[Federal Register Volume 75, Number 140 (Thursday, July 22, 2010)]
[Notices]
[Pages 42742-42743]
[FR Doc No: 2010-17883]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Project No. 13272-001]

Alaska Village Electric Cooperative; Notice of Environmental Site
Review and Scoping Meeting

July 15, 2010.
    a. Project No.: 13272-001.
    b. Name of Project: Old Harbor Hydroelectric Project.
    c. Location: On Mountain Creek, near the town of Old Harbor, Kodiak
Island Borough, Alaska.
    d. Potential Applicant Contact: Brent Petrie, Alaska Village
Electric Cooperative, 4831 Eagle Street, Anchorage, Alaska 99503-7497,
(907) 565-5358 or e-mail at<EMAIL_ADDRESS>    e. FERC Contact: Carolyn Templeton at<PHONE_NUMBER> or e-mail at
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>    f. Project History
    On August 24, 2009, Alaska Village Electric Cooperative (AVEC)
filed a Pre-Application Document (PAD) with the Commission, pursuant to
18 CFR 5.6 of the Commission's regulations. The PAD described the
proposed project location, facilities, and operations and included
information on the existing environment and any known and potential
impacts of the proposed project on specified resources. The Commission
issued Scoping Documents 1 \1\ and 2 on September 9, 2009 and January
4, 2010, respectively, which outlined the subject areas to be addressed
in the Commission's environmental document. On January 4, 2010 and May
5, 2010, AVEC filed, with the Commission, their proposed \2\ and
revised study plans, respectively. The plans outlined studies that
would be necessary to evaluate the effects of project construction and
operation and identified specific measures to mitigate project impacts.
On June 4, 2010, the Director of the Office of Energy Projects issued
his study plan determination which approved, with modifications, AVEC's
revised study plan.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ Upon issuance of Scoping Document 1, a 60-day comment period
was open for all interested individuals, organizations, and agencies
to provide comments on the PAD and Scoping Document 1, as well as
study requests. Comments received were then incorporated, if
applicable, into the Commission's Scoping Document 2.
    \2\ Following the filing of AVEC's proposed study plan, a 90-day
comment period was open for all interested individuals,
organizations, and agencies to provide comments on AVEC's proposed
study plan. Comments received were then incorporated, if applicable,
into AVEC's revised study plan.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    g. On Thursday, October 22, 2009, Commission staff conducted a
daytime scoping meeting for the proposed Old Harbor Hydroelectric
Project at AVEC's office in Anchorage, Alaska. Due to inclement weather
conditions, the environmental site review and evening scoping meeting
that was scheduled for Wednesday, October 21, 2009 in Old Harbor,
Alaska was cancelled. Therefore, Commission staff will conduct an
environmental site review and scoping meeting on Tuesday, August 17,
2010 and are inviting all interested individuals, organizations, and
agencies to attend one or both of these events, and to assist staff in
identifying the scope of environmental issues to be addressed in the
environmental document. The details of the environmental site review
and evening scoping meeting are as follows:

Environmental Site Review

    AVEC and Commission staff will conduct an environmental site review
of the project area on Tuesday, August 17, 2010, beginning at 1:00 p.m.
at the Old Harbor Native Corporation office. Those wishing to
participate should contact Robin Reich by August 6, 2010 [e-mail,
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or phone, (907)

929-5960] for details on how to participate. The environmental site
review will include an all-terrain vehicle ride to the proposed project
intake and other features. Proper footwear and gear is strongly
recommended.

Evening Scoping Meeting

    Date: Tuesday, August 17, 2010.
    Time: 6 p.m.
    Location: Old Harbor Native Corporation Office Building, 12
Elderberry Drive, Old Harbor, Alaska 99643.
    Phone:<PHONE_NUMBER>.

Scoping Meeting Objectives

    Scoping meeting participants should come prepared to discuss their
issues and/or concerns with the proposed Old Harbor Hydroelectric
Project. Please review the PAD, Scoping Documents 1 and 2, AVEC's
proposed and revised study plans, and the Commission's study plan
determination in preparation for the scoping meeting. These documents,
as well as other documents pertaining to the record for this
proceeding, may be viewed on the Web at http://www.ferc.gov, using the
``Documents & Filings'' link followed by the ``eLibrary'' link. After
clicking on the ``General Search'' link, select ``All'' for the ``Date
Range'' and type the project number, P-13272, into the ``Docket
Number'' box.

Kimberly D. Bose,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2010-17883 Filed 7-21-10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


			  UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

		        DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

			  OFFICE OF THE SECRETARY

			          WASHINGTON, D.C.

Issued by the Department of Transportation on May 21, 2004

NOTICE OF ACTION TAKEN -- DOCKETS OST-2004-17517

________________________________________________________________________
__________________________________________

This serves as notice to the public of the action described below, taken
by the Department official indicated (no additional confirming order
will be issued in this matter).

Applicant:  Caribbean Star Airlines, Ltd. & Caribbean Sun Airlines, Inc.
  Date Filed:  April 7, 2004

Relief requested:

Caribbean Star Airlines, Ltd.--Exemption from 49 U.S.C. § 41301 to
engage in scheduled foreign air transportation of persons, property and
mail between St. Johns, Antigua, on the one hand, and San Juan, Puerto
Rico, and St. Thomas, U.S. Virgin Islands, on the other hand, pursuant
to a code-share arrangement with Caribbean Sun Airlines, Inc., a U.S.
certificated air carrier.

Caribbean Sun Airlines, Inc.—Statement of authorization under 14 CFR
Part 212 to the extent necessary to permit Caribbean Sun Airlines, Inc.
(Caribbean Sun) to display the designator code of Caribbean Star
Airlines, Ltd. (Caribbean Star) on flights operated by Caribbean Sun
between San Juan, Puerto Rico, and St. Thomas, U.S. Virgin Islands, on
the one hand, and St. Johns, Antigua, on the other hand.

If renewal, date and citation of last action:  New authority

Applicant(s) representative:  Nathaniel P. Breed, Jr.<PHONE_NUMBER>

DOT Analyst:  Gordon H. Bingham<PHONE_NUMBER>

Responsive pleadings:  None filed

DISPOSITION

Action:  Approved							Action date:  May 21, 2004

Effective dates of exemption authority granted Caribbean Star:  May 21,
2004-May 21, 2005

Effective dates of the statement of authorization granted Caribbean Sun:
 May 21, 2004-Indefinite

Basis for approval (bilateral agreement/reciprocity):  Air Services
Agreement between the United States and the United Kingdom concerning
air services to which Antigua and Barbuda acceded upon independence in

1981 (the Agreement)

Except to the extent exempted/waived, this authority is subject to the
terms, conditions, and limitations indicated:  X  Standard exemption
conditions (Caribbean Star Attachment A & Caribbean Sun Attachment B) &
Caribbean Sun’s Certificate of Public Convenience and Necessity issued
by Order 2002-12-18.

Special conditions/Partial grant/Denial basis/Remarks:  Based on the
record in this case, we found that Caribbean Star is financially and
operationally qualified to perform the services authorized above.  We
also found that Caribbean Star is substantially owned and effectively
controlled by citizens of Antigua.  Specifically,

2

Caribbean Star, a corporation organized and existing under the laws of
Antigua, is wholly-owned by Caribbean Star Airlines Holdings, Ltd.
(CSAH), an Antiguan corporation.  CSAH in turn is wholly-owned by Mr. R.
Allen

Stanford.  Mr. Stanford holds dual citizenship (Antiguan and U.S.).  The
carrier is properly licensed by the Organization of Eastern Caribbean
States (OECS) and was designated by the Government of Antigua and
Barbuda on February 20, 2004, under Annex 1 of U.K. Route 9 of the
Agreement to perform the proposed services.

Caribbean Star may not conduct U.S. operations with its own aircraft and
crews without further order of the Department.

The statement of authorization granted to Caribbean Sun is subject to
the following conditions:

(a)  The statement of authorization will remain in effect only as long
as (i) Caribbean Sun and Caribbean Star continue to hold the necessary
underlying authority to operate the code-share services at issue, and
(ii) the code-share agreement providing for the code-share operations
remains in effect.

(b)  Caribbean Sun and/or Caribbean Star must promptly notify the
Department (Office of International Aviation) if the code-share
agreement providing for the code-share operations is no longer effective
or the carriers decide to cease operating any or all of the approved
code-share services.  Such notices should be filed in Docket
OST-2004-17517.

(c)  The code-sharing operations conducted under this authority must
comply with 14 CFR 257 and with any amendments to the Department’s
regulations concerning code-share arrangements that may be adopted.
Notwithstanding any provisions in the contract between the carriers, our
approval here is expressly conditioned upon the requirements that the
subject foreign air transportation be sold in the name of the carrier
holding out such service in computer reservation systems and elsewhere;
that the carrier selling such transportation (i.e., the carrier shown on
the ticket) accept responsibility for the entirety of the code-share
journey for all obligations established in its contract of carriage with
the passenger; and that the passenger liability of the operating carrier
be unaffected.  Further, the operator shall not permit the code of its
U.S. code-sharing partner to be carried on any flight that enters,
departs, or transits the airspace of any area for whose airspace the
Federal Aviation Administration has issued a flight prohibition.

(d)  The authority granted here is specifically conditioned so that
neither Caribbean Sun nor Caribbean Star shall give any force or effect
to any contractual provisions between themselves that are contrary to
these conditions.

Action taken by:   Paul L. Gretch, Director

		      Office of International Aviation

________________________________________________________________________
_________

Under authority assigned by the Department in its regulations, 14 CFR
Part 385, we found that (1) the applicant was qualified to perform the
proposed operations; (2) our action was consistent with Department
policy; (3) grant of the authority was consistent with the public
interest; and (4) grant of the authority would not constitute a major
regulatory action under the Energy Policy and Conservation Act of 1975.
To the extent not granted/deferred/dismissed, we denied all requests in
the referenced Docket.  We may amend, modify, or revoke the authority
granted in this Notice at any time without hearing at our discretion.

Persons entitled to petition the Department for review of the action set
forth in this Notice under the Department’s regulations, 14 CFR §
385.30, may file their petitions within seven (7) days after the date of
issuance of this Notice.  This action was effective when taken, and the
filing of a petition for review will not alter such effectiveness.

An electronic version of this document is available on the World Wide
Web at:

http://dms.dot.gov//reports/reports_aviation.asp

Foreign Carrier Exemption Conditions

In the conduct of the operations authorized, the foreign carrier
applicant(s) shall:

(1)  Not conduct any operations unless it holds a currently effective
authorization from its homeland for such operations, and it has filed a
copy of such authorization with the Department;

(2)  Comply with all applicable requirements of the Federal Aviation
Administration, including, but not limited to, 14 CFR Parts 129, 91, and
36, and with all applicable U.S. Government requirements concerning
security, including, but not limited to, 49 CFR Part 1546 or 1550, as
applicable.  To assure compliance with all applicable U.S. Government
requirements concerning security, the holder shall, before commencing
any new service (including charter flights) from a foreign airport that
would be the holder’s last point of departure for the United States,
contact its International Principal Security Inspector (IPSI) to advise
the IPSI of its plans and to find out whether the Transportation
Security Administration has determined that security is adequate to
allow such airport(s) to be served;

(3)  Comply with the requirements for minimum insurance coverage
contained in 14 CFR Part 205, and, prior to the commencement of any
operations under this authority, file evidence of such coverage, in the
form of a completed OST Form 6411, with the Federal Aviation
Administration’s Program Management Branch (AFS-260), Flight Standards
Service (any changes to, or termination of, insurance also shall be
filed with that office);

(4)  Not operate aircraft under this authority unless it complies with
operational safety requirements at least equivalent to Annex 6 of the
Chicago Convention;

(5)  Conform to the airworthiness and airman competency requirements of
its Government for international air services;

(6)  Except as specifically exempted or otherwise provided for in a
Department Order, comply with the requirements of 14 CFR Part 203,
concerning waiver of Warsaw Convention liability limits and defenses;

(7)  Agree that operations under this authority constitute a waiver of
sovereign immunity, for the purposes of 28 U.S.C. 1605(a), but only with
respect to those actions or proceedings instituted against it in any
court or other tribunal in the United States that are: (a)  based on its
operations in international air transportation that, according to the
contract of carriage, include a point in the United States as a point of
origin, point of destination, or agreed stopping place, or for which the
contract of carriage was purchased in the United States; or (b)  based
on a claim under any international agreement or treaty cognizable in any
court or other tribunal of the United States.  In this condition, the
term "international air transportation" means "international
transportation" as defined by the Warsaw Convention, except that all
States shall be considered to be High Contracting Parties for the
purpose of this definition;

(8)  Except as specifically authorized by the Department, originate or
terminate all flights to/from the United States in its homeland;

(9)  Comply with the requirements of 14 CFR Part 217, concerning the
reporting of scheduled, nonscheduled, and charter data;

(10) If charter operations are authorized, except as otherwise provided
in the applicable aviation agreement, comply with the Department's rules
governing charters (including 14 CFR Parts 212 and 380); and

(11) Comply with such other reasonable terms, conditions, and
limitations required by the public interest as may be prescribed by the
Department, with all applicable orders or regulations of other U.S.
agencies and courts, and with all applicable laws of the United States.

This authority shall not be effective during any period when the holder
is not in compliance with the conditions imposed above.  Moreover, this
authority cannot be sold or otherwise transferred without explicit
Department approval under Title 49 of the U.S. Code.

										Attachment B

U.S. Carrier Exemption Conditions

In the conduct of the operations authorized, the U.S. carrier
applicant(s) shall:

(1)  Hold at all times effective operating authority from the government
of each country served;

(2)  Comply with applicable requirements concerning oversales contained
in 14 CFR 250 (for scheduled operations, if authorized);

(3)  Comply with the requirements for reporting data contained in 14 CFR
241;

(4)  Comply with requirements for minimum insurance coverage, and for
certifying that coverage to the Department, contained in 14 CFR 205;

(5)  Except as specifically exempted or otherwise provided for in a
Department Order, comply with the requirements of 14 CFR 203, concerning
waiver of Warsaw Convention liability limits and defenses;

(6)  Comply with all applicable requirements of the Federal Aviation
Administration and with all applicable U.S. Government requirements
concerning security, including, but not limited to, 49 CFR Part 1544.
To assure compliance with all applicable U.S. Government requirements
concerning security, the holder shall, before commencing any new service
(including charter flights) to or from a foreign airport, contact its
International Principal Security Inspector (IPSI) to advise the IPSI of
its plans and to find out whether the Transportation Security
Administration has determined that security is adequate to allow such
airport(s) to be served; and

(7)  Comply with such other reasonable terms, conditions, and
limitations required by the public interest as may be prescribed by the
Department of Transportation, with all applicable orders and regulations
of other U.S. agencies and courts, and with all applicable laws of the
United States.

The authority granted shall be effective only during the period when the
holder is in compliance with the conditions imposed above.

  Caribbean Star’s application was accompanied by a motion under Rule
12 (14 CFR § 302.12) to withhold certain financial information from
public disclosure.  In support of its motion, Caribbean Star states that
it is a privately held Antiguan company and, as such, is not required by
its government to disclose such information.  Moreover, Caribbean Star
states that the Government of Antigua allows U.S. carriers to file
financial statements in connection with applications for Antiguan
authority on a confidential basis.  Caribbean Star states that
disclosure of such information would adversely affect Caribbean Star’s
competitive interest vis a vis its commercial competitors and is not
required by the public interest.  Because of the commercially sensitive
nature of the information, we have determined that the documents fall
within the Freedom of Information Act exemption for proprietary
information and would adversely affect the competitive position of
Caribbean Star under 49 U.S.C. § 40115, we therefore grant its motion.

 Mr. Stanford is also the sole owner of Caribbean Sun through his
ownership of Caribbean Sun Airlines Holdings, Inc., a Delaware
corporation.

  Antigua is currently a Category 2 country under the FAA’s
International Aviation Safety Assessment Program (IASA).

  We expect this notification to be received within 10 days of such
noneffectiveness or of such decision.

05/2004


[Federal Register: October 11, 2006 (Volume 71, Number 196)]
[Notices]
[Page 59765]
[DOCID:fr11oc06-67]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Docket No. RP06-621-000]

Transcontinental Gas Pipe Line Corporation; Notice of Proposed
Changes in FERC Gas Tariff

October 3, 2006.
    Take notice that on September 29, 2006, Transcontinental Gas Pipe
Line Corporation (Transco) tendered for filing as part of its FERC Gas
Tariff, Third Revised Volume No. 1, Sixth Revised Sheet No. 282, Fourth
Revised Sheet No. 293, and Original Sheet No. 293A to become effective
November 1, 2006.
    Any person desiring to intervene or to protest this filing 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). 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. Any person wishing to become a party must file a notice of
intervention or motion to intervene, as appropriate. Such notices,
motions, or protests must be filed in accordance with the provisions of
Sec.  154.210 of the Commission's regulations (18 CFR 154.210). Anyone
filing an intervention or protest must serve a copy of that document on
the Applicant. Anyone filing an intervention or protest on or before
the intervention or protest date need not serve motions to intervene or
protests on persons other than the Applicant.
    The Commission encourages electronic submission of 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 14 copies of the protest or intervention to the Federal
Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street, NE., Washington, DC
20426.
    This filing is accessible online at http://www.ferc.gov, using the

``eLibrary'' link and is 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>.

Magalie R. Salas,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. E6-16778 Filed 10-10-06; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register: November 12, 2009 (Volume 74, Number 217)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Page 58202-58204]
[DOCID:fr12no09-5]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 97

[Docket No. 30694; Amdt. No 3346]

Standard Instrument Approach Procedures, and Takeoff Minimums and
Obstacle Departure Procedures; Miscellaneous Amendments

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Final Rule.

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

SUMMARY: This establishes, amends, suspends, or revokes Standard
Instrument Approach Procedures (SIAPs) and associated Takeoff Minimums
and Obstacle Departure Procedures for operations at certain airports.
These regulatory actions are needed because of the adoption of new or
revised criteria, or because of changes occurring in the National
Airspace System, such as the commissioning of new navigational
facilities, adding new obstacles, or changing air traffic requirements.
These changes are designed to provide safe and efficient use of the
navigable airspace and to promote safe flight operations under
instrument flight rules at the affected airports.

DATES: This rule is effective November 12, 2009. The compliance date
for each SIAP, associated Takeoff Minimums, and ODP is specified in the
amendatory provisions.
    The incorporation by reference of certain publications listed in
the regulations is approved by the Director of the Federal Register as
of November 12, 2009.

ADDRESSES: Availability of matters incorporated by reference in the
amendment is as follows:
    For Examination--
    1. FAA Rules Docket, FAA Headquarters Building, 800 Independence
Avenue, SW., Washington, DC 20591;
    2. The FAA Regional Office of the region in which the affected
airport is located;
    3. The National Flight Procedures Office, 6500 South MacArthur
Blvd., Oklahoma City, OK 73169 or,
    4. The National Archives and Records Administration (NARA). For
information on the availability of this material at NARA, call 202-741-
6030, or go to: http://www.archives.gov/federal_register/code_of_
federal_regulations/ibr_locations.html.
    Availability--All SIAPs and Takeoff Minimums and ODPs are available
online free of charge. Visit http://www.nfdc.faa.gov to register.
Additionally, individual SIAP and Takeoff Minimums and ODP copies may
be obtained from:
    1. FAA Public Inquiry Center (APA-200), FAA Headquarters Building,
800 Independence Avenue, SW., Washington, DC 20591; or
    2. The FAA Regional Office of the region in which the affected
airport is located.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Harry J. Hodges, Flight Procedure
Standards Branch (AFS-420), Flight Technologies and Programs Divisions,
Flight Standards Service, Federal Aviation Administration, Mike
Monroney Aeronautical Center, 6500 South MacArthur Blvd. Oklahoma City,
OK. 73169 (Mail Address: P.O. Box 25082, Oklahoma City, OK 73125)
Telephone:<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This rule amends Title 14 of the Code of
Federal Regulations, Part 97 (14 CFR part 97), by establishing,
amending, suspending, or revoking SIAPS, Takeoff Minimums and/or ODPS.
The complete regulators description of each SIAP and its associated
Takeoff Minimums or ODP for an identified airport is listed on FAA form
documents which are incorporated by reference in this amendment under 5
U.S.C. 552(a), 1 CFR part 51, and 14 CFR part 97.20. The applicable FAA
Forms are FAA Forms 8260-3, 8260-4, 8260-5, 8260-15A, and 8260-15B when
required by an entry on 8260-15A.
    The large number of SIAPs, Takeoff Minimums and ODPs, in addition
to their complex nature and the need for a special format make
publication in the Federal Register expensive and impractical.
Furthermore, airmen do not use the regulatory text of the SIAPs,
Takeoff Minimums or ODPs, but instead refer to their depiction on
charts printed by publishers of aeronautical materials. The advantages
of incorporation by reference are realized and publication of the
complete description of ach SIAP, Takeoff Minimums and ODP listed on
FAA forms is unnecessary. This amendment provides the affected CFR

sections and specifies the types of SIAPs and the effective dates of
the, associated Takeoff Minimums and ODPs. This amendment also
identifies the airport and its location, the procedure, and the
amendment number.

The Rule

    This amendment to 14 CFR part 97 is effective upon publication of
each separate SIAP, Takeoff Minimums and ODP as contained in the
transmittal. Some SIAP and Takeoff Minimums and textual ODP amendments
may have been issued previously by the FAA in a Flight Data Center
(FDC) Notice to Airmen (NOTAM) as an emergency action of immediate
flight safety relating directly to published aeronautical charts. The
circumstances which created the need for some SIAP and Takeoff Minimums
and ODP amendments may require making them effective in less than 30
days. For the remaining SIAPS and Takeoff Minimums and ODPS, an
effective date at least 30 days after publication is provided.
    Further, the SIAPs and Takeoff Minimums and ODPS contained in this
amendment are based on the criteria contained in the U.S. Standard for
Terminal Instrument Procedures (TERPS). In developing these SIAPS and
Takeoff Minimums and ODPs, the TERPS criteria were applied to the
conditions existing or anticipated at the affected airports. Because of
the close and immediate relationship between these SIAPs, Takeoff
Minimums and ODPs, and safety in air commerce, I find that notice and
public procedures before adopting these SIAPS, Takeoff Minimums and
ODPs are impracticable and contrary to the public interest and, where
applicable, that good cause exists for making some SIAPs effective in
less than 30 days.

Conclusion

    The FAA has determined that this regulation only involves an
established body of technical regulations for which frequent and
routine amendments are necessary to keep them operationally current.
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. For the same reason, the FAA
certifies that this amendment will not have a significant economic
impact on a substantial number of small entities under the criteria of
the Regulatory Flexibility Act.

List of Subjects in 14 CFR part 97:

    Air Traffic Control, Airports, Incorporation by reference, and
Navigation (Air).

John M. Allen,
Director, Flight Standards Service.

Adoption of the Amendment

0
Accordingly, pursuant to the authority delegated to me, Title 14, Code
of Federal Regulations, Part 97 (14 CFR part 97) is amended by
establishing, amending, suspending, or revoking Standard Instrument
Approach Procedures and/or Takeoff Minimums and/or Obstacle Departure
Procedures effective at 0902 UTC on the dates specified, as follows:

PART 97--STANDARD INSTRUMENT APPROACH PROCEDURES

0
1. The authority citation for part 97 continues to read as follows:

    Authority: 49 U.S.C. 106(g), 40103, 40106, 40113, 40114, 40120,
44502, 44514, 44701, 44719, 44721-44722.

0
2. Part 97 is amended to read as follows:

Effective 17 Dec 2009

Galena, AK, Edward G. Pitka, Sr, ILS OR LOC/DME RWY 25, Amdt 1A,
CANCELLED
Hope, AR, Hope Muni, NDB RWY 16, Amdt 5
Hope, AR, Hope Muni, Takeoff Minimums and Obstacle DP, Orig
Twentynine Palms, CA, Twentynine Palms, RNAV (GPS) RWY 26, Amdt 1A
Savannah, GA, Savannah/Hilton Head Intl, VOR/DME OR TACAN RWY 1,
Orig-C
Fort Dodge, IA, Fort Dodge Rgnl, ILS OR LOC RWY 6, Amdt 7
Fort Dodge, IA, Fort Dodge Rgnl, RNAV (GPS) RWY 6, Amdt 1
Fort Dodge, IA, Fort Dodge Rgnl, RNAV (GPS) RWY 12, Amdt 1
Fort Dodge, IA, Fort Dodge Rgnl, RNAV (GPS) RWY 24, Amdt 1
Fort Dodge, IA, Fort Dodge Rgnl, RNAV (GPG) RWY 30, Amdt 1
Fort Dodge, IA, Fort Dodge Rgnl, Takeoff and Minimum Obstacle DP,
Amdt 1
Red Oak, IA, Red Oak Muni, GPS RWY 5, Orig, CANCELLED
Red Oak, IA, Red Oak Muni, GPS RWY 17, Orig, CANCELLED
Red Oak, IA, Red Oak Muni, RNAV (GPS) RWY 5, Orig
Red Oak, IA, Red Oak Muni, RNAV (GPS) RWY 17, Orig
Mc Comb, MS, Mc Comb/Pike County/John E Lewis Field, ILS OR LOC RWY
15, Amdt 1
Havre, MT, Havre City-County, RNAV (GPS) RWY 8, Orig
Havre, MT, Havre City-County, RNAV (GPS) RWY 26, Orig
Havre, MT, Havre City-County, VOR RWY 8, Amdt 7
Havre, MT, Havre City-County, VOR RWY 26, Amdt 9
Havre, MT, Havre City-County, Takeoff Minimums and Obstacle DP, Amdt
3
Hudson, NY, Columbia County, GPS RWY 3, Amdt 1A, CANCELLED
Hudson, NY, Columbia County, GPS RWY 21, Orig-B, CANCELLED
Hudson, NY, Columbia County, NDB-A, Amdt 4
Hudson, NY, Columbia County, RNAV (GPS) RWY 3, Orig
Hudson, NY, Columbia County, RNAV (GPS) RWY 21, Orig
Ogdensburg, NY, Ogdensburg Intl, Takeoff Minimums and Obstacle DP,
Amdt 1
Oklahoma City, OK, Clarence E Paige Muni, RNAV (GPS) RWY 17R, Amdt 2
Oklahoma City, OK, Clarence E Paige Muni, RNAV (GPS) RWY 35L Amdt 2
Oklahoma City, OK, Clarence E Paige Muni, VOR-B, Amdt 3
Lancaster, PA, Lancaster, ILS OR LOC RWY 8, Amdt 1
Lancaster, PA, Lancaster, RNAV (GPS) RWY 8, Amdt 2
Lancaster, PA, Lancaster, Takeoff Minimums and Obstacle DP, Amdt 1
Lancaster, PA, Lancaster, VOR RWY 8, Amdt 21
Lancaster, PA, Lancaster, VOR/DME RWY 8, Amdt 6
Selinsgrove, PA, Penn Valley, RNAV (GPS)-B, Orig-A, CANCELLED
Selinsgrove, PA, Penn Valley, RNAV (GPS) RWY 17, Orig
Selinsgrove, PA, Penn Valley, Takeoff Minimums and Obstacle DP, Amdt
3
Selinsgrove, PA, Penn Valley, VOR-A, Amdt 7
Lancaster, SC, Lancaster County-McWhirter Field, NDB RWY 24, Amdt 5
Lancaster, SC, Lancaster County-McWhirter Field, RNAV (GPS) RWY 6,
Amdt 1
Lancaster, SC, Lancaster County-McWhirter Field, RNAV (GPS) RWY 24,
Amdt 1
Lancaster, SC, Lancaster County-McWhirter Field, Takeoff Minimums
and Obstacle DP, Amdt 1
Lancaster, SC, Lancaster County-McWhirter Field, VOR/DME-A, Amdt 1
Pickens, SC, Pickens County, Takeoff Minimums and Obstacle DP, Orig
Beaumont/Port Arthur, TX, Southeast Texas Rgnl, GPS RWY 12, Orig-A,
CANCELLED
Beaumont/Port Arthur, TX, Southeast Texas Rgnl, GPS RWY 16, Orig-A,
CANCELLED
Beaumont/Port Arthur, TX, Southeast Texas Rgnl, GPS RWY 30, Orig,
CANCELLED
Beaumont/Port Arthur, TX, Southeast Texas Rgnl, GPS RWY 34, Orig-C,
CANCELLED
Beaumont/Port Arthur, TX, Southeast Texas Rgnl, RNAV (GPS) RWY 12,
Orig
Beaumont/Port Arthur, TX, Southeast Texas Rgnl, RNAV (GPS) RWY 16,
Orig
Beaumont/Port Arthur, TX, Southeast Texas Rgnl, RNAV (GPS) RWY 30,
Orig
Beaumont/Port Arthur, TX, Southeast Texas Rgnl, RNAV (GPS) RWY 34,
Orig
Beaumont/Port Arthur, TX, Southeast Texas Rgnl, RADAR-1, Amdt 8,
CANCELLED
Fort Hood/Killeen, TX, Robert Gray AAF, COPTER VOR RWY 33, Amdt 2
Fort Hood/Killeen, TX, Robert Gray AAF, ILS OR LOC RWY 15, Amdt 6
Fort Hood/Killeen, TX, Robert Gray AAF, ILS OR LOC RWY 33, Amdt 1
Fort Hood/Killeen, TX, Robert Gray AAF, NDB RWY 15, Amdt 6

Fort Hood/Killeen, TX, Robert Gray AAF, RNAV (GPS) RWY 15, Amdt 1
Fort Hood/Killeen, TX, Robert Gray AAF, RNAV (GPS) RWY 33, Amdt 1
Fort Hood/Killeen, TX, Robert Gray AAF, VOR-A, Amdt 2
Fort Hood/Killeen, TX, Robert Gray AAF, VOR/DME RWY 15, Amdt 3
Georgetown, TX, Georgetown Muni, GPS RWY 11, Orig, CANCELLED
Georgetown, TX, Georgetown Muni, GPS RWY 18, Orig, CANCELLED
Georgetown, TX, Georgetown Muni, GPS RWY 29, Orig, CANCELLED
Georgetown, TX, Georgetown Muni, GPS RWY 36, Orig, CANCELLED
Georgetown, TX, Georgetown Muni, RNAV (GPS) RWY 11, Orig
Georgetown, TX, Georgetown Muni, RNAV (GPS) RWY 18, Orig
Georgetown, TX, Georgetown Muni, RNAV (GPS) RWY 29, Orig
Georgetown, TX, Georgetown Muni, RNAV (GPS) RWY 36, Orig
Georgetown, TX, Georgetown Muni, Takeoff Minimums and Obstacle DP,
Orig
Killeen, TX, Skylark Field, ILS OR LOC RWY 1, Amdt 3
Killeen, TX, Skylark Field, RNAV (GPS) RWY 1, Orig
Killeen, TX, Skylark Field, VOR-A, Amdt 4
Lampasas, TX, Lampasas, RNAV (GPS) RWY 34, Orig
Lampasas, TX, Lampasas, VOR-A, Amdt 4
Lampasas, TX, Lampasas, Takeoff Minimums and Obstacle DP, Orig
Llano, TX, Llano Muni, GPS RWY 17, Amdt 1, CANCELLED
Llano, TX, Llano Muni, GPS RWY 35, Amdt 1A, CANCELLED
Llano, TX, Llano Muni, RNAV (GPS) RWY 17, Orig
Llano, TX, Llano Muni, RNAV (GPS) RWY 35, Orig
Llano, TX, Llano Muni, Takeoff Minimums and Obstacle DP, Orig
Odessa, TX, Odessa-Schlemeyer Field, Takeoff Minimums and Obstacle
DP, Amdt 2
Renton, WA, Renton Muni, NDB RWY 16, Amdt 6
Renton, WA, Renton Muni, RNAV (GPS) Y RWY 16, Amdt 3
Renton, WA, Renton Muni, RNAV (GPS) Z RWY 16, Amdt 1
Renton, WA, Renton Muni, Takeoff Minimums and Obstacle DP, Amdt 7
Wenatchee, WA, Pangborn Memorial, VOR/DME-A, Amdt 8
Wenatchee, WA, Pangborn Memorial, VOR/DME-C, Amdt 4
Wenatchee, WA, Pangborn Memorial, VOR OR GPS-B, Amdt 4, CANCELLED
Sheboygan, WI, Sheboygan County Memorial, Takeoff Minimums and
Obstacle DP, Amdt 1
Pinedale, WY, Pinedale/Ralph Wenz Field, RNAV (GPS) RWY 11, Amdt 1
Pinedale, WY, Pinedale/Ralph Wenz Field, RNAV (GPS) RWY 29, Amdt 1

[FR Doc. E9-26949 Filed 11-10-09; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


[Federal Register Volume 86, Number 209 (Tuesday, November 2, 2021)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 60418-60421]
[FR Doc No: 2021-23711]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 71

[Docket No. FAA-2021-0821; Airspace Docket No. 21-ASW-1]
RIN 2120-AA66

Proposed Amendment, Establishment, and Revocation of Multiple Air
Traffic Service (ATS) Routes in the Vicinity of Borger, TX

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM).

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

SUMMARY: This action proposes to amend Jet Route J-8 and VHF
Omnidirectional Range (VOR) Federal airway V-272; establish Area
Navigation (RNAV) route T-420; and remove Jet Route J-142 and VOR
Federal airways V-304 and V-390. The FAA is proposing this action due
to the planned decommissioning of the VOR portion of the Borger, TX,
VOR/Tactical Air Navigation (VORTAC) navigational aid

(NAVAID). The Borger VOR is being decommissioned in support of the
FAA's VOR Minimum Operational Network (MON) program.

DATES: Comments must be received on or before December 17, 2021.

ADDRESSES: Send comments on this proposal to the U.S. Department of
Transportation, Docket Operations, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE, West
Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140, Washington, DC 20590; telephone:
1(800) 647-5527, or<PHONE_NUMBER>. You must identify FAA Docket No.
FAA-2021-0821; Airspace Docket No. 21-ASW-1 at the beginning of your
comments. You may also submit comments through the internet at https://www.regulations.gov.
    FAA Order JO 7400.11F, Airspace Designations and Reporting Points,
and subsequent amendments can be viewed online at https://www.faa.gov/air_traffic/publications/. For further information, you can contact the
Rules and Regulations Group, Federal Aviation Administration, 800
Independence Avenue SW, Washington, DC 20591; telephone: (202) 267-
8783. FAA Order JO 7400.11F is also available for inspection at the
National Archives and Records Administration (NARA). For information on
the availability of FAA Order JO 7400.11F at NARA, email:
[email protected] or go to https://www.archives.gov/federal-register/cfr/ibr-locations.html.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Colby Abbott, Rules and Regulations
Group, Office of Policy, Federal Aviation Administration, 800
Independence Avenue SW, Washington, DC 20591; telephone: (202) 267-
8783.

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. 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 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
the airspace necessary to ensure the safety of aircraft and the
efficient use of airspace. This regulation is within the scope of that
authority as it would modify the National Airspace System (NAS) as
necessary to preserve the safe and efficient flow of air traffic.

Comments Invited

    Interested parties are invited to participate in this proposed
rulemaking 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-2021-0821; Airspace Docket No. 21-ASW-1) and be submitted in
triplicate to the Docket Management Facility (see the ADDRESSES section
for address and phone number). You may also submit comments through the
internet at https://www.regulations.gov.
    Commenters 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 FAA Docket No. FAA-2021-0821; Airspace Docket No. 21-ASW-1.'' The
postcard will be date/time stamped and returned to the commenter.
    All communications received on or before the specified comment
closing date will be considered before taking action on the proposed
rule. The proposal contained in this action may be changed in light of
comments received. All comments submitted will be available for
examination in the public docket both before and after the comment
closing date. 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 through the
internet at https://www.regulations.gov. Recently published rulemaking
documents can also be accessed through the FAA's web page at https://www.faa.gov/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 during normal
business hours at the office of the Operations Support Group, Central
Service Center, Federal Aviation Administration, 10101 Hillwood
Parkway, Fort Worth, TX 76177.

Availability and Summary of Documents for Incorporation by Reference

    This document proposes to amend FAA Order JO 7400.11F, Airspace
Designations and Reporting Points, dated August 10, 2021, and effective
September 15, 2021. FAA Order JO 7400.11F is publicly available as
listed in the ADDRESSES section of this document. FAA Order JO 7400.11F
lists Class A, B, C, D, and E airspace areas, air traffic service
routes, and reporting points.

Background

    The FAA is planning to decommission the Borger, TX, VOR in July
2022. The Borger VOR was one of the candidate VORs identified for
discontinuance by the FAA's VOR MON program and listed in the Final
policy statement notice, ``Provision of Navigation Services for the
Next Generation Air Transportation System (NextGen) Transition to
Performance-Based Navigation (PBN) (Plan for Establishing a VOR Minimum
Operational Network),'' published in the Federal Register of July 26,
2016 (81 FR 48694), Docket No. FAA-2011-1082.
    Although the VOR portion of the Borger VORTAC is planned for
decommissioning, the co-located Tactical Air Navigation (TACAN) portion
of the NAVAID, which includes Distance Measuring Equipment (DME)
service, is being retained to support NextGen PBN flight procedure
requirements.
    The air traffic service (ATS) routes effected by the Borger VOR
decommissioning are Jet Routes J-8 and J-142, and VOR Federal airways
V-272, V-304, and V-390. With the planned decommissioning of the Borger
VOR, the remaining ground-based NAVAID coverage in the area is
insufficient to enable the continuity of the affected ATS routes. As
such, proposed modification to J-8 would result in a gap in the route
and to V-272 would result in the airway being shortened, as well as the
proposed revocation of J-142, V-304, and V-390 in their entirety. To
overcome the proposed modifications and revocations to the affected ATS
routes, instrument flight rules (IFR) traffic could use portions of
adjacent ATS routes, including J-6, J-14, J-58, J-76, J-78, and J-98 in
the high altitude enroute structure and V-12, V-47, V-81, V-190, V-280,
and V-402 in the low altitude enroute structure, or receive air traffic
control (ATC) radar

vectors to fly around or through the affected area. Additionally, IFR
pilots equipped with RNAV capabilities could also navigate point to
point using the existing NAVAIDs and fixes that would remain in place
to support continued operations though the affected area. Visual flight
rules (VFR) pilots who elect to navigate via the affected ATS routes
could also take advantage of the adjacent ATS routes or ATC services
listed previously.
    Further, the FAA proposes to establish RNAV route T-420 between the
Dalhart, TX, VORTAC and Will Rogers, OK, VORTAC. The new T-route would,
in part, mitigate the proposed removal of the V-272 airway segment
affected by the planned Borger VOR decommissioning, reduce air traffic
control (ATC) sector workload and complexity, and reduce pilot-to-
controller communication. The new route would also increase NAS
capacity in the route's vicinity and assist ATC when non-radar
procedures are required due to frequent outages of the Amarillo
Approach Control radar. Finally, the new T-route would provide airspace
users equipped with RNAV an ATS route between the Dalhart, TX, area
eastward to the Oklahoma City, OK, area and support the FAA's NextGen
efforts to modernize the NAS navigation system from a ground-based
system to a satellite-based system.

The Proposal

    The FAA is proposing an amendment to 14 CFR part 71 to amend Jet
Route J-8 and VOR Federal airway V-272; establish RNAV route T-420; and
remove Jet Route J-142 and VOR Federal airways V-304 and V-390 due to
the planned decommissioning of the Borger, TX, VOR. The proposed ATS
route actions are described below.
    J-8: J-8 currently extends between the Needles, CA, VORTAC and the
Casanova, VA, VORTAC. The FAA proposes to remove the route segment
between the Fort Union, NM, VORTAC and the Kingfisher, OK, VORTAC.
Additional changes to other portions of the route have been proposed in
a separate NPRM. The unaffected portions of the existing airway would
remain as charted.
    J-142: J-142 currently extends between the Socorro, NM, VORTAC and
the Borger, TX, VORTAC. The FAA proposes to remove the route segment
between the Anton Chico, NM, VORTAC and Borger VORTAC due to the
planned decommissioning of the Borger VOR. Additionally, the FAA
proposes to remove the remaining route segment between the Socorro
VORTAC and the Anton Chico VORTAC since the distance between the
VORTACs is within NAVAID service volumes and pilots could file direct.
As a result, the FAA proposes to remove J-142 in its entirety.
    V-272: V-272 currently extends between the Dalhart, TX, VORTAC and
the Will Rogers, OK, VORTAC. The FAA proposes to remove the airway
segment between the Dalhart VORTAC and the Burns Flat, OK, VORTAC. The
unaffected portions of the existing airway would remain as charted.
    V-304: V-304 currently extends between the Panhandle, TX, VORTAC
and the Lamar, CO, VOR/Distance Measuring Equipment (VOR/DME). The FAA
proposes to remove the airway segment between the Panhandle VORTAC and
Liberal, KS, VORTAC due to the planned decommissioning of the Borger
VOR. Additionally, the FAA proposes to remove the remaining airway
segment between the Liberal VORTAC and the Lamar VOR/DME since it
overlays V-210 between the two NAVAIDs and will remain available for
use by NAS users. As a result, the FAA proposes to remove V-304 in its
entirety.
    V-390: V-390 currently extends between the Tucumcari, NM, VORTAC
and the Mitbee, OK, VORTAC. The FAA proposes to remove the airway in
its entirety.
    T-420: T-420 is a proposed new route that would extend between the
Dalhart, TX, VORTAC and the Will Rogers, OK, VORTAC. This T-route would
mitigate the proposed removal of the V-272 airway segment between the
Dalhart, TX, VORTAC and the Burns Flat, OK, VORTAC (noted above), as
well as provide RNAV routing capability from the Dalhart, TX, area,
eastward to the Oklahoma City, OK, area.
    All NAVAID radials listed in the Jet Route description below are
unchanged and stated in True degrees.
    Jet Routes are published in paragraph 2004, VOR Federal airways are
published in paragraph 6010(a), and RNAV T-routes are published in
paragraph 6011 of FAA Order JO 7400.11F, dated August 10, 2021, and
effective September 15, 2021, which is incorporated by reference in 14
CFR 71.1. The ATS routes listed in this document would be published
subsequently in FAA Order JO 7400.11.
    FAA Order JO 7400.11, Airspace Designations and Reporting Points,
is published yearly and effective on September 15.

Regulatory Notices and Analyses

    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
Department of Transportation (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, will not have a significant economic impact on a
substantial number of small entities under the criteria of the
Regulatory Flexibility Act.

Environmental Review

    This proposal will be subject to an environmental analysis in
accordance with FAA Order 1050.1F, ``Environmental Impacts: Policies
and Procedures,'' prior to any FAA final regulatory action.

List 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(f), 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 FAA Order JO
7400.11F, Airspace Designations and Reporting Points, dated August 10,
2021, and effective September 15, 2021, is amended as follows:

Paragraph 2004 Jet Routes.

* * * * *

J-8 [Amended]

    From Needles, CA; Flagstaff, AZ; Gallup, NM; to Fort Union, NM.
From Kingfisher, OK; Springfield, MO; St Louis, MO; Louisville, KY;
Charleston, WV; INT Charleston 092[deg] and Casanova, VA, 253[deg]
radials; to Casanova.
* * * * *

J-142 [Removed]

* * * * *

Paragraph 6010(a) Domestic VOR Federal Airways.

* * * * *

V-272 [Amended]

    From Burns Flat, OK; to Will Rogers, OK.
* * * * *

V-304 [Removed]

* * * * *

V-390 [Removed]

* * * * *

Paragraph 6011 United States Area Navigation Routes.

* * * * *

T-420 Dalhart, TX (DHT) to Will Rogers, OK (IRW) [New]

Dalhart, TX (DHT)                                      VORTAC                      (Lat. 36[deg]05'29.24'' N, long. 102[deg]32'40.71'' W)
Burns Flat, OK (BFV)                                   VORTAC                      (Lat. 35[deg]14'13.00'' N, long. 099[deg]12'22.20'' W)
Will Rogers, OK (IRW)                                  VORTAC                      (Lat. 35[deg]21'30.95'' N, long. 097[deg]36'33.22'' W)

    Issued in Washington, DC, on October 26, 2021.
Michael R. Beckles,
Acting Manager, Rules and Regulations Group.
[FR Doc. 2021-23711 Filed 11-1-21; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


[Federal Register: September 17, 2007 (Volume 72, Number 179)]
[Notices]
[Page 52870]
[DOCID:fr17se07-46]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Docket No. ER07-1138-000]

Jeffers Wind 20, LLC; Notice of Issuance of Order

September 10, 2007.
    Jeffers Wind 20, LLC (Jeffers Wind) filed an application for
market-based rate authority, with an accompanying rate schedule. The
proposed market-based rate schedule provides for the sale of energy and
capacity at market-based rates. Jeffers Wind also requested waivers of
various Commission regulations. In particular, Jeffers Wind requested
that the Commission grant blanket approval under 18 CFR part 34 of all
future issuances of securities and assumptions of liability by Jeffers
Wind.
    On September 7, 2007, pursuant to delegated authority, the
Director, Division of Tariffs and Market Development--West, granted the
requests for blanket approval under Part 34 (Director's Order). The
Director's Order also stated that the Commission would publish a
separate notice in the Federal Register establishing a period of time
for the filing of protests. Accordingly, any person desiring to be
heard concerning the blanket approvals of issuances of securities or
assumptions of liability by Jeffers Wind, should file a protest with
the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street, NE.,
Washington, DC 20426, in accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of the
Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedure. 18 CFR 385.211, 385.214
(2004).
    Notice is hereby given that the deadline for filing protests is
October 9, 2007.
    Absent a request to be heard in opposition to such blanket
approvals by the deadline above, Jeffers Wind is authorized to issue
securities and assume obligations or liabilities as a guarantor,
indorser, surety, or otherwise in respect of any security of another
person; provided that such issuance or assumption is for some lawful
object within the corporate purposes of Jeffers Wind, compatible with
the public interest, and is reasonably necessary or appropriate for
such purposes.
    The Commission reserves the right to require a further showing that
neither public nor private interests will be adversely affected by
continued approvals of Jeffers Wind's issuance of securities or
assumptions of liability.
    Copies of the full text of the Director's Order are available from
the Commission's Public Reference Room, 888 First Street, NE.,
Washington, DC 20426. The Order may also be viewed on the Commission's
Web site at http://www.ferc.gov, using the eLibrary link. Enter the

docket number excluding the last three digits in the docket number
filed to access the document. Comments, protests, and interventions may
be filed electronically via the Internet in lieu of paper. See, 18 CFR
385.2001(a)(1)(iii) and the instructions on the Commission's Web site
under the ``e-Filing'' link. The Commission strongly encourages
electronic filings.

Kimberly D. Bose,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. E7-18211 Filed 9-14-07; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 81, Number 178 (Wednesday, September 14, 2016)]
[Notices]
[Pages 63175-63176]
[FR Doc No: 2016-22043]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

Combined Notice of Filings

    Take notice that the Commission has received the following Natural
Gas Pipeline Rate and Refund Report filings:

Filings Instituting Proceedings

    Docket Numbers: RP11-2473-000.
    Applicants: Gulf South Pipeline Company, LP.
    Description: Report Filing: 2015 Cash Pool Filing.
    Filed Date: 9/1/16.
    Accession Number: 20160901-5082.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 9/13/16.

    Docket Numbers: RP11-2474-000.
    Applicants: Gulf Crossing Pipeline Company LLC.
    Description: Report Filing: 2015 Cash Pool Filing.
    Filed Date: 9/1/16.
    Accession Number: 20160901-5078.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 9/13/16.

    Docket Numbers: RP16-1222-000.
    Applicants: Dominion Cove Point LNG, LP.
    Description: Compliance filing DCP--2016 Revenue Crediting Report.
    Filed Date: 9/1/16.
    Accession Number: 20160901-5070.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 9/13/16.

    Docket Numbers: RP16-1223-000.
    Applicants: Enable Gas Transmission, LLC.
    Description: Sec.  4(d) Rate Filing: Negotiated Rate Filing--
September 2016 CERC 1019 LER 8744 to be effective 9/1/2016.
    Filed Date: 9/1/16.
    Accession Number: 20160901-5086.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 9/13/16.

    Docket Numbers: RP16-1224-000.
    Applicants: Cimarron River Pipeline, LLC.
    Description: Sec.  4(d) Rate Filing: Fuel Tracker 2016--Winter
Season Rates to be effective 11/1/2016.
    Filed Date: 9/1/16.
    Accession Number: 20160901-5133.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 9/13/16.

    Docket Numbers: RP16-1225-000.
    Applicants: Columbia Gulf Transmission, LLC.
    Description: Annual Cash-Out Report of Columbia Gulf Transmission,
LLC under RP16-1225.

    Filed Date: 9/1/16.
    Accession Number: 20160901-5138.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 9/13/16.

    Docket Numbers: RP16-1226-000.
    Applicants: ANR Pipeline Company.
    Description: Sec.  4(d) Rate Filing: Vectren Energy Amendment to be
effective 9/1/2016.
    Filed Date: 9/1/16.
    Accession Number: 20160901-5182.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 9/13/16.

    Docket Numbers: RP16-1227-000.
    Applicants: Natural Gas Pipeline Company of America.
    Description: Sec.  4(d) Rate Filing: Madill Gas Processing to be
effective 6/27/2016.
    Filed Date: 9/1/16.
    Accession Number: 20160901-5236.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 9/13/16.

    Docket Numbers: RP16-1228-000.
    Applicants: Trailblazer Pipeline Company LLC.
    Description: Sec.  4(d) Rate Filing: Order No. 587--Housekeeping to
be effective 9/1/2016.
    Filed Date: 9/2/16.
    Accession Number: 20160902-5160.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 9/14/16.

    Docket Numbers: RP16-1229-000.
    Applicants: Rockies Express Pipeline LLC.
    Description: Sec.  4(d) Rate Filing: Order No. 587-W, Housekeeping
Filing to be effective 9/1/2016.
    Filed Date: 9/2/16.
    Accession Number: 20160902-5161.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 9/14/16.

    Docket Numbers: RP16-1230-000.
    Applicants: Tallgrass Interstate Gas Transmission, L.
    Description: Sec.  4(d) Rate Filing: Order No. 587-W Housekeeping
Filing to be effective 9/1/2016.
    Filed Date: 9/2/16.
    Accession Number: 20160902-5238.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 9/14/16.

    Docket Numbers: RP16-1231-000.
    Applicants: Kern River Gas Transmission Company.
    Description: Sec.  4(d) Rate Filing: 2016 September Tenaska to be
effective 9/7/2016.
    Filed Date: 9/6/16.
    Accession Number: 20160906-5300.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 9/19/16.

    Docket Numbers: RP16-1232-000.
    Applicants: Columbia Gas Transmission, LLC.
    Description: Sec.  4(d) Rate Filing: Negotiated & Non-Conforming
Service Agmt--Eclipse to be effective 10/1/2016.
    Filed Date: 9/6/16.
    Accession Number: 20160906-5301.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 9/19/16.

    Any person desiring to intervene or protest in any of the above
proceedings must file in accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of the
Commission's Regulations (18 CFR 385.211 and Sec.  385.214) on or
before 5:00 p.m. Eastern time on the specified comment date. Protests
may be considered, but intervention is necessary to become a party to
the proceeding.

Filings in Existing Proceedings

    Docket Numbers: RP16-440-005.
    Applicants: ANR Pipeline Company.
    Description: Compliance filing Compliance to RP16-440-004 to be
effective 8/1/2016.
    Filed Date: 9/1/16.
    Accession Number: 20160901-5183.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 9/13/16.

    Any person desiring to protest in any of the above proceedings must
file in accordance with Rule 211 of the Commission's Regulations (18
CFR 385.211) on or before 5:00 p.m. Eastern time on the specified
comment date.
    The filings are accessible in the Commission's eLibrary system by
clicking on the links or querying the docket number.
    eFiling is encouraged. More detailed information relating to filing
requirements, interventions, protests, service, and qualifying
facilities filings can be found at: http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/efiling/filing-req.pdf. For other information, call<PHONE_NUMBER>
(toll free). For TTY, call<PHONE_NUMBER>.

    Dated: September 7, 2016.
Nathaniel J. Davis, Sr.,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2016-22043 Filed 9-13-16; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


INFORMATION COLLECTION REQUEST Marine Engine Manufacturers Production Line Testing Reporting and Recordkeeping Requirements ( OMB No. 2060 0323)

December 2000 Certification and Compliance Division Office of Transportation and Air Quality Office of Air and Radiation U. S. Environmental Protection Agency 2 SUPPORTING STATEMENT 1. IDENTIFICATION OF THE INFORMATION COLLECTION 1( a) TITLE Marine Engine Manufacturers' Production Line Testing Reporting and Recordkeeping Requirements 1( b) SHORT CHARACTERIZATION / ABSTRACT EPA uses the Marine Engine Manufacturers' Production Line Testing Program information collection and record keeping to monitor compliance with exhaust emission standards. Section 213( d) of the Clean Air Act as amended ( Act) authorizes the Marine Engine Manufacturers' Production Line Testing ( PLT) Program which is reviewed by the Engine Programs Group ( EPG), Certification and Compliance Division, Office of Transportation and Air Quality, Office of Air and Radiation.

The PLT program is an emission monitoring program for new production marine engines in which manufacturers are required to test engines as they leave the assembly line, without direct EPA oversight. The objective of the self audit program is that manufacturers and EPA can monitor, with reasonable statistical certainty, whether or not new engines are in compliance with the Act.

The manufacturers' PLT program is the main emission monitoring program for new marine engines. The Marine Engine Selective Enforcement Auditing Program is typically only employed if EPA determines that the results of the PLT program reveal noncompliance or when EPA determines that other evidence of suspected noncompliance by the manufacturer exists. SEAs are utilized as spot checks to enable EPA to evaluate testing practices used by the manufacturer, follow up on concerns reported to EPA and address configurations not covered by manufacturers in their PLT program, if any. In the first three years of implementing the marine emission standards and associated programs, EPA has relied on PLT data to monitor compliance and EPA not issued an SEA test order to any marine engine manufacturers.

This information collection requires manufacturers of marine engines to generate and submit to EPA periodic reports from their PLT programs. EPG collects this information and evaluates it to determine if production marine engines comply with the Act. The PLT information collected includes production information, records for test equipment, test data, and statistical analyses to determine compliance margins. 3 The results of the PLT program are used only by the Office of Transportation and Air Quality to verify compliance of production engines; however, the exhaust emission data generated during PLT programs becomes public information after the PLT program is concluded. The data and test facility information from the PLT program may be used by the EPG to help evaluate a manufacturer's future model year Applications for Certification, and PLT data will also used by the EPG to help target potential future engines for in use testing.

The information is collected by the EPG and stored in internal files and databases. Nonconfidential copies of reports from manufacturers listing PLT results are available to the public upon request, and will soon be available through the Internet.

Due to the flexibilities EPA offers small volume marine engine manufacturers ( i. e., exemptions from this program), approximately ten ( 10) marine spark ignition ( SI) engine manufacturers are subject to this program requirement.

The EPG estimates that the annual cost to industry of the Marine Manufacturers' Production Line Testing Program resulting from this information collection to be $ 3,568,865 and is divided between 10 manufacturers of spark ignition marine engines. This includes estimates for start up, capital and operating and maintenance costs.

2. NEED FOR AND USE OF THE COLLECTION 2( a) NEED/ AUTHORITY FOR THE COLLECTION This information collection is needed by EPA to determine whether engine manufacturers are producing engines that meet the emission requirements of the Act. For new marine engines, the EPA administers a two stage emission testing program that includes: pre production ( Certification) and required manufacturers' production line testing ( PLT).

The PLT program verifies that prototype designs used in certification have been successfully translated into mass produced engines. By detecting problems through the PLT program, while engines are still in production, noncompliance may be corrected before engines are introduced into commerce or may be corrected soon after production when engines are most easily located.

To ensure that marine engine manufacturers' new production marine engines conform with requirements of the Act and emission standards applicable for the model year in which the marine engines are assembled, the U. S. Environmental Protection Agency 4 ( EPA) is authorized to conduct emission testing of new production marine engines through the PLT program.

Section 213( d) of the Act authorizes EPA to subject nonroad ( including marine) engines to sections 206 and 208 of the Act. Section 206( b) of the Act authorizes EPA to execute the marine engine manufacturers' production line emission testing program. Section 208( a) of the Act requires manufacturers to establish and maintain records, make reports, perform tests, and provide information to EPA. Regulations at 40 CFR Part 91 include standards, test procedures as well as PLT requirements applicable to marine spark ignition engines.

2( b) PRACTICAL UTILITY / USERS OF THE DATA The Office of Transportation and Air Quality uses this information collection to verify that production marine engines meet Federal emission requirements. PLT data helps verify that preproduction certification engine designs are translated into production. The PLT program provides reasonable statistical certainty that tested engine models meet emission standards when they leave the assembly line and are introduced into commerce.

PLT results are used by EPA to enforce provisions of the Act. The Administrator may use PLT results as a basis to suspend or revoke a Certificate of Conformity for noncomplying engines and for a noncomplying engine class. The EPG may also use PLT results to help evaluate an engine design's emission compliance.

PLT results are also useful for the marine engine emission averaging, banking and trading program. Because marine engine manufacturers may change the applicable family emission limit ( FEL) during the model year, manufacturers and EPA can monitor PLT results to monitor the compliance margins of families, and engine manufacturers may adjust FELs to maximize credit generation and minimize credit use throughout the model year.

3. NONDUPLICATION, CONSULTATIONS, AND OTHER COLLECTION CRITERIA 3( a) NONDUPLICATION The Office of Transportation and Air Quality, CCD is the only Federal office which regulates the emissions of new production marine engines. Emissions and Federal sales data differentiated by EPA engine classes are not gathered by other agencies, departments or program offices.

3( b) PUBLIC NOTICE REQUIRED PRIOR TO ICR SUBMISSION TO OMB 5 On August 31, 2000, an announcement that this ICR is up for renewal was made in the Federal Register ( FR). A copy of this FR notice is attached. No comments were submitted in response to this notice.

3( c) CONSULTATIONS EPA consulted with four marine engine manufacturers regarding the information collection burden of this program. These manufacturers have experience with conducting the marine PLT program. These manufacturers provided hourly pay rates and burden hours for the activities described in this ICR. EPA believes these rates are representative of hourly pay rates and burden hours for the marine industry.

The results of these consultations are incorporated in this document. Regarding hourly pay rates, manufacturers provided pay rates, including benefits, overhead, office space and equipment as well as other business expenses. Regarding the activities associated with the PLT program, these manufacturers identified the hours each occupation is required for testing an engine family. Because these manufactures have multiple engine families, and the test facilities are often use for multiple purposes ( such as research and development, certification, PLT and in use testing), facility costs, capital / start up, operating and maintenance costs were also estimated on a per engine family basis. By estimating costs on an engine family basis, this burden estimate better predicts the total cost to industry and the average cost to individual manufactures since the number of families certified by a manufacturer may vary from year to year.

SURVEYED MANUFACTURERS AND CONTACTS:

EPA consulted with the following four marine ( nonroad) engine manufacturers regarding the hourly pay rates associated with this type of information collection. All of these manufacturers have experience with the PLT program and have submitted data required by 40 CFR Part 91.

Contact Affiliation Phone Number Michael Tyrrell American Honda Motor Co. Inc. 310 783 3419 Thomas Pugh Yamaha Motor Corporation, USA 714 761 7807 Susan Bucheger Mercury Marine 920 929 4978 Lawrence Keller OMC 847 689 5620 6 3( d) EFFECTS OF LESS FREQUENT COLLECTION The information collection schedules listed in this document are essential for enforcement. Annual production information is necessary to verify the quantities of engines in each engine family for statistically predicting compliance. Because of engine production variability, and changes implemented during the model year, PLT data is needed on a quarterly basis so the EPG can evaluate current production emission levels. If PLT data were submitted less frequently, the EPG would not be able to efficiently direct its resources toward problem engine families and would not be able to expeditiously determine that production engines conform to emission standards.

3( e) GENERAL GUIDELINES Paperwork Reduction Act Guidelines One PLT information collection activity exceeds the guidelines of the Paperwork Reduction Act, which provides that respondents will have a minimum of 30 days to provide the requested information.

If PLT results indicate noncompliance, EPA requires that manufacturers notify EPA within ten days. EPA needs this requirement to rapidly evaluate PLT program conclusions and occurrences during the program. If a noncompliance determination is reached, testing and the statistical evaluation would be completed, the report to EPA would need to be submitted within 10 days. This requirement is necessary so EPA and the manufacturer take appropriate action not to introduce noncomplying engines into commerce.

3( f) CONFIDENTIALITY The production information is considered confidential and is therefore protected under 40 CFR Part 2. All other reports are considered public information, as authorized by section 208 ( b) of the Act.

3( g) SENSITIVE QUESTIONS Not applicable. No questions of a sensitive nature are asked.

4. THE RESPONDENTS AND INFORMATION REQUESTED 4( a) RESPONDENTS/ SIC CODES The respondents are engine manufacturers ( SIC 3519). 7 4( b) INFORMATION REQUESTED ( i) Data items and recordkeeping requirements Report on these Items: 91.509 ( e) ( 1) Location and description of test facility, ( 2) Total production and sample size, ( 3) FEL, ( 4) Sample selection description, ( 5) Description of test engines, ( 6) for each test, ( i) description of test engine including ( A) configuration & engine family ( B) Year, make, and build date, ( C) Engine identification number, ( D) Number of hours of service accumulation, ( ii) Location and description of service accumulation, ( iii) Test number, date, test procedure, initial ( before and after rounding) and final test results for all tests,

( iv) Description of any adjustment, modification, repair, preparation, maintenance, and/ or testing performed which will not be performed on all other production engines, ( v) CumSum analysis of PLT results for each family, ( vi) Other information requested by the Administrator, ( 7) for each failed engine, a description of the remedy and test results for all retests, ( 8) Date of the end of the model year production for each engine family, and ( 9) A signed statement and endorsement.

Recordkeeping items  1 year record retention specified at 91.504( b) 91.504( a) Establish, maintain, and retain the following: ( 1) General records. Description of test equipment. ( 2) Individual records. Records pertaining to each test: ( i) date, time, and location of each test; ( ii) number of hours of service accumulation before and after testing; ( iii) names of supervisory personnel involved; ( iv) Record and description of adjustments, repair, preparation or modification performed; ( v) If applicable, dates of shipping and the date the engine was received at the test facility; ( vi) Complete records of all emission tests; ( vii) Brief descriptions of any significant events. 8 ( ii) Respondent Activities PLT information collection requirements require manufacturers to perform a variety of activities. PLT information will require manufacturers to plan activities, conduct tests, generate and submit reports to EPA, and maintain records. Manufacturers will also periodically train personnel and review regulations and guidance to comply with PLT requirements.

The information collection activities of the marine engine PLT program include the collection of projected quarterly production and annual sales data. EPA expects that marine engine manufacturers produce projected annual sales estimates routinely as a part of production planning and marketing strategy. Projected annual production by engine family must be reported in the manufacturer's application for certification. For PLT statistical requirements, marine engine manufacturers must gather and monitor production information ( based on engine family) and conduct numbers of tests based on production. Production information is also reported to EPA.

Based on production, manufacturers will periodically select engines from the assembly line and ship ( if emission test equipment is not at the plant) the engine to an emission test facility. Selected engines are typically inspected and service accumulation ( engine operation) is performed to break in the engine prior to emission testing.

Manufacturers are required to perform emission tests on engines and create documents detailing testing and the results. Manufacturers are required, under certification regulations, to maintain calibration and maintenance documentation for test equipment. During PLT testing, manufacturers must gather and provide some of this information to EPA, and some facility information must also be retained for PLT requirements. Before and after each test, engine information and results typically entered into databases and results must be analyzed for statistical comparison. If engines fail to comply with applicable standards, additional testing must be performed.

Finally, manufacturers must write brief reports listing the results of PLT testing and maintain records of their PLT programs. Manufacturers must submit a quarterly report of PLT results which includes testing information. If engines fail to comply with standards during an PLT program, manufacturers must submit failed engine reports. Manufacturers must maintain PLT records for a period of one year after the conclusion of the PLT program for that model year. These records must include test equipment as well as test engine information. Manufacturers may maintain these records in any format. 9 5. THE INFORMATION COLLECTED AGENCY ACTIVITIES, COLLECTION METHODOLOGY, AND INFORMATION MANAGEMENT 5( a) AGENCY ACTIVITIES The EPG performs the following activities with information collected. 1. Review & compare sales data, 2. Check report format & completeness, 3. Input reports and data into the information management system ( IMS), 4. Analyze and compare results with standards and FELs 5. File submitted information 6. Periodically answer manufacturers questions 7. Infrequently request and review additional information 8. From time to time perform maintenance and/ or make enhancements to the IMS. 9. Post nonconfidential data from completed test programs on the Internet. 10. Infrequently analyze requests for confidentiality.

5( b) Collection Methodology and Management EPA uses the marine engine PLT program to ensure with reasonable statistical certainty that production engines meet the emission standards to which their prototypes were certified. PLT data is submitted in electronic format for EPA and manufacturer convenience. The format used facilitates easy incorporation into the engine IMS maintained by EPG. Because this IMS links certification, PLT and in use data by engine family, data quality and compliance with applicable standards and FELs are most rapidly checked. In the near future, EPG will be enhancing the IMS to more rapidly post emission data to the Internet. Currently, EPG responds to individual requests for data from the IMS. The IMS has automatic functions to restrict and maintain confidential information so it is not inadvertently released.

5( c) Small Entity Flexibility Not applicable. None of the respondents are small entities.

5( d) Collection Schedule PLT information is generally reported quarterly by manufacturers. However, information about failing engines or engine family noncompliance may be submitted at different intervals. The ongoing PLT requirement is that reports must be submitted within 30 days of the end of each quarter.

EPA requires that manufacturers notify EPG within two 10 working days if the results of PLT testing indicate noncompliance. EPA needs this requirement to rapidly evaluate PLT program conclusions and occurrences when noncomplying engines are being introduced into commerce.

6. ESTIMATING THE BURDEN AND COST OF THE COLLECTION 6( a) ESTIMATING RESPONDENT BURDEN Reference Chart 6( a) Marine spark ignition manufacturers Chart 6( a) provides an average annual respondent burden for each information collection activity. This estimated is based on average activity estimates provided by the surveyed manufactures listed above. These manufacturers estimated the activity hours and costs of the PLT program for an engine family. This estimate is also based on recent certification data. In the 1999 and 2000 model years, a total of approximately 150 engine families ( which could have been subject to PLT requirements) have been certified each year by 10 manufacturers. Consequently, the average number of responses ( families) each year is approximately 1.5 per manufacturer. 11 Annual Hrs & Costs / Response ( engine family) Av. Tot. Hrs & Costs per Manufr.

Legal Technical Manager Clerical Test Cell Assembler Transport Service No. of Total Total Manufacturer Information Collection Activity $ 100.00 $ 46.25 $ 82.50 $ 36.67 $ 31.25 $ 20.00 $ 23.75 $ 25.00 Responses Hours / Cost /

per hour per hour per hour per hour per hour per hour per hour per hour ( Families) Year Year Gather / maintain sales data. 1.925 0.25 0.25 8.5 20.61 $ 1,009.99 Read Instructions & Regulations 56.55 0.25 8.5 482.80 $ 22,406.53 Projecting Testing Needs and Planning Test Schedules 11.075 0.25 0.25 8.5 98.39 $ 4,607.09 Engine Selection & Shipping 3.2 0.25 1.25 0.25 0.25 8.5 44.20 $ 1,640.50 Engine Inspection & Service Accumulation 0.5 5.5 8.5 51.00 $ 1,657.50 Testing 3 11.75 8.5 125.38 $ 4,300.47 Data Entry & Analysis 7.95 0.5 8.5 71.83 $ 3,281.18 Report Writing & Submission 0.25 12.3 0.25 0.25 8.5 110.93 $ 5,301.17 Gathering Information 1.425 0.25 8.5 14.24 $ 638.12 Training 6.25 0.75 8.5 59.50 $ 2,656.25 Recordkeeping / Filing 5.3875 0.5 0.25 8.5 52.17 $ 2,316.29 Other tasks ( test equipment calibration, engine repair, etc.) 0.25 92.5 1.25 8.5 799.00 $ 24,934.22 Subtotal 0.25 109.8125 1 2 110.75 1.5 0.25 1.5 8.5 1930.03 $ 74,749.31 Chart 6( a) ANNUAL RESPONDENT BURDEN AND COST 12 6( b) ESTIMATING RESPONDENT COSTS Reference Chart 6( a).

( i) Estimating Labor Cost As described in section 3( c), the costs associated with the PLT program described here are based on estimates from marine engine manufactures with PLT experience. The hourly pay rates shown in chart 6( a) are the average rates provided by the manufacturers with the occupations performing applicable activities.

( ii) Estimating Capital and Operations and Maintenance Costs The surveyed manufactures provided capital / start up, operating and maintenance cost figures. Because this is a newly regulated industry, over the past few years manufacturers have constructed facilities and installed equipment for testing and reporting as required by the PLT program.

( iii) Capital/ Start up vs. Operating and Maintenance Costs The capital/ start up cost estimates from these manufacturers include costs from facility construction, test equipment and computer purchases. The operating and maintenance ( O& M) costs include ongoing costs for calibration and maintenance of equipment. For some of the responding manufacturers, equipment is shared between engine certification, PLT and in use testing. Where equipment is shared, a portion of the cost was used to represent the percent of demand by the PLT program. Additionally, to facilitate describing the costs of this program, the costs are again projected on a per engine family basis.

Prior to annualizing the average capital/ start up cost is $ 101,963 per engine family, and the average O& M cost is $ 18,673 per engine family.

( iv) Annualized Capital Costs The average capital/ start up per engine family is $ 101,963 prior to annualizing. Estimating an conservative equipment life of 10 years ( most equipment will be used longer), the annualized net present value ( ANPV) for capital and start up costs is $ 14,517 per engine family. 13 Hrs & Costs / Response Total Hrs & Costs per Family Technical Manager Number Total Total Annual Agency Information Collection Activity for Each Engine Family $ 53.08 $ 73.79 of Hours / Cost / per hour per hour Respon Year Year Review & Compare Sales Data 0.25 0 1 0.25 $ 13.27 Check Report Format & Completeness 0.2 0 4 0.8 $ 42.47 Input Reports & Data Into the IMS 0.25 0 4 1 $ 53.08 Analyze & Compare Results to Standards & FELs 0.5 0.25 4 3 $ 179.95 File Information Submitted 0.2 0 4 0.8 $ 42.47 Periodically answer manufacturers questions. 0.5 0.25 1 0.75 $ 44.99 Infrequently request & review additional information. 0.25 0 1 0.25 $ 13.27 Periodically perform maintenance or make enhancements to the IMS. 1 0 1 1 $ 53.08 Post data from completed test programs on the Internet. 0.25 0.1 1 0.35 $ 20.65 Infrequently analyze requests for confidentiality. 0.25 0.1 1 0.35 $ 20.65 Subtotal 3.65 0.7 22 8.55 $ 483.88 6( c) ESTIMATING AGENCY BURDEN AND COST EPA based its burden estimates on experience from information collection activities with the marine PLT program in recent years. EPA uses no contractor assistance with the PLT program. Because the PLT program is solely administered in Washington, DC, the hourly wages for the government are based on 2000 GS pay schedule for Washington, DC. Hourly rates are $ 53.08 for technical staff and $ 77.79 for managers. To derive hourly rates, EPA divided annual compensation estimates by 2,080 which is the number of hours in the Federal work year. EPA then multiplied hourly rates by the standard government benefits multiplication factor of 1.6. 14 Av. per Respondent Total Burden & Cost Respon. Respon. Respon. Respon. Number Total Total Manufacturer Information Collection Activity Hours / Labor Cost Capital / O & M of Hours / Cost Year Per Year Startup Cost Cost Respon. Year Per Year Gather / maintain sales data. 20.61 $ 1,009.99 10 206.13 $ 10,099.95 Read Instructions & Regulations 482.80 $ 22,406.53 10 4828.00 $ 224,065.31 Projecting Testing Needs and Planning Test Schedules 98.39 $ 4,607.09 10 983.88 $ 46,070.89 Engine Selection & Shipping 44.20 $ 1,640.50 10 442.00 $ 16,405.00 Engine Inspection & Service Accumulation 51.00 $ 1,657.50 10 510.00 $ 16,575.00 Testing 125.38 $ 4,300.47 10 1253.75 $ 43,004.69 Data Entry & Analysis 71.83 $ 3,281.18 10 718.25 $ 32,811.77 Report Writing & Submission 110.93 $ 5,301.17 10 1109.25 $ 53,011.67 Gathering Information 14.24 $ 638.12 10 142.38 $ 6,381.20 Training 59.50 $ 2,656.25 10 595.00 $ 26,562.50 Recordkeeping / Filing 52.17 $ 2,316.29 10 521.69 $ 23,162.94 Other tasks ( test equipment calibration, engine repair, etc.) 799.00 $ 24,934.22 10 7990.00 $ 249,342.19 Total 1930.03 $ 74,749.31 $ 123,395 $ 158,721 10 19,300.31 $ 3,568,643.10 6( d) ESTIMATING THE RESPONDENT UNIVERSE AND TOTAL BURDEN AND COSTS Based on certification records for 1999 and 2000, EPA estimates that 10 marine engine manufacturers may have up to an industry total of 85 engine families subject to the PLT reporting and recordkeeping requirements.

Table 6( d)

Total Annual Hourly Burden = Hours/ Respondent x # of Respondents = 1,930 x 10 = 19,300 hours per year Total Annual Cost = Cost/ Respondent x # of Respondents = ( Labor + Cap/ SU + O& M) x # of Respondents = ($ 74,749+$ 123,395+$ 158,721) x 10 = $ 3,568,865 per year 6( e) BOTTOM LINE BURDEN HOURS AND COST TABLES ( i) Respondent Tally Total Annual Hourly Burden = 19,300 hours Annual Capital / start up Costs = $ 1,233,950 Annual Operating & maintenance costs = $ 1,587,210 Total Annual Cost = $ 3,568,865 15 Total per Family Annual Total Total Total Number Total Total Annual Agency Information Collection Activity Hours / Cost / of Hours / Cost / Year Year Families Year Year Review & Compare Sales Data 0.25 $ 13.27 85 21.25 $ 1,128.02 Check Report Format & Completeness 0.8 $ 42.47 85 68 $ 3,609.65 Input Reports & Data Into the IMS 1 $ 53.08 85 85 $ 4,512.06 Analyze & Compare Results to Standards & FELs 3 $ 179.95 85 255 $ 15,296.01 File Information Submitted 0.8 $ 42.47 85 68 $ 3,609.65 Periodically answer manufacturers questions. 0.75 $ 44.99 85 63.75 $ 3,824.00 Infrequently request & review additional information. 0.25 $ 13.27 85 21.25 $ 1,128.02 Periodically perform maintenance or make enhancements to the IMS. 1 $ 53.08 85 85 $ 4,512.06 Post data from completed test programs on the Internet. 0.35 $ 20.65 85 29.75 $ 1,755.20 Infrequently analyze requests for confidentiality. 0.35 $ 20.65 85 29.75 $ 1,755.20 Subtotal 8.55 $ 483.88 85 726.75 $ 41,129.88 6( d)( ii) The Agency Tally Number of Respondents Av. Number of Families Subject to PLT Total Hours per Year Total Annual Labor Cost EPA Marine PLT Program 10 85 727 hours $ 41,130 ( iv) Variations in the Annual Bottom Line No annual variations in the respondent reporting/ recordkeeping burden or cost over the course of this clearance period are expected.

6( f) REASONS FOR CHANGE IN BURDEN There are a number of reasons for the change in burden since the last clearance. While the last ICR for the Marine PLT program was for the rule making, the primary difference is that capital / start up, operating and maintenance costs have been included here. As described above, because this is a newly 16 regulated industry, many of these manufacturers have added new test equipment, and the additional cost will be reflected in the early years of this program until additional efficiencies can be gained, and the equipment is used for more purposes.

For the agency cost, the primary difference is the labor rates used in this analysis. Previously, clerical support was included, and a much lower technical salary was used. For this analysis, it was assumed technical staff would perform the work, and a higher salary with the cost of overhead was used. Finally, the previous estimate reflected the early years of regulation with a lower number of families subject to PLT. This estimate projects more families requiring PLT reporting, and consequently EPA having to spend more time reviewing the reports.

6( g) BURDEN STATEMENT Table 6( d) shows the projected average annual respondent burden for the marine engine PLT program. For marine engine manufacturers the reporting burden is estimated to average 1857 hours per respondent per year. This estimate includes time for reading regulations & guidance, selecting and testing engines, analyzing data, preparing and submitting reports to EPA. The recordkeeping burden is estimated to average 73 hours per respondent per year. This estimate includes time for gathering information, and developing and maintaining records.

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, and verifying information, processing and maintaining information, and disclosing and providing information; adjust the existing ways to comply with any previously applicable instructions and requirements; train personnel to be able to respond to a collection of information; search data sources; complete and review the collection of information; and transmit or otherwise disclose the information. 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 are listed in 40 CFR Part 9 and 48 CFR Chapter 15.

Send comments on the Agency's need for this information, the accuracy of the provided burden estimates, and any suggested methods for minimizing respondent burden, including through the use of automated collection techniques to the Sandy Farmer, U. S. Environmental Protection Agency, Collection Strategies Division 17 ( Mail Code 2822), 1200 Pennsylvania Avenue, N. W., Washington, D. C. 20460; and to the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, Office of Management and Budget, 725 17th Street, NW, Washington, DC 20503, Attention: Desk Officer for EPA. Include the EPA ICR number 1725.03 and OMB control number 2060 0323 in any correspondence.