APPENDIX E ESTIMATION OF CONSUMER INVESTMENTS AND SAVINGS UNDER THE HIGH EFFICIENCY/ CARBON LEVEL OF 515 MMT IN 2008 CASE EPA estimated the investment costs and savings under the High Efficiency/ Carbon Level of 515 MMT in 2008 case by using unpublished information from the Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory and U. S. Environmental Protection Agency entitled Technology and Greenhouse Gas Emissions: An Integrated Scenario Analysis Using the LBNL NEMS Model, September 1998. This joint LBNL/ EPA study has examined this option for lowering greenhouse gas emissions. The information that EPA used provides estimates of the annualized capital investment that the residential, commercial, and industrial sectors make to lower electricity use. The study also provides estimates of the electricity savings, and the value of those savings.

The joint LBNL/ EPA study showed that for every MWh of electricity savings in 2010 there is $ 22.42 of annualized dollar investment and $ 35.36 in annual electricity bill savings in 1990 dollars. 1 In 2010, EPA's analysis showed annual electricity savings of 222 million MWh in the High Efficiency/ Carbon Level of 515 MMT in 2008 case and related alternatives. This leads to an annualized capitalized investment cost of $ 4,986 million dollars. There is estimated electricity bill savings of $ 7,864 million.

1 The LNBL/ EPA study provided results in 1996 dollars. EPA converted these to 1990 dollars by using GDP deflators from the Council of Economic Advisors, Economic Report of the President, February 1998.


[Federal Register Volume 88, Number 53 (Monday, March 20, 2023)]
[Notices]
[Pages 16704-16708]
[FR Doc No: 2023-05539]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-97138; File No. SR-CboeBZX-2023-016]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; Cboe BZX Exchange, Inc.; Notice of
Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of a Proposed Rule Change To Amend
Its Fee Schedule

March 14, 2023.
    Pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934
(``Act''),\1\ and Rule 19b-4 thereunder,\2\ notice is hereby given that
on February 28, 2023, Cboe BZX Exchange, Inc. (``Exchange'' or ``BZX'')
filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (``Commission'') the
proposed rule change as described in Items I, II, and III below, which
Items have been prepared by the Exchange. The Commission is publishing
this notice to solicit comments on the proposed rule change from
interested persons.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1).
    \2\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

I. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement of the Terms of Substance
of the Proposed Rule Change

    Cboe BZX Exchange, Inc. (the ``Exchange'' or ``BZX Options'')
proposes to amend its Fee Schedule. The text of the proposed rule
change is provided in Exhibit 5.
    The text of the proposed rule change is also available on the
Exchange's website (http://markets.cboe.com/us/equities/regulation/rule_filings/bzx/), at the Exchange's Office of the Secretary, and at
the Commission's Public Reference Room.

II. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement of the Purpose of, and
Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule Change

    In its filing with the Commission, the Exchange included statements
concerning the purpose of and basis for the proposed rule change and
discussed any comments it received on the proposed rule change. The
text of these statements may be examined at the places specified in
Item IV below. The Exchange has prepared summaries, set forth in
sections A, B, and C below, of the most significant aspects of such
statements.

A. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement of the Purpose of, and
Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule Change

1. Purpose
    The Exchange proposes to amend its fees Fee Schedule to modify its
market data fees for BZX Options Top.\3\ Particularly, the Exchange
proposes to modify the Professional and Non-Professional User Fees,
modify the Enterprise Fee for BXZ Options Top and make other
clarifying, non-substantive changes.\4\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ BZX Options Top is an uncompressed data feed that offers top
of book quotations and execution information based on options orders
entered into the System. Uncompressed data is disseminated ``as is''
in the native format by the Exchange, with no compression.
    \4\ The Exchange initially filed the proposed fee changes on
January 3, 2023 (SR-CboeBZX-2023-001). On February 28, 2023, the
Exchange withdrew that filing and submitted this proposal.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange first proposes to reduce the rates for Professional
and Non-Professional User fees for BZX Options Top. The Exchange
currently charges Internal Distributors and External Distributors that
redistribute any of the BZX Options Data Feeds different fees for their
Professional Users \5\ and Non-Professional Users.\6\ The Exchange
currently assesses a monthly fee for Professional Users of $30.00 per
User and a monthly fee of $1.00 per Non-Professional User.\7\ One User
fee allows access to the BZX Options Top Feed and the BZX Options Depth
Feed.\8\ The Exchange proposes to reduce the rates for the User fees
for BZX Options Top. Particularly, the Exchange proposes to reduce the
monthly (i) Professional User fee from $30 per user to $5 per user and
(ii) Non-Professional User fee from $1.00 per user to $0.10 per user.
The Exchange also proposes to start charging separate User fees for BZX
Options Top and BZX Options Depth Feed. The Exchange therefore proposes
to eliminate the language under the BZX Options Top table and BZX
Options Depth Feed table that states one User fee allows access to the
BZX Options Top Feed and the BZX Options Depth Feed.\9\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ A Professional User of an Exchange Market Data product is
any User other than a a Non-Professional User. The Exchange proposes
to amend the definition of ``Professional User'' in the Fee Schedule
to further clarify that a Professional User is a natural person
recipient of an Exchange Data product who is not a Non-Professional
User.
    \6\ A ``Non-Professional User'' of an Exchange Market Data
product is a natural person or qualifying trust that uses Data only
for personal purposes and not for any commercial purpose and, for a
natural person who works in the United States, is not: (i)
registered or qualified in any capacity with the Securities and
Exchange Commission, the Commodities Futures Trading Commission, any
state securities agency, any securities exchange or association, or
any commodities or futures contract market or association; (ii)
engaged as an ``investment adviser'' as that term is defined in
Section 202(a)(11) of the Investment Advisors Act of 1940 (whether
or not registered or qualified under that Act); or (iii) employed by
a bank or other organization exempt from registration under federal
or state securities laws to perform functions that would require
registration or qualification if such functions were performed for
an organization not so exempt; or, for a natural person who works
outside of the United States, does not perform the same functions as
would disqualify such person as a Non-Professional User if he or she
worked in the United States.
    \7\ Distributors that receive BZX Options Data are required to
count every Professional User and Non-Professional User to which
they provide the data feed(s).
    \8\ BZX Options Depth is an uncompressed data feed that offers
depth of book quotations and execution information based on options
orders entered into the System.
    \9\ The Exchange is not proposing any changes to the current
User Fee amounts for BZX Options Depth Feed at this time.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange next proposes to increase the current monthly
Enterprise Fee. The Enterprise Fee permits a recipient firm (i.e., a
Distributor) to purchase a monthly (and optional) Enterprise license to
receive the BZX Options Top Feed for distribution to an unlimited
number of Professional and Non-Professional Users.\10\ The Enterprise
Fee is an alternative to Professional and Non-Professional User fees
and permits a Distributor to pay a flat fee for unlimited number of
Professional and Non-Professional Users. Like User fees, it is also
assessed in addition to the Distribution Fee.\11\ Currently, the
Exchange assesses an Enterprise Fee of $3,500 per month. The Exchange
proposes to increase the Enterprise Fee to $20,000 per month. For
example, if a Distributor distributes BZX Options Top to 15,000
Professional Users who each receive BZX Options Top at $5.00 per month
(as proposed), then that Distributor will pay $75,000 per month in
Professional Users fees. Under the proposed Enterprise Fee, it will pay
a flat fee of $20,000 for an unlimited number of Professional and Non-
Professional Users. A Distributor must pay a separate Enterprise Fee
for each entity that controls the display of BZX Options Top if it
wishes for such User to be covered by the Enterprise Fee rather than by
per User fees.\12\ A Distributor that pays the Enterprise Fee will not
have to report its number of such Users on a monthly basis. However,
every six months, it must provide the Exchange with a count of the
total number of Professional and Non-Professional Users of BZX Options
Top.\13\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \10\ The Exchange proposes to amend the description relating to
the Enterprise Fees under the BZX Options Top and Depth fee tables
to clarify that Distributors are the market participant that would
be purchasing the monthly Enterprise license for purposes of
distribution to Professional and Non-Professional Users.
    \11\ The Exchange also proposes to clarify in the descriptions
relating to the Enterprise Fees that (i) it is an alternative to
``Professional and Non-Professional'' User fees and (ii) is in
addition to the Distribution Fee.
    \12\ For example, if a Distributor that distributes BZX Options
Top to Retail Brokerage Firm A and Retail Brokerage Firm B and
wishes to have the Users under each firm covered by an Enterprise
license, the Distributor would be subject to two Enterprise Fees.
    \13\ See Cboe Global Markets North American Data Policies.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange lastly proposes to add references to ``Depth'' in the
description of the Distribution Fees and Enterprise Fee under the BZX
Options Depth Feed table to clarify which data feed such fees currently
applies to, thereby alleviating potential confusion. The Exchange also
proposes to replace references to ``Recipient firm'' with
``Distributors'' to more accurately reflect the type of market
participants the fees are applicable to, thereby alleviating potential
confusion. Lastly, the Exchange proposes to modify the definition of
Professional User under the definitions section of the Market Data Fees
section to clarify that a Professional ``User'' is any natural person
recipient of an Exchange Market Data product who is not a Non-
Professional User. The proposed modification also aligns the definition
with that of the definition used by the Exchange's affiliates Cboe
Exchange, Inc. and Cboe C2 Exchange, Inc.\14\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \14\ See Cboe Data Services, LLC Fees Schedule and Cboe C2
Options Fees Schedule.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

2. Statutory Basis
    The Exchange believes the proposed rule change is consistent with
the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (the ``Act'') and the rules and
regulations thereunder applicable to the Exchange and, in particular,
the requirements of Section 6(b) of the Act.\15\ Specifically, the
Exchange believes the proposed rule change is consistent with the
Section 6(b)(5) \16\ requirements that the rules of an exchange be
designed to prevent fraudulent and manipulative acts and practices, to
promote just and equitable principles of trade, to foster cooperation
and coordination with persons engaged in regulating, clearing,
settling, processing information with respect to, and facilitating
transactions in securities, to remove impediments to and perfect the
mechanism of a free and open market and a national market system, and,
in general, to protect investors and the public interest. Additionally,
the Exchange believes the proposed rule change is consistent with

Section 6(b)(4) of the Act,\17\ which requires that Exchange rules
provide for the equitable allocation of reasonable dues, fees, and
other charges among its Members and other persons using its facilities.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \15\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b).
    \16\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5).
    \17\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(4).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange first notes that it operates in a highly competitive
environment. Indeed, there are currently 16 registered options
exchanges that trade options. Based on publicly available information,
no single options exchange has more than 17% of the market share.\18\
The Exchange believes top-of-book quotation and transaction data is
highly competitive as national securities exchanges compete vigorously
with each other to provide efficient, reliable, and low-cost data to a
wide range of investors and market participants. Indeed, there are
several competing products offered by other national securities
exchanges today, not counting products offered by the Exchange's
affiliates, and each of the Exchange's affiliated U.S. options
exchanges also offers similar top-of-book data.\19\ Each of those
exchanges offer top-of-book quotation and last sale information based
on their own quotation and trading activity that is substantially
similar to the information provided by the Exchange through the BZX
Options Top Feed. Further, the quote and last sale data contained in
the BZX Options Top Feed is identical to the data sent to OPRA for
redistribution to the public.\20\ Accordingly, Exchange top-of-book
data is widely available today from a number of different sources.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \18\ See Cboe Global Markets U.S. Options Market Month-to-Date
Volume Summary (February 24, 2023), available at https://markets.cboe.com/us/options/market_statistics/.
    \19\ See e.g., NYSE Arca Options Proprietary Market Data Fees
Schedule, MIAX Options Exchange, Fee Schedule, Section 6 (Market
Data Fees), Nasdaq PHLX Options 7 Pricing Schedule, Section 10
(Proprietary Data Feed Fees) and Cboe Data Services, LLC Fees
Schedule.
    \20\ The Exchange notes that it makes available the top-of-book
and last sale data that is included in the BZX Options Top Data Feed
no earlier than the time at which the Exchange sends that data to
OPRA.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Moreover, the BZX Options Top is distributed and purchased on a
voluntary basis, in that neither the Exchange nor market data
distributors are required by any rule or regulation to make this data
available. Accordingly, Distributors and Users can discontinue use at
any time and for any reason, including due to an assessment of the
reasonableness of fees charged. As described above, market participants
have a wide variety of alternative market data products from which to
choose, such as similar proprietary data products offered by other
exchanges and consolidated data. Further, the Exchange is not required
to make any proprietary data products available or to offer any
specific pricing alternatives to any customers. Moreover, persons
(including broker-dealers) who subscribe to any exchange proprietary
data feed must also have equivalent access to consolidated Options
Information \21\ from OPRA for the same classes or series of options
that are included in the proprietary data feed, and proprietary data
feeds cannot be used to meet that particular requirement.\22\ As such,
all proprietary data feeds are optional.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \21\ ``Consolidated Options Information'' means consolidated
Last Sale Reports combined with either consolidated Quotation
Information or the BBO furnished by OPRA. Access to consolidated
Options Information is deemed ``equivalent'' if both kinds of
information are equally accessible on the same terminal or work
station. See Limited Liability Company Agreement of Options Price
Reporting Authority, LLC (``OPRA Plan''), Section 5.2(c)(iii). The
Exchange notes that this requirement under the OPRA Plan is also
reiterated under the Cboe Global Markets Global Data Agreement and
Cboe Global Markets North American Data Policies, which subscribers
to any exchange proprietary product must sign and are subject to,
respectively. Additionally, the Exchange's Data Order Form (used for
requesting the Exchange's market data products) requires
confirmation that the requesting market participant receives data
from OPRA.
    \22\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Commission has repeatedly expressed its preference for
competition over regulatory intervention in determining prices,
products, and services in the securities markets. Particularly, in
Regulation NMS, the Commission highlighted the importance of market
forces in determining prices and SRO revenues and, also, recognized
that current regulation of the market system ``has been remarkably
successful in promoting market competition in its broader forms that
are most important to investors and listed companies.'' \23\ Making
similar data products available to market participants fosters
competition in the marketplace, and constrains the ability of exchanges
to charge supracompetitive fees. In the event that a market participant
views one exchange's data product as more or less attractive than the
competition they can and do switch between similar products. The
proposed fees are a result of the competitive environment, as the
Exchange seeks to adopt fees to attract purchasers of BZX Options Top
Data.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \23\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 51808 (June 9,
2005), 70 FR 37496, 37499 (June 29, 2005) (``Regulation NMS Adopting
Release'').
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange believes the proposed changes to reduce the rates of
the current Professional and Non-Professional User fees are reasonable
as Distributors will be subject to lower BZX Options Top User fees.
Additionally, the User fees continue to be in line with and/or lower
than User fees assessed by other exchanges for similar data.\24\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \24\ See e.g., Nasdaq PHLX Options 7 Pricing Schedule, Section
10 (Proprietary Data Feed Fees), which provides for a fee of $40 per
month to professional users and $1.00 per month to non-professional
users to cover the usage of PHLX Options (TOPO) Data, TOPO Plus
Orders, PHLX Orders and PHLX Depth Data feeds. See also NYSE
American Options Proprietary Market Data Fees schedule, which
provides for a fee of $50 per month to professional users and $1.00
per month to non-professional users of American Options Top Data,
American Options Deep and American Options Complex products. By
comparison, the total combined Professional User fee for the
Exchange's market data products is still lower at $35 per
Professional User (i.e., $5 per Professional Users of BZX Options
Top, as proposed, and $30 per Professional User of BZX Options
Depth). The Exchange's combined Non-Professional User Fee at $1.10
per Non-Professional User (i.e., $0.10 per Non-Professional User of
BZX Options Top, as proposed, and $1 per Non-Professional User of
BZX Options Depth) is still in line with, and not a significant
departure from, PHLX's and NYSE American's aforementioned Non-
Professional User fees.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange believes that the proposed fees are equitable and not
unfairly discriminatory because they will be charged uniformly to
recipient firms and Users. The Exchange also believes continuing to
offer BZX Options Top Data to Non-Professional Users at a lower cost
than Professional Users results in greater equity among data
recipients, as Professional Users are categorized as such based on
their employment and participation in financial markets, and thus, are
compensated to participate in the markets. Although Non-Professional
Users too can receive significant financial benefits through their
participation in the markets, the Exchange believes it is reasonable to
charge more to those Users who are more directly engaged in the
markets.
    The Exchange next notes it is not required to charge a single User
fee to cover all its available data products, but none-the-less has not
charged separate User Fees for both BZX Options Top and BZX Options
Depth since BZX Options Top was adopted in March 2018.\25\ However, the
Exchange no longer wishes to continue to have a single fee. The
Exchange believes the proposed change is reasonable, equitable and not
unfairly discriminatory as the Top and Book Depth Data Feeds are purely
optional. Only those Distributors that deem the products to be of
sufficient overall value and usefulness would purchase them for
purposes of distribution to Users.

Further, Distributors are not required to distribute, and Users are not
required to receive, any one particular data product and indeed may
choose to receive none, one, or several of the Exchange's market data
products. Indeed, less than 25% of the Exchange's market data
subscriptions is for BZX Options Top. Additionally, the Exchange is not
required to provide any fee waiver to Distributors of BZX Options Top.
The Exchange believes the proposed change is equitable and not unfairly
discriminatory as it will apply uniformly to Distributors.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \25\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 82874 (March 14,
2018), 83 FR 12210 (March 20, 2018) (SR-CboeBZX-2018-017).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The proposed increased Enterprise Fee for BZX Options Top Feed is
equitable and reasonable as the proposed fee could still result in a
fee reduction for Distributors with a large number of Professional and
Non-Professional Users. If a Distributor has a smaller number of
Professional Users of BZX Options Top, then it may continue using the
per User structure and benefit from the proposed per BZX Options Top
User Fee reductions. By reducing prices Distributors with a large
number of Professional and Non-Professional Users, the Exchange
believes that more firms may choose to receive and to distribute BZX
Options Top Data, thereby expanding the distribution of this market
data for the benefit of investors. The Exchange notes that currently no
Distributors have purchased an Enterprise license. The Exchange
believes however, that the proposed lower User fees for BZX Options Top
may incentivize additional External Distributors to distribute BZX
Options Top an enlist additional Users. As noted, as a Distributor's
User base grows, it may make sense for a Distributor to purchase the
alternative Enterprise license to cap its fees. In connection with this
potential increase in Users, the Exchange believes it is therefore also
reasonable to increase the Enterprise Fee. That said, as described
above, the Enterprise Fee is entirely optional. A firm that does not
have a sufficient number of Users to benefit from purchase of the
license need not do so.
    The Exchange further believes that the Enterprise Fee, even as
amended, is reasonable because it simplifies reporting for certain
recipients that have large numbers of Professional and Non-Professional
Users. Firms that pay the proposed Enterprise Fee do have to report the
number of Users on a monthly basis as they currently do, but rather
only have to count authorized users every six months, which is a
significant reduction in administrative burden.
    The Exchange lastly believes the proposed non-substantive
clarifying changes will alleviate potential confusion, thereby removing
impediments to and perfecting the mechanism of a free and open market
and a national market system, and, in general, protecting investors and
the public interest.

B. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement on Burden on Competition

    The Exchange does not believe that the proposed rule change would
result in any burden on competition that is not necessary or
appropriate in furtherance of the purposes of the Act. The Exchange
operates in a highly competitive environment, and its ability to price
top-of-book data is constrained by competition among exchanges that
offer similar data products to their customers. Top-of-book data is
broadly disseminated by competing U.S. options exchanges and through
OPRA. There are therefore a number of alternative products available to
market participants and investors, including products offered by
certain competing exchanges, as well as OPRA. In this competitive
environment potential Distributors are free to choose which competing
product to purchase to satisfy their need for market information.
Often, the choice comes down to price, as market data customers look to
purchase cheaper data products, and quality, as market participants
seek to purchase data that represents significant market liquidity.
    The Exchange believes that the proposed fees do not put any market
participants at a relative disadvantage compared to other market
participants. As discussed, the proposed fees would apply to all
similarly situated Distributors of BZX Options Top on an equal and non-
discriminatory basis. The Exchange believes the differentiated fees for
Professional and Non-Professional Users of BZX Options Top is
appropriate given Professional Users are categorized as such based on
their employment and participation in financial markets, and thus, are
compensated to participate in the markets. Non-Professional Users too
can receive significant financial benefits through their participation
in the markets, however the Exchange believes it is reasonable to
charge more for those Users who are more directly engaged in the
markets. The Exchange therefore believes that the proposed fee neither
favors nor penalizes one or more categories of market participants in a
manner that would impose an undue burden on competition.
    The Exchange believes that the proposed fees do not impose a burden
on competition or on other SROs that is not necessary or appropriate in
furtherance of the purposes of the Act. In particular, market
participants are not forced to subscribe to BZX Options Top, or any of
the Exchange's data feeds, as described above. Also as described above,
there are numerous substitute products offered by other national
securities exchanges, as well as OPRA. Because market data customers
can find suitable substitute feeds, an exchange that overprices its
market data products stands a high risk that users may substitute
another product. These competitive pressures ensure that no one
exchange's market data fees can impose an undue burden on competition,
and the Exchange's proposed fees do not do so here.

C. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement on Comments on the Proposed
Rule Change Received From Members, Participants, or Others

    The Exchange neither solicited nor received comments on the
proposed rule change.

III. Date of Effectiveness of the Proposed Rule Change and Timing for
Commission Action

    The foregoing rule change has become effective pursuant to Section
19(b)(3)(A) of the Act \26\ and paragraph (f) of Rule 19b-4 \27\
thereunder. At any time within 60 days of the filing of the proposed
rule change, the Commission summarily may temporarily suspend such rule
change if it appears to the Commission that such action is necessary or
appropriate in the public interest, for the protection of investors, or
otherwise in furtherance of the purposes of the Act. If the Commission
takes such action, the Commission will institute proceedings to
determine whether the proposed rule change should be approved or
disapproved.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \26\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A).
    \27\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

IV. Solicitation of Comments

    Interested persons are invited to submit written data, views, and
arguments concerning the foregoing, including whether the proposed rule
change is consistent with the Act. Comments may be submitted by any of
the following methods:

Electronic Comments

     Use the Commission's internet comment form (http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml); or

     Send an email to [email protected]. Please include
File Number SR-CboeBZX-2023-016 on the subject line.

Paper Comments

     Send paper comments in triplicate to Secretary, Securities
and Exchange Commission, 100 F Street NE, Washington, DC 20549-1090.

All submissions should refer to File Number SR-CboeBZX-2023-016. This
file number should be included on the subject line if email is used. To
help the Commission process and review your comments more efficiently,
please use only one method. The Commission will post all comments on
the Commission's internet website (http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml).
Copies of the submission, all subsequent amendments, all written
statements with respect to the proposed rule change that are filed with
the Commission, and all written communications relating to the proposed
rule change between the Commission and any person, other than those
that may be withheld from the public in accordance with the provisions
of 5 U.S.C. 552, will be available for website viewing and printing in
the Commission's Public Reference Room, 100 F Street NE, Washington, DC
20549, on official business days between the hours of 10:00 a.m. and
3:00 p.m. Copies of the filing also will be available for inspection
and copying at the principal office of the Exchange. All comments
received will be posted without change. Persons submitting comments are
cautioned that we do not redact or edit personal identifying
information from comment submissions. You should submit only
information that you wish to make available publicly. All submissions
should refer to File Number SR-CboeBZX-2023-016 and should be submitted
on or before April 10, 2023.

    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets,
pursuant to delegated authority.\28\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \28\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Sherry R. Haywood,
Assistant Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2023-05539 Filed 3-17-23; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 88, Number 119 (Thursday, June 22, 2023)]
[Notices]
[Pages 40818-40819]
[FR Doc No: 2023-13216]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

[FRL-11056-01-OA]

Request for Nominations to the National Environmental Youth
Advisory Council

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Notice of request for applications.

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

SUMMARY: The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) invites
applications from a diverse range of qualified candidates to be
considered for appointment to the National Environmental Youth Advisory
Council. Approximately sixteen vacancies are expected to be filled by
December 2023. For appointment consideration, nominations should be
submitted by August 22, 2023. Sources in addition to this Federal
Register notice may also be utilized in the solicitation of nominees.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Carissa Cyran, Designated Federal
Officer, Office of Public Engagement and Environmental Education,
[email protected], telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
    Background: NEYAC is a federal advisory committee chartered under
the Federal Advisory Committee Act, Public Law 92-463. NEYAC was
created in 2023 by the United States Environmental Protection Agency's
Office of Public Engagement and Environmental Education at the
direction of the Administrator of EPA. Implementing authority was
delegated to the Administrator of EPA. The NEYAC provides independent
advice and recommendations to the Administrator of the Environmental
Protection Agency (EPA) on how to increase EPA's efforts to address a
range of environmental issues as they relate to youth communities, with
an emphasis on communities with ages below 29 years of age. The NEYAC
provides a critical perspective on how the impacts of climate change
and other environmental harms affects youth communities. Members are
appointed by the EPA Administrator for a two-year term. NEYAC expects
to meet at least once annually and the average workload for committee
members is approximately 10 to 15 hours per month. Members serve on the
committee in a voluntary capacity. Although we are unable to offer
compensation or an honorarium, members may receive travel and per diem
allowances, according to applicable federal travel regulations and the
agency's budget. To learn more about NEYAC, please visit https://www.epa.gov/education/national-environmental-youth-advisory-council-neyac.
    The EPA is seeking nominations from a variety of sectors including
but not limited to representatives from business and industry,
academia, non-governmental organizations, and local, county, and tribal
governments. According to the mandates of FACA, committees are required
to support diversity across a broad range of constituencies, sectors,
and groups.
    In accordance with Executive Order 14035 (June 25, 2021) and
consistent with law, EPA values and welcomes opportunities to increase
diversity, equity, inclusion, and accessibility on its federal advisory
committees. EPA's federal advisory committees strive to have a
workforce that reflects the diversity of the American people.
    The following criteria will be used to evaluate applicants:
     The NEYAC will be composed of approximately (16) members
who will generally serve as Representative members of non-federal
interests appointed by the Administrator of EPA.
     Members will serve as Representatives and will be between
the ages of 16 and 29 but may surpass 29 years of age if the length of
their term overlaps with a corresponding birthday; however, they would
not be able to be reappointed if their age exceeds 29 years of age.
Members must be 16 years of age by the time of their appointment.
     In selecting members, EPA will consider candidates from
business and industry, academic institutions, state, local and tribal
governments, public interest groups, environmental organizations,
service groups, and more. In determining a fair spread across
categories, no more than 60% of the advisory committee can come from a
single categorical entity.
     At least 50% of the overall membership of the NEYAC should
either come from, reside primarily in, and/or do most of their work in
disadvantaged communities as defined by the Climate and Economic
Justice Screening Tool (CEJST) as part of the Justice40 Initiative.
     Members must demonstrate notable commitment to
environmental issues with extensive involvement, knowledge, or
engagement with relevant material and/or affected communities.
     Members must demonstrate an ability to work in a consensus
building process with a wide range of representative from diverse
constituencies.
     Members must be able to contribute approximately 10 to 15
hours per month to NEYAC's activities, including the attendance at
meetings and participating in the development of advice letters/reports
and other material.
     Members must demonstrate potential for active and
constructive involvement in NEYAC's work.
    How to Submit Applications: Any interested person or organization
may apply to be considered for an appointment to serve on the National
Environmental Youth Advisory Council.
     Applications must include:
    [cir] (1) contact information as outlined below:
    [ssquf] Applicants must provide their: full legal name, preferred
name if applicable, pronouns, date of birth, current home address, and
phone number.
    [ssquf] If under 18, the Agency will contact applicants for
additional information to obtain proof of age.
    [cir] (2) resume or curriculum vitae (CV) OR a short biography
describing professional and/or educational qualifications or
experiences, including but not limited to a list of relevant
activities/clubs/volunteering/community projects/etc. as well as any
current or previous service on advisory committees OR a 2-page single
spaced (font size 12, 1-inch margins) maximum essay on qualifications
    [cir] (3) statement of interest explaining why you would like to
serve on this committee:
    [ssquf] The statement of interest should describe how the nominee's
background, knowledge, and experience would add value to the
committee's work, and how the individual's qualifications would
contribute to the overall diversity of the NEYAC. To help the Agency in
evaluating the effectiveness of its outreach efforts, please include in
the statement of interest how you learned of this opportunity.
    [cir] (4) a media project that can take the form of any ONE of the
below options. The media project must share more about the applicant's
viewpoint on the intersection between youth communities and
environmental issues, including a focus on an urgent environmental or
climate issue and its specific impact on youth communities.

    [ssquf] Media projects containing audio and/or video must be shared
via a link (e.g., Google Drive, SharePoint, etc.) and can NOT be
included as an attachment. The link should lead to a downloadable copy.
    [ssquf] A 2-page single-spaced 1-inch margin essay.
    [ssquf] A 2-page single-spaced 1-inch margin letter to the editor.
    [ssquf] A 2-page single-spaced 1-inch margin blog post.
    [ssquf] A 2-minute video.
    [ssquf] A 2-minute podcast.
    [ssquf] 8'' x 11'' or smaller piece of artwork as a scanned copy.
    [ssquf] 3-minute song.
    Please be aware that EPA's policy is that, unless otherwise
prescribed by statute, members generally are appointed for a two-year
term. For appointment consideration, interested nominees should submit
the application materials electronically via email to Carissa Cyran at
[email protected] with the subject line NEYAC, COMMITTEE APPLICATION
PACKAGE 2023 for (Name of Nominee) by August 22, 2023.

Kathryn Avivah Jakob,
Director, Office of Public Engagement, Office of Public Engagement and
Environmental Education, Office of the Administrator.
[FR Doc. 2023-13216 Filed 6-21-23; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


[Federal Register Volume 76, Number 133 (Tuesday, July 12, 2011)]
[Notices]
[Pages 40906-40907]
[FR Doc No: 2011-17474]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Project No. 2678-005]

Pacific Gas and Electric Company; Notice of Intent To File
License Application, Filing of Pre-Application Document (Pad),
Commencement of Pre-Filing Process, and Scoping; Request for Comments
on the Pad and Scoping Document, and Identification of Issues and
Associated Study Requests

    a. Type of Filing: Notice of Intent to File License Application for
a Subsequent License and Commencing Pre-filing Process.
    b. Project No.: 2678-005.
    c. Dated Filed: April 29, 2011.
    d. Submitted By: Pacific Gas and Electric Company.
    e. Name of Project: Narrows No. 2 Transmission Line Project.
    f. Location: Nevada and Yuba Counties, California.
    g. Filed Pursuant to: 18 CFR Part 5 of the Commission's
Regulations.
    h. Potential Applicant Contact: Paul Maben, Pacific Gas and
Electric Company, 5555 Florin Perkins Road, Sacramento, CA 95826. Tel:
(209) 736-6644.
    i. FERC Contact: Mary Greene at<PHONE_NUMBER> or e-mail at
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>    j. Cooperating agencies: Federal, state, local, and tribal agencies
with jurisdiction and/or special expertise with respect to
environmental issues that wish to cooperate in the preparation of the
environmental document should follow the instructions for filing such
requests described in item o below. Cooperating agencies should note
the Commission's policy that agencies that cooperate in the preparation
of the environmental document cannot also intervene. See 94 FERC ]
61,076 (2001).
    k. With this notice, we are initiating informal consultation with:
(a) The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service under section 7 of the
Endangered Species Act and the joint agency regulations thereunder at
50 CFR part 402 and (b) the State Historic Preservation Officer, as
required by section 106, National Historical Preservation Act, and the
implementing regulations of the Advisory Council on Historic
Preservation at 36 CFR 800.2.
    l. Pacific Gas and Electric Company filed with the Commission a
Pre-Application Document (PAD; including a proposed process plan and
schedule),

pursuant to 18 CFR 5.6 of the Commission's regulations.
    m. A copy of the PAD is available for review at the Commission in
the Public Reference Room or may be viewed on the Commission's Web site
(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 Online Support at
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or toll free at 1-866-208-3676, or for TTY,
(202) 502-8659. A copy is also available for inspection and
reproduction at the address in paragraph h.
    Register online at http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/esubscription.asp to be notified via e-mail of new filing and issuances
related to this or other pending projects. For assistance, contact FERC
Online Support.
    n. With this notice, we are soliciting comments on the PAD and
Commission's staff Scoping Document 1 (SD1), as well as study requests.
All comments on the PAD and SD1, and study requests should be sent to
the address above in paragraph h. In addition, all comments on the PAD
and SD1, study requests, requests for cooperating agency status, and
all communications to and from Commission staff related to the merits
of the potential application must be filed with the Commission.
Documents may be filed electronically via the Internet. See 18 CFR
385.2001(a)(1)(iii) and the instructions on the Commission's Web site
http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/efiling.asp. Commenters can submit
brief comments up to 6,000 characters, without prior registration,
using the eComment system at http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/ecomment.asp. You must include your name and contact information at the
end of your comments. For assistance, please contact FERC Online
Support. Although the Commission strongly encourages electronic filing,
documents may also be paper-filed. To paper-file, mail an original and
seven copies to: Kimberly D. Bose, Secretary, Federal Energy Regulatory
Commission, 888 First Street, NE., Washington, DC 20426.
    All filings with the Commission must include on the first page, the
project name (Narrows No. 2 Transmission Line Project) and number (P-
2678-005), and bear the appropriate heading: ``Comments on Pre-
Application Document,'' ``Study Requests,'' ``Comments on Scoping
Document 1,'' ``Request for Cooperating Agency Status,'' or
``Communications to and from Commission Staff.'' Any individual or
entity interested in submitting study requests, commenting on the PAD
or SD1, and any agency requesting cooperating status must do so by
September 4, 2011.
    o. Although our current intent is to prepare a single EA, there is
a possibility that a subsequent EA or an environmental impact statement
(EIS) may be required. Nevertheless, this scoping document will satisfy
the NEPA scoping requirements, irrespective of whether an EA or EIS is
issued by the Commission.
    Because of the limited scope of environmental issues associated
with the Narrows No. 2 Transmission Line Project we do not anticipate
holding formal public or agency scoping meeting near the project site.
Instead, we will conduct paper scoping for the project.
    Scoping Document 1 (SD1), which outlines the subject areas to be
addressed in the environmental document, was mailed to the individuals
and entities on the Commission's mailing list. Follow the directions
for accessing information in paragraph n. Based on all oral and written
comments, a Scoping Document 2 (SD2) may be issued. SD2 may include a
revised process plan and schedule, as well as a list of issues,
identified through the scoping process.

    Dated: July 6, 2011.
Kimberly D. Bose,
 Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2011-17474 Filed 7-11-11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register: April 9, 2010 (Volume 75, Number 68)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Page 18047-18048]
[DOCID:fr09ap10-2]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 71

[Docket No. FAA-2010-0015; Airspace Docket No. 09-ASW-18]
RIN 2120-AA66

Amendment of Low Altitude Area Navigation Route T-254; Houston,
TX

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: This action amends low altitude Area Navigation (RNAV) route
T-254 in the Houston, TX, terminal area by eliminating the segment
between the Centex, TX, VHF Omnidirectional Range/Tactical Air
Navigation (VORTAC) and the College Station, TX, VORTAC. The FAA is
taking this action to eliminate a portion of T-254 that is no longer
needed; thus, enhancing safety and the efficient use of the navigable
airspace in the Houston, TX, terminal area.

DATES: Effective Dates: 0901 UTC, June 3, 2010. The Director of the
Federal Register approves this incorporation by reference action under
1 CFR part 51, subject to the annual revision of FAA Order 7400.9 and
publication of conforming amendments.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Colby Abbott, Airspace and Rules
Group, Office of System Operations Airspace and AIM, Federal Aviation
Administration, 800 Independence Avenue, SW., Washington, DC 20591;
telephone:<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

History

    On Tuesday, February 9, 2010, the FAA published in the Federal
Register a notice of proposed rulemaking to amend low altitude Area
Navigation (RNAV) route T-254 in the Houston, TX, terminal area (75 FR
6319). Interested parties were invited to participate in this
rulemaking effort by submitting written comments on the proposal to the
FAA. No comments were received.

The Rule

    This action amends Title 14 Code of Federal Regulations (14 CFR)
part 71 by amending area navigation route T-254

in the Houston, TX, terminal area. Specifically, the FAA is eliminating
the route segment of T-254 between the Centex, TX, VORTAC and College
Station, TX, VORTAC. This action eliminates unnecessary duplication
with an existing route segment of Federal Airway V-565 to enhance
safety and facilitate the efficient use of the navigable airspace for
en route instrument flight rules operations transitioning around the
Houston Class B terminal airspace area.
    Low altitude RNAV routes are published in paragraph 6011 of FAA
Order 7400.9T, Airspace Designations and Reporting Points, signed
August 27, 2009, and effective September 15, 2009, which is
incorporated by reference in 14 CFR 71.1. The low altitude RNAV route
listed in this document will be published subsequently in the Order.
    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.
Therefore, this regulation: (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 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.
    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 amends a low altitude Area Navigation route (T-254) in the
Houston, TX, terminal area.

Environmental Review

    The FAA has determined that this action qualifies for categorical
exclusion under the National Environmental Policy Act in accordance
with FAA Order 1050.1E, ``Environmental Impacts: Policies and
Procedures,'' paragraphs 311a. This airspace action is not expected to
cause any potentially significant environmental impacts, and no
extraordinary circumstances exist that warrant preparation of an
environmental assessment.

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 71

    Airspace, Incorporation by reference, Navigation (air).

Adoption of the Amendment

0
In consideration of the foregoing, the Federal Aviation Administration
amends 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 the Federal
Aviation Administration Order 7400.9T, Airspace Designations and
Reporting Points, signed August 27, 2009, and effective September 15,
2009, is amended as follows:

Paragraph 6011 Area Navigation Routes

* * * * *

T-254 College Station, TX to Lake Charles, LA [Amended]

College Station, TX (CLL) VORTAC
    (Lat. 30[deg]36'18'' N., long. 96[deg]25'14'' W.)
EAKES, TX WP
    (Lat. 30[deg]33'18'' N., long. 95[deg]18'29'' W.)
CREPO, TX WP
    (Lat. 30[deg]16'54'' N., long. 94[deg]14'43'' W.)
Lake Charles, LA (LCH) VORTAC
    (Lat. 30[deg]08'29'' N., long. 93[deg]06'20'' W.)

    Issued in Washington, DC, on April 1, 2010.
Ellen Crum,
Acting Manager, Airspace and Rules Group.
[FR Doc. 2010-8015 Filed 4-8-10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


[Federal Register Volume 77, Number 178 (Thursday, September 13, 2012)]
[Notices]
[Pages 56663-56664]
[FR Doc No: 2012-22505]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Federal Emergency Management Agency

[Docket ID: FEMA-2012-0029; OMB No. 1660-0098]

Agency Information Collection Activities: Proposed Collection;
Comment Request, Citizen Corps Council Registration

AGENCY: Federal Emergency Management Agency, DHS.

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: The Federal Emergency Management Agency, as part of its
continuing effort to reduce paperwork and respondent burden, invites
the general public and other Federal agencies to take this opportunity
to comment on an extension, without change, of a currently approved
information collection. In accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act
of 1995, this notice seeks comments concerning the online registration
process for Citizen Corps Councils and Community Emergency Response
Team programs.

DATES: Comments must be submitted on or before November 13, 2012.

ADDRESSES: To avoid duplicate submissions to the docket, please use
only one of the following means to submit comments:
    (1) Online. Submit comments at www.regulations.gov under Docket ID
FEMA-2010-XXXX. Follow the instructions for submitting comments.
    (2) Mail. Submit written comments to Docket Manager, Office of
Chief Counsel, DHS/FEMA, 500 C Street SW., Room 835, Washington, DC
20472-3100.
    (3) Facsimile. Submit comments to<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    All submissions received must include the agency name and Docket
ID. Regardless of the method used for submitting comments or material,
all submissions will be posted, without change, to the Federal
eRulemaking Portal at http://www.regulations.gov, and will include any
personal information you provide. Therefore, submitting this
information makes it public. You may wish to read the Privacy Act
notice that is available via the link in the footer of
www.regulations.gov.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Jenelle Cardone, Individual and
Community Preparedness Division Supervisory Program Specialist, FEMA,
202-786-9463 for additional information. You may contact the Records
Management Division for copies of the proposed collection of
information at facsimile number<PHONE_NUMBER> or email address<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Citizen Corps was launched as a Presidential
Initiative, Executive Order 13254, in 2002 with a mission to harness
the power of every individual through education, training, and
volunteer service to make communities safer, stronger, and better
prepared for the threats of terrorism, crime, public health issues, and
disasters of all kinds. The Community Emergency Response Team Program
offers training that prepares people to help themselves, their families
and their neighbors in the event of a disaster in their community.
    In order to fulfill its mission, the Federal Emergency Management
Agency (FEMA) Individual and Community Preparedness Division (ICPD)
require Citizen Corps Councils and Community Emergency Response Team
Programs to submit profiles electronically through its online
information collection process and forms. The Citizen Corps Council
registration form will allow FEMA and State personnel to ensure that
prospective Councils/CERTs have the support of the appropriate
government officials in their area, ensure a dedicated coordinator is
assigned to the Council, and will provide an efficient way to track the
effectiveness of the nationwide network of Councils and CERTs. This
continuing registration process will allow the Individual and Community
Preparedness Division to collect information that is more usable and
provide a more efficient way to track the effectiveness of the
nationwide network of Councils and CERT's.

Collection of Information

    Title: Citizen Corps Council Registration.
    Type of Information Collection: Extension, without change, of a
currently approved information collection.
    OMB Number: 1660-0098.
    FEMA Forms: FEMA Form 646-0-10ONL, Citizen Corps Council
Registration.
    Abstract: FEMA's Community Preparedness Division would like to
renew a currently approved collection for its registration of State,
local, Tribal and territorial Councils and Community Emergency Response
Teams. The registration process allows for new Councils to submit
information on the Council or CERT to the State Citizen Corps Program
Manager for approval. The revised registration process will allow for
the collection of more valuable information and the tool is more user-
friendly for Citizen Corps Councils and CERT's.
    Affected Public: State, local or Tribal Government.
    Number of Respondents: 3,750.
    Number of Responses: 7,500.
    Estimated Total Annual Burden Hours: 7,500 hours.

                                                                           Estimated Annualized Burden Hours and Costs
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                Number of                      Avg. burden    Total annual                    Total annual
              Type of respondent                       Form name/form No.            Number of     responses per   Total Number    per response     burden  (in     Avg. hourly     respondent
                                                                                respondents     respondent     of responses     (in hours)        hours)         wage rate         cost
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
State, local or Tribal Government.............  FEMA Form 646-0-10ONL/Citizen              3,750               2           7,500          1 hour           7,500          $25.90     $194,250.00
                                                 Corps Council Registration.
                                               -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Total.....................................  ................................           3,750  ..............           7,500  ..............           7,500  ..............      194,250.00
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Estimated Cost: The estimated annual cost to respondents for the
hour burden is $194,250.00. There are no annual costs to respondents
operations and maintenance costs for technical services. There is no
annual start-up or capital costs. The cost to the Federal Government is
$377,030.00.

Comments

    Comments may be submitted as indicated in the ADDRESSES caption
above. Comments are solicited to (a) evaluate whether the proposed data
collection is necessary for the proper performance of the agency,
including whether the information shall have practical utility; (b)
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; (c) enhance the quality, utility, and
clarity of the information to be collected; and (d) 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.

    Dated: September 6, 2012.
Charlene D. Myrthil,
Director, Records Management Division, Mission Support Bureau, Federal
Emergency Management Agency, Department of Homeland Security.
[FR Doc. 2012-22505 Filed 9-12-12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 9111-05-P


			  UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

		        DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

			  OFFICE OF THE SECRETARY

			          WASHINGTON, D.C.

Issued by the Department of Transportation on March 10, 2005

NOTICE OF ACTION TAKEN -- DOCKET OST-2000-6824

________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________

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:  Cathay Pacific Airways Limited					Date Filed:  December 21,
2004

Relief requested: Renew exemption from 49 U.S.C. § 41301 to engage in
scheduled foreign air transportation of  persons, property and mail
between Hong Kong, on the one hand, and twenty five (25) points in the
United States, via intermediate points, pursuant to a codeshare
arrangement with American Airlines, Inc. (American).

Date and citation of last action:  January 8, 2003, in this docket

Applicant representative:  William C. Evans<PHONE_NUMBER>

DOT Analyst:  Gordon H. Bingham<PHONE_NUMBER>

Responsive pleadings:  None filed

	DISPOSITION

Action:  Approved								Action date:  March 10, 2005

Effective dates of authority granted:  March 10, 2005-March 10, 2007

Basis for approval (bilateral agreement/reciprocity):  Bilateral
aviation agreement between the United States and Hong Kong (the
Agreement) and the Memorandum of Understanding of October 19, 2002 (the
MOU)

Except to the extent exempted/waived, this authority is subject to the
terms, conditions, and limitations indicated:

X  Foreign air carrier permit (Order 97-8-12), the Agreement, the MOU,
and the code-share conditions imposed on Cathay Pacific and American on
January 8, 2003, in this docket.

Special conditions/Partial grant/Denial basis/Remarks:

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) immediate action was required and 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 ten (10) 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:

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

Attachment

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.

												05/2004

  The Government of the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region of the
People’s Republic of China (HKSAR) may, at is discretion, change the
codeshare points in the United States on not less than 30 days’ notice
in writing to the Government of the United States.  By letter dated July
28, 2003, the HKSAR selected Nashville, New Orleans, Pittsburgh,
Raleigh/Durham and Tampa in addition to previously selected Atlanta,
Austin, Boston, Chicago, Dallas/Ft. Worth, Denver, Detroit, Ft.
Lauderdale, Houston, Las Vegas, Miami, New York/Newark, Orlando,
Philadelphia, San Diego, San Francisco, San Jose, San Juan, St. Louis,
and Washington/Baltimore, as codeshare points under the Agreement and
MOU.


[Federal Register Volume 85, Number 132 (Thursday, July 9, 2020)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 41221-41223]
[FR Doc No: 2020-14787]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. FAA-2020-0625; Product Identifier 2016-SW-007-AD]
RIN 2120-AA64

Airworthiness Directives; Various Restricted Category Helicopters

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM).

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

SUMMARY: The FAA proposes to adopt a new airworthiness directive (AD)
for various restricted category helicopters, originally manufactured by
Sikorsky Aircraft Corporation (Sikorsky), Model EH-60A, HH-60L, S-70,
S-70A, S-70C, S-70C(M), S-70C(M1), and UH-60A. This proposed AD would
require initial and recurring inspections of the main rotor (M/R) blade
spindle cuff for a crack. This proposed AD is prompted by multiple
reports of a cracked M/R blade spindle cuff. The proposed actions are
intended to prevent an unsafe condition on these products.

DATES: The FAA must receive comments on this proposed AD by August 24,
2020.

ADDRESSES: You may send comments by any of the following methods:
     Federal eRulemaking Docket: Go to https://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 https://www.regulations.gov by searching for and locating Docket No. FAA-2020-
0625; or in person at Docket Operations

between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal
holidays. The AD docket contains this proposed AD, any comments
received, and other information. The street address for Docket
Operations is listed above. Comments will be available in the AD docket
shortly after receipt.
    For service information identified in this proposed rule, contact
your local Sikorsky Field Representative or Sikorsky's Service
Engineering Group at Sikorsky Aircraft Corporation, 124 Quarry Road,
Trumbull, CT 06611; telephone 1-800-Winged-S; email
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Operators may also log on to the
Sikorsky 360 website at https://www.sikorsky360.com. You may view the
referenced service information at the FAA, Office of the Regional
Counsel, Southwest Region, 10101 Hillwood Pkwy., Room 6N-321, Fort
Worth, TX 76177.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Kristopher Greer, Aerospace Engineer,
Boston ACO Branch, Compliance and Airworthiness Division, FAA, 1200
District Avenue, Burlington, Massachusetts 01803; telephone 781-238-
7799; email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Comments Invited

    The FAA invites you to participate in this rulemaking by submitting
written comments, data, or views. 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.
    Except for Confidential Business Information (CBI) as described in
the following paragraph, and other information as described in 14 CFR
11.35, the FAA will file in the docket all comments received, as well
as a report summarizing each substantive public contact with FAA
personnel concerning this proposed rulemaking. Before acting on this
proposal, the FAA will consider all comments received on or before the
closing date for comments. The FAA will consider comments filed after
the comment period has closed if it is possible to do so without
incurring expense or delay. The FAA may change this proposal in light
of the comments received.

Confidential Business Information

    Confidential Business Information (CBI) is commercial or financial
information that is both customarily and actually treated as private by
its owner. Under the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) (5 U.S.C. 552),
CBI is exempt from public disclosure. If your comments responsive to
this NPRM contain commercial or financial information that is
customarily treated as private, that you actually treat as private, and
that is relevant or responsive to this NPRM, it is important that you
clearly designate the submitted comments as CBI. Please mark each page
of your submission containing CBI as ``PROPIN.'' The FAA will treat
such marked submissions as confidential under the FOIA, and they will
not be placed in the public docket of this NPRM. Submissions containing
CBI should be sent to Kristopher Greer, Aerospace Engineer, Boston ACO
Branch, Compliance and Airworthiness Division, FAA, 1200 District
Avenue, Burlington, Massachusetts 01803; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>; email
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Any commentary that the FAA receives which is
not specifically designated as CBI will be placed in the public docket
for this rulemaking.

Discussion

    The FAA proposes to adopt a new AD for various restricted category
helicopters, originally manufactured by Sikorsky, Model EH-60A, HH-60L,
S-70, S-70A, S-70C, S-70C(M), S-70C(M1), and UH-60A, with an M/R blade
spindle cuff part number 70150-09109-041 installed. This proposed AD
would require initial and recurring inspections of the M/R blade
spindle cuff for a crack.
    This proposed AD is prompted by multiple reports of a cracked M/R
blade spindle cuff. In 2008, Sikorsky reported an M/R blade spindle
cuff on a Model UH-60A helicopter that cracked across the lower inboard
bolt holes. Investigation determined the crack was caused by a non-
conforming hole edge break, specifically a burr, introduced during an
overhaul at a non-Sikorsky overhaul facility. Sikorsky issued Sikorsky
Safety Advisory No. SSA-S70-08-002, dated December 11, 2008 (SSA-S70-
08-002), for Black Hawk Model H-60- and S-70-series helicopters to
inform operators of the incident and recommend compliance with
Sikorsky's preventative maintenance inspections. The safety advisory
also recommended that operators with M/R blades overhauled by a non-
Sikorsky repair facility contact that facility to verify whether the
hole edge radius requirement was met during the overhaul.
    In 2015, the FAA received an additional report of an M/R blade
spindle cuff on a military model helicopter that cracked. Investigation
from this reporting has revealed no anomalies at the crack initiation
site. In each instance, a crack initiated at a bolt hole and spread to
either an adjacent bolt hole or to the free edge. Due to design
similarity, Model EH-60A, HH-60L, S-70, S-70A, S-70C, S-70C(M), S-
70C(M1), and UH-60A helicopters are all affected by this unsafe
condition. The proposed actions are intended to detect a crack, prevent
failure of an M/R blade spindle cuff, loss of an M/R blade, and loss of
control of the helicopter.

FAA's Determination

    The FAA is proposing this AD after evaluating all known relevant
information and determining that an unsafe condition exists and is
likely to exist or develop on other helicopters of these same type
designs.

Related Service Information

    The FAA reviewed SSA-S70-08-002. This service information
recommends, for helicopters with M/R blades overhauled by non-Sikorsky
M/R blade repair facilities, contacting the facilities to verify
whether the hole edge radius requirement was met during cuff
replacement. The safety advisory also recommends operators conduct 10
hour/14 day visual inspections and follow the inspection procedures
regarding sudden onset of low frequency vibration or an out of track
condition.
    The FAA also reviewed Sikorsky Technical Manual Preventative
Maintenance Services 10 Hour/14 Day (30 Hour/42 Day) Inspection
Checklist TM 1-70-PMS-1, dated December 1, 2014, for Sikorsky Model S-
70 helicopters. This service information contains procedures for the 10
hour/14 day and 30 hour/42 day inspections.

Proposed AD Requirements

    This proposed AD would require, using 10X or higher power
magnification, visually inspecting each M/R blade spindle cuff for a
crack, and replacing the M/R blade spindle cuff if there is a crack.

Costs of Compliance

    The FAA estimates that this proposed AD affects 204 helicopters of
U.S. Registry. The FAA estimates that operators may incur the following
costs in order to comply with this AD. Labor

costs are estimated at $85 per work-hour.
    Inspecting the M/R blade spindle cuffs would take about 1 work-hour
for an estimated cost of $85 per helicopter and $17,340 for the U.S.
fleet. Replacing an M/R blade spindle cuff would take about 175 work-
hours and required parts would cost about $10,000 for a total estimated
replacement cost of $24,875 per M/R blade spindle cuff.

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.
    The FAA is 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

    The FAA 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. Will not affect intrastate aviation in Alaska, and
    3. 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.

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

0
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]

0
2. The FAA amends Sec.  39.13 by adding the following new airworthiness
directive (AD):

Various Restricted Category Helicopters: Docket No. FAA-2020-0625;
Product Identifier 2016-SW-007-AD.

(a) Applicability

    This AD applies to various restricted category helicopters
originally manufactured by Sikorsky Aircraft Corporation, Model EH-
60A, HH-60L, S-70, S-70A, S-70C, S-70C(M), S-70C(M1), and UH-60A
helicopters with a main rotor (M/R) blade spindle cuff part number
70150-09109-041 installed; type certificate holders include but are
not limited to ACE Aeronautics, LLC; BHI H60 Helicopters, LLC;
Billings Flying Service Inc.; Carson Helicopters; Delta Enterprise;
High Performance Helicopters Corp.; Northwest Rotorcraft LLC;
Pickering Aviation, Inc.; PJ Helicopters Inc.; Sikorsky Aircraft
Corporation; SixtyHawk TC, LLC; Skydance Blackhawk Operations, LLC;
Timberline Helicopters, Inc.; and Unical Aviation, Inc.

(b) Unsafe Condition

    This AD defines the unsafe condition as a crack in an M/R blade
spindle cuff. This condition could result in failure of an M/R blade
spindle cuff, loss of an M/R blade, and loss of control of the
helicopter.

(c) Comments Due Date

    The FAA must receive comments by August 24, 2020.

(d) 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.

(e) Required Actions

    Before further flight, unless already done within the last 10
hours time-in-service (TIS), and thereafter at intervals not to
exceed 10 hours TIS from the last inspection:
    (1) Using 10X or higher power magnification, visually inspect
each M/R blade spindle cuff for a crack. Pay particular attention to
the area around each bolt hole and the upper and lower surfaces of
the leading and trailing edges of each M/R blade spindle cuff.
    (2) If there is a crack, replace the M/R blade spindle cuff
before further flight.

(f) Alternative Methods of Compliance (AMOC)

    (1) The Manager, Boston ACO Branch, FAA, may approve AMOCs for
this AD. Send your proposal to: Kristopher Greer, Aerospace
Engineer, Boston ACO Branch, Compliance and Airworthiness Division,
FAA, 1200 District Avenue, Burlington, Massachusetts 01803;
telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>; email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>    (2) For operations conducted under a 14 CFR part 119 operating
certificate or under 14 CFR part 91, subpart K, the FAA suggests
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.

(g) Additional Information

    Sikorsky Safety Advisory No. SSA-S70-08-002, dated December 11,
2008, and Sikorsky Technical Manual Preventative Maintenance
Services 10 Hour/14 Day (30 Hour/42 Day) Inspection Checklist 1-70-
PMS-1, dated December 1, 2014, which are not incorporated by
reference, contain additional information about the subject of this
AD. For service information identified in this AD, contact your
local Sikorsky Field Representative or Sikorsky's Service
Engineering Group at Sikorsky Aircraft Corporation, 124 Quarry Road,
Trumbull, CT 06611; telephone 1-800-Winged-S; email
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Operators may also log on to
the Sikorsky 360 website at https://www.sikorsky360.com. You may
view a copy of information at the FAA, Office of the Regional
Counsel, Southwest Region, 10101 Hillwood Pkwy., Room 6N-321, Fort
Worth, TX 76177.

 (h) Subject

    Joint Aircraft Service Component (JASC) Code: 6220, Main Rotor
Head--Main Rotor Spindle Cuff.

    Issued on July 2, 2020.
Ross Landes,
Deputy Director for Regulatory Operations, Compliance & Airworthiness
Division, Aircraft Certification Service.
[FR Doc. 2020-14787 Filed 7-8-20; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


[Federal Register Volume 87, Number 235 (Thursday, December 8, 2022)]
[Notices]
[Pages 75242-75243]
[FR Doc No: 2022-26676]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Docket No. IC22-35-000]

Commission Information Collection Activities (FERC-725J); Comment
Request; Extension

AGENCY: Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, DOE.

ACTION: Notice of information collection and request for comments.

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

SUMMARY: In compliance with the requirements of the Paperwork Reduction
Act of 1995, the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (Commission or
FERC) is soliciting public comment on the currently approved
information collection, FERC-725J (Definition of the Bulk Electric
System), which will be submitted to the Office of Management and Budget
(OMB). The Commission published a 60-day notice in the Federal Register
on September 28, 2022 and received no comments on the 60-day notice.

DATES: Comments on the collection of information are due January 9,
2023.

ADDRESSES: Send written comments on FERC 725J to OMB through
www.reginfo.gov/public/do/PRAMain, Attention: Federal Energy Regulatory
Commission Desk Officer. Please identify the OMB Control Number 1902-
0259 (Definition of the Bulk Electric System) in the subject line. Your
comments should be sent within 30 days of publication of this notice in
the Federal Register.
    Please submit copies of your comments (identified by Docket No.
IC22-35-000 and the form) to the Commission as noted below. Electronic
filing through https://www.ferc.gov, is preferred.
     Electronic Filing: Documents must be filed in acceptable
native applications and print-to-PDF, but not in scanned or picture
format.
     For those unable to file electronically, comments may be
filed by USPS mail or by hand (including courier) delivery.
    [cir] Mail via U.S. Postal Service Only, addressed to: Federal
Energy Regulatory Commission, Secretary of the Commission, 888 First
Street NE, Washington, DC 20426.
    [cir] Hand (Including Courier) Delivery to: Federal Energy
Regulatory Commission, Secretary of the Commission, 12225 Wilkins
Avenue, Rockville, MD 20852.
    Please reference the specific collection number(s) and/or title(s)
in your comments.
    Instructions: OMB submissions must be formatted and filed in
accordance with submission guidelines at: www.reginfo.gov/public/do/PRAMain. Using the search function under the ``Currently Under Review
field,'' select Federal Energy Regulatory Commission; click ``submit''
and select ``comment'' to the right of the subject collection. FERC
submissions must be formatted and filed in accordance with submission
guidelines at: https://www.ferc.gov. For user assistance contact FERC
Online Support by email at [email protected], or by phone at
(866) 208-3676 (toll-free).
    Docket: Users interested in receiving automatic notification of
activity in this docket or in viewing/downloading comments and
issuances in this docket may do so at https://www.ferc.gov.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ellen Brown may be reached by email at
[email protected] and telephone at<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
    Title: FERC-725J (Definition of the Bulk Electric System).
    OMB Control No.: 1902-0259.
    Type of Request: Three-year extension of the FERC-725J with no
changes to the current reporting requirements.
    Abstract: On December 20, 2012, the Commission issued Order No.
773, a Final Rule approving NERC's modifications to the definition of
``bulk electric system'' and the Rules of Procedure exception process
to be effective July 1, 2013. On April 18, 2013, in Order No. 773-A,
the Commission largely affirmed its findings in Order No. 773. In Order
Nos. 773 and 773-A, the Commission directed NERC to modify the
definition of bulk electric system in two respects: (1) modify the
local network exclusion (exclusion E3) to remove the 100 kV minimum
operating voltage to allow systems that include one or more looped
configurations connected below 100 kV to be eligible for the local
network exclusion; and (2) modify the exclusions to ensure that
generator interconnection facilities at or above 100 kV connected to
bulk electric system generators identified in inclusion I2 are not
excluded from the bulk electric system.\1\ Each year the Regions and
NERC may need to act on exception requests submitted by U.S. only
transmission owners, generator owners and distribution providers. We
have revised the estimate for exception requests from 20 exception
requests to 10, which is more accurate to the volume of received
exception requests. Regarding Implementation Plans and Compliance, FERC
estimates that 10% of the U.S. registered entities may have to perform
this task on a continuing basis.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ Revisions to Electric Reliability Organization Definition of
Bulk Electric System and Rules of Procedure, Order No. 773, 141 FERC
] 61,236 (2012); order on reh'g, Order No. 773-A, 143 FERC ] 61,053
(2013); order on reh'g and clarification, 144 FERC ] 61,174 (2013);
aff'd sub nom., People of the State of New York and the Pub. Serv.
Comm'n of New York v. FERC, No. 13-2316 (2d. Cir. 2015). On June 13,
2013, the Commission granted NERC's request for extension of time
and extended the effective date for the revised definition of bulk
electric system and the Rules of Procedure exception process to July
1, 2014. Revisions to Electric Reliability Organization Definition
of Bulk Electric System and Rules of Procedure, 143 FERC ] 61,231,
at P 13 (2013). On March 20, 2014, the Commission approved NERC's
revisions to the definition of bulk electric system and determined
the revisions either adequately address the Commission's Order Nos.
773 and 773-A directives or provide an equally effective and
efficient approach. See order approving revised definition, 146 FERC
] 61,199 (2014).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Type of Respondents: Generator owners, distribution providers,
other NERC-registered entities.
    Estimate of Annual Burden.\2\ The Commission estimates the annual
public reporting burden and cost \3\ for the information collection as:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \2\ Burden is defined as 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. See 5
CFR 1320 for additional information on the definition of information
collection burden.
    \3\ The estimated hourly cost (salary plus benefits) is based on
the figures for August 2022 posted by the Bureau of Labor Statistics
for the Utilities sector (available at Sector 22--Utilities--May
2021 OEWS Industry-Specific Occupational Employment and Wage
Estimates (bls.gov)) and updated June 2022 for benefits information
(at Employer Costs for Employee Compensation Summary--2022 Q01
Results (bls.gov)). The hourly estimates for salary plus benefits
are:
    --Legal (code 23-0000), $145.35
    --File Clerks (code 43-4071), $34.38
    --Electrical Engineer (code 17-2071), $77.02
    The average hourly burden cost for this collection is $85.58
[($145.35 + $34.38 + $ 77.02)/3 = $85.58] and is rounded to $86.00
an hour.

                                                                       FERC-725J (Definition of the Bulk Electric System)
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                            Annual number
                                              Number of     of responses    Total number    Average burden (hrs.) & cost ($) per    Total annual burden hours & total annual        Cost per
                                             respondents   per respondent   of responses                  response                                  cost ($)                     respondent ($)
                                                      (1)             (2)     (1) * (2) =  (4)..................................  (3) * (4) = (5)............................          (5) / (1)
                                                                                (3)
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Generator Owners, Distribution Providers,              10               1              10  120 hrs.; $10,320....................  1,200 hrs.; $103,200.......................            $10,320
 and Transmission Owners (Exception
 Request).
All Registered Entities (Implementation               157               1             157  350 hrs.; $30,100....................  54,950 hrs.; $4,725,700....................             30,100
 Plans and Compliance).
Local Distribution Determinations........               1               1               1  92 hrs.; $7,912......................  92 hrs.; $7,912............................              7,912
                                          ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Total................................  ..............  ..............             168  .....................................  56,242 hrs.; $4,836,812....................  .................
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Comments: Comments are invited on: (1) whether the collection of
information is necessary for the proper performance of the functions of
the Commission, including whether the information will have practical
utility; (2) the accuracy of the agency's estimates of the burden and
cost of the collection of information, including the validity of the
methodology and assumptions used; (3) ways to enhance the quality,
utility and clarity of the information collection; and (4) ways to
minimize the burden of the collection of information on those who are
to respond, including the use of automated collection techniques or
other forms of information technology.

    Dated: December 2, 2022.
Kimberly D. Bose,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2022-26676 Filed 12-7-22; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P