Classified); or 424710 (corresponds
                                     to SIC 5171, Petroleum Bulk
                                     Terminals and Plants); or 562112
                                     (Limited to facilities primarily
                                     engaged in solvent recovery
                                     services on a contract or fee basis
                                     (previously classified under SIC
                                     7389, Business Services, NEC)); or
                                     562211, 562212, 562213, 562219,
                                     562920 (Limited to facilities
                                     regulated under the Resource
                                     Conservation and Recovery Act,
                                     subtitle C, 42 U.S.C. 6921 et seq.)
                                     (correspond to SIC 4953, Refuse
                                     Systems).
Federal Government................  Federal facilities.
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    If you have questions regarding the applicability of this action to
a particular entity, consult the individual listed in the preceding FOR
FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section.
    Title: Toxic Chemical Release Reporting; Request for Comments on
Proposed Renewal of Form R and Form A.
    ICR Number: EPA ICR No. 1363.23, TRI Form R and TRI Form A
Certification Statement, OMB Control No. 2025-0009.
    ICR Status: The ICR for the TRI Form R and the TRI Form A
Certification Statement is scheduled to expire on October 31, 2014.
    Abstract: Pursuant to section 313 of EPCRA, certain facilities that
manufacture, process, or otherwise use specified toxic chemicals in
amounts above reporting threshold levels must submit annually to EPA
and to designated State or Tribal officials toxic chemical release
forms containing information specified by EPA. 42 U.S.C. 11023. In
addition, pursuant to section 6607 of the Pollution Prevention Act
(PPA), facilities reporting under section 313 of EPCRA must also report
pollution prevention and waste management data, including recycling
information, for such chemicals. 42 U.S.C. 13106. EPA compiles and
stores these reports in a publicly accessible database known as the
Toxics Release Inventory (TRI).
    Regulations at 40 CFR part 372, subpart B, require facilities that
meet all of the following criteria to report:
    1. The facility has 10 or more full-time employee equivalents
(i.e., a total of 20,000 hours worked per year or greater; see 40 CFR
372.3); and
    2. The facility is included in a North American Industry
Classification System (NAICS) Code listed at 40 CFR 372.23 or under
Executive Order 13148, federal facilities regardless of their industry
classification; and
    3. The facility manufactures (defined to include importing),
processes, or otherwise uses any EPCRA section 313 (TRI) chemical in
quantities greater than the established thresholds for the specific
chemical in the course of a calendar year.
    Facilities that meet the criteria must file a Form R report or, in
some cases, may submit a Form A Certification Statement, for each
listed toxic chemical for which the criteria are met. As specified in
EPCRA section 313(a), facilities must submit report(s) for any calendar
year on or before July 1 of the following year. For example, reporting
year 2012 data should have been submitted and certified on or before
July 1, 2013.
    EPA maintains the list of toxic chemicals subject to TRI reporting
at 40 CFR 372.65 and the Agency publishes this list each year as Table
II in the Toxics Release Inventory Reporting Forms and Instructions.
The current TRI chemical list contains 594 chemicals and 30 chemical
categories.
    Environmental agencies, industry, and the public use TRI data for a
wide variety of purposes. EPA program offices use TRI data, along with
other data, to help establish programmatic priorities, evaluate
potential hazards to human health and the natural environment, and
undertake appropriate regulatory and/or enforcement activities.
Environmental and public interest groups use the data to better
understand toxic chemical releases at the community level and to work
with industry, government agencies, and others to promote reductions in
toxic chemical releases. Industrial facilities use the TRI data to
evaluate the efficiency of their production processes and to help track
and communicate their progress in achieving pollution prevention goals.
    The TRI data are unique in providing a multi-media (air, water, and
land) picture of toxic chemical releases, transfers, and other waste
management activities by covered facilities on a yearly basis. While
other environmental media programs provide some toxic chemical data and
related permit data, TRI data are unique with regard to the types of
chemicals and industry sectors covered as well as the frequency of
reporting. Facilities subject to TRI reporting must submit reports for
each calendar year to EPA and the State or Indian Country in which they
are located by July 1 of the following year.
    Respondents may claim trade secrecy for a chemical's identity as
described in EPCRA Section 322 and its implementing regulations in 40
CFR part 350. EPA will disclose information covered by a claim of trade
secrecy only to the extent permitted by and in accordance with the
procedures in 40 CFR part 350 and 40 CFR part 2.
    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 OMB control numbers for EPA's
regulations in 40 CFR are listed in 40 CFR part 9 and are identified on
the form and/or instrument, if applicable.
    Burden Statement: EPA estimates average annual public reporting and
recordkeeping burden for this collection of information to be
approximately 35.71 hours for Form R and approximately 21.96 hours for
a Form A. Burden means the total time, effort, or financial resources
expended by persons to generate, maintain, retain, or disclose or
provide information to or for a Federal agency. This includes the time
needed to review instructions; develop,

acquire, install, and utilize technology and systems for the purposes
of collecting/validating/verifying information, processing and
maintaining information, and disclosing and providing information;
adjust existing ways to comply with any previously applicable
instructions and requirements that have subsequently changed; train
personnel to respond to a collection of information; search data
sources; complete and review the collection of information; and
transmit or otherwise disclose the information.
    The ICR Supporting Statement provides a detailed explanation of the
Agency's estimate for TRI program burden, including Form R/A burden.
Below is a brief summary of the burden estimated for annual TRI
reporting:
     Estimated total number of respondents (i.e., facilities):
21,025.
     Frequency of response: annual.
     Estimated total average number of responses: 74,869.
     Estimated total average number of responses for each
respondent: 3.56.
     Estimated total annual burden hours: 3,555,998 hours.
     Estimated total annual costs: $183,418,377.

What Changes Does this ICR Propose?

    OMB approved the ICR for Form R and for the Form A Certification
Statement on October 14, 2011, with the original expiration date of
October 31, 2014. The OMB approved burden numbers are 3,327,436 hours
for Form R and 195,300 hours for Form A for a total of 3,522,736 hours.
Change in burden estimates since OMB approved of the combined Form R/A
ICR on October 14, 2011, include:
     the lifting of the Administrative Stay of the Toxics
Release Inventory reporting requirements for hydrogen sulfide on
October 17, 2011. EPA received the first submissions for hydrogen
sulfide for reporting year 2012; the total number of form submissions
used to calculate the overall program burden therefore includes these
hydrogen sulfide submissions.
     the addition of o-Nitrotoluene Rule, which the Federal
Register included in its publication on November 7, 2013. EPA estimates
this rule will increase the number of newly reporting facilities by 1
and the total number of Form Rs and Form As submitted by 17 and 5
respectively, with an associated ongoing steady state burden increase
of 717 hours.
    Over the last few years, the number of facilities reporting to TRI
increased slightly. Based on the latest data for RY 2012 with updates
to reflect the estimated burden due to the addition of o-Nitrotoluene,
EPA now estimates the total number of combined Form R and Form A
responses to be 74,869, the associated total annual burden hours to be
3,555,998, and the annual cost to be $183,418,377. For a detailed
explanation of the Agency's estimates of the respondent reporting
burden and labor costs, please refer to the proposed TRI Form R and A
Supporting Statement which are available in the docket.
    EPA proposes making several changes to the TRI reporting forms and
associated instructions, however, these changes are estimated to have a
negligible effect on form unit burden. The proposed changes, which are
outlined below, are designed to enhance the overall utility of the data
collected under the TRI Program.
    1. Add an optional extension to all phone numbers which would allow
facilities to ensure that incoming calls are directed to the
appropriate person.
    2. Add an optional field to allow facilities to indicate the
section of a water body that received the surface water discharge.
Specifically, facilities could provide a reach code, which is a unique
identifier for a linear, unbranched section of a water body. (Part II:
Sec. 5.3). Rationale: Linking TRI discharges to a reach code (a unique
identifier for a linear, unbranched section of a water body) provides
regulatory agencies and researchers the ability to model the potential
impact of TRI chemicals to downstream and intermediate receiving
waterbodies and water resources, and to assess the potential cumulative
environmental impacts of TRI chemical releases to surface waters. While
optional, this field would populate automatically when selecting their
receiving water body in the TRI-MEweb user interface for this section.
    3. EPA proposes moving the header ``5.5 Disposal to land on-site''
to precede Sections 5.4 and 5.5 on Form R so that it covers both 5.4
and 5.5. Furthermore, EPA proposes rewording 5.4.1 and 5.4.2 to fit
under the new header as follows: Section 5.4-5.5: Disposal to land on-
site, Section 5.4.1: Class 1 Underground Injection Wells, Section 5.4.2
Class II-V Underground Injection Wells. The remaining sections of
Section 5.5 are unchanged. Rationale: This change clarifies that
releases to underground injection wells are considered releases to
land.
    4. Provide the heading, ``Production-related waste managed'' for
Sections 8.1-8.7 and re-label Section 8.8 ``Non-production-related
waste managed,'' with a footnote indicating that this Section
``includes quantities released to the environment or transferred off-
site as a result of remedial actions, catastrophic events, or other
one-time events not associated with production processes (Part II: Sec.
8.1-8.8). Rationale: Re-labeling these Sections clearly indicates what
quantities facilities must report in them and makes it easier for TRI
data users to refer to these Sections in a concise and consistent
manner.
    5. Add checkboxes to indicate whether a facility has provided a
``Production Ratio'' or an ``Activity Ratio'' (Part II: Sec. 8.9).
Rationale: Facilities are required to submit a ratio of either
production or an activity other than production for the purposes of
normalizing year-to-year changes in TRI chemical quantities, but TRI
data users currently cannot determine which type of ratio was used.
    6. Add a new column where facilities can provide an optional
percentage range indicating the estimated annual reduction in chemical
waste generation associated with a given source reduction activity
(Part II: Sec. 8.10). Rationale: This change makes it easier to report
and assess the effectiveness of different types of source reduction
activities and thus promote the adoption and recognition of successful
pollution prevention practices.
    7. Provide optional barrier codes that facilities can use in
Section 8.11 to indicate why they could not implement any source
reduction activities during the reporting year. (Part II: Sec. 8.11).
Rationale: Facilities are required to pick a code if they perform a new
source reduction activity. However, there is currently no way for a
facility to indicate why they didn't implement a source reduction
activity. While these codes would be optional, they would allow EPA to
assist facilities in overcoming barriers to implementing source
reduction activities.
    8. Allow facilities to categorize optional free-text information
entered in Sections 8.11 and 9.1 by selecting from a list of topics
provided in TRI-MEweb (no changes to Form R itself). Rationale: Letting
facilities flag their free-text entries as relevant to certain
commonly-used topics would improve TRI tools that display free-text
information, data quality efforts, and the overall analytical utility
of the dataset.
    Additionally, the EPA proposes modifying TRI-MEweb to collect, as
optional, information that some facilities have historically provided,
unsolicited, to EPA on matters related to TRI (collectively called
miscellaneous TRI documents). Examples of these miscellaneous TRI
documents include

updates to contact and location information for the facility and
reasons for non-reporting. Some of this information is useful to the
Agency and could be useful to the public. Currently, the EPA receives
this unsolicited information on paper.
    This proposed modification would allow for an online means for the
EPA to receive miscellaneous documents, reducing the cost of processing
their submission and aligning how EPA processes such documents with the
recent requirement to submit TRI reporting forms electronically. In
other words, with this change, facilities could use TRI-MEweb to
provide details on specific categories of information that they have
been providing on a voluntary basis to the EPA throughout the existence
of the program (e.g., supplemental information on updates to the
facility's name, status, location, and/or parent company; supplemental
information on updates on whom to contact for technical and/or public
matters; and reasons for not reporting (indicating the facility did not
meet thresholds or did not report for any other appropriate reason)).
Receipt and processing of this information would not affect any
reporting forms certified and submitted to the agency, but rather would
allow facilities to provide an electronic means to submit contextual
information concerning their facilities that can enhance the context of
TRI data for the EPA as well as for the public.

What is the next step in the process for these ICRs?

    EPA will consider the comments received and amend the ICR as
appropriate. The final ICR package will then be submitted to OMB for
review and approval pursuant to 5 CFR 1320.12. At that time, EPA will
issue another Federal Register notice for the ICR pursuant to 5 CFR
1320.5(a)(1)(iv) to announce the submission of the ICR to OMB and the
opportunity to submit additional comments to OMB. If you have any
questions about this ICR or the approval process, please contact the
individual listed under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT.

    Dated: February 24, 2014.
Arnold Layne,
Director,
    Office of Information Analysis and Access
    Office of Environmental Information.
[FR Doc. 2014-04611 Filed 2-28-14; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P