[Federal Register Volume 75, Number 92 (Thursday, May 13, 2010)]
[Notices]
[Page 26977]
[FR Doc No: 2010-11485]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Federal Emergency Management Agency

[Internal Agency Docket No. FEMA-1894-DR; Docket ID FEMA-2010-0002]

Rhode Island; Amendment No. 5 to Notice of a Major Disaster
Declaration

AGENCY: Federal Emergency Management Agency, DHS.

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: This notice amends the notice of a major disaster declaration
for the State of Rhode Island (FEMA-1894-DR), dated March 29, 2010, and
related determinations.

DATES: Effective Date: May 5, 2010.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Peggy Miller, Recovery Directorate,
Federal Emergency Management Agency, 500 C Street, SW., Washington, DC
20472,<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The Federal Emergency Management Agency
(FEMA) hereby gives notice that pursuant to the authority vested in the
Administrator, under Executive Order 12148, as amended, Craig A.
Gilbert, of FEMA is appointed to act as the Federal Coordinating
Officer for this disaster.
    This action terminates the appointment of Gracia B. Szczech as
Federal Coordinating Officer for this disaster.

The following Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance Numbers (CFDA)
are to be used for reporting and drawing funds: 97.030, Community
Disaster Loans; 97.031, Cora Brown Fund; 97.032, Crisis Counseling;
97.033, Disaster Legal Services; 97.034, Disaster Unemployment
Assistance (DUA); 97.046, Fire Management Assistance Grant; 97.048,
Disaster Housing Assistance to Individuals and Households in
Presidentially Declared Disaster Areas; 97.049, Presidentially
Declared Disaster Assistance--Disaster Housing Operations for
Individuals and Households; 97.050, Presidentially Declared Disaster
Assistance to Individuals and Households--Other Needs; 97.036,
Disaster Grants--Public Assistance (Presidentially Declared
Disasters); 97.039, Hazard Mitigation Grant.

W. Craig Fugate,
Administrator, Federal Emergency Management Agency.
[FR Doc. 2010-11485 Filed 5-12-10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 9111-23-P


[Federal Register Volume 78, Number 202 (Friday, October 18, 2013)]
[Notices]
[Page 62350]
[FR Doc No: 2013-24480]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Project No. 13567-001]

City of Guttenberg; Notice of Successive Preliminary Permit
Application Accepted for Filing and Soliciting Comments, Motions To
Intervene, and Competing Applications

    On July 2, 2013, the City of Guttenberg filed an application for a
successive preliminary permit, pursuant to section 4(f) of the Federal
Power Act (FPA), proposing to study the feasibility of the Guttenberg
Water Power Project to be located on the Mississippi River, near the
township of Guttenberg, in Clayton County, Iowa. The sole purpose of a
preliminary permit, if issued, is to grant the permit holder priority
to file a license application during the permit term. A preliminary
permit does not authorize the permit holder to perform any land-
disturbing activities or otherwise enter upon lands or waters owned by
others without the owners' express permission.
    The proposed project would consist of the following: (1) An
existing 140-foot-wide by 280-foot-long auxiliary lock; (2) a new 110-
foot-wide by 250-foot-long concrete powerhouse containing four new 5-
mega-watt (MW) pit-type horizontal turbine units for a total capacity
of 20 MW; (3) an existing local step-up transformer; (4) a new 300-
foot-long, 69-kilovolt (kV) transmission line extending from the local
transformer to the local grid (the point of interconnection) which is
owned and operated by the City of Guttenberg; and (5) appurtenant
facilities. The estimated annual generation of the Guttenberg Water
Power Project would be 63,400 megawatt-hours.
    Applicant Contact: Mr. Barry Dykhuizen, City of Guttenberg, P.O.
Box 580, 502 S. 1st Street, Guttenberg, IA 52052-0580; phone: (563)
252-1161, extension 109.
    FERC Contact: Tyrone Williams; phone:<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    Deadline for filing comments, motions to intervene, competing
applications (without notices of intent), or notices of intent to file
competing applications: 60 days from the issuance of this notice.
Competing applications and notices of intent must meet the requirements
of 18 CFR 4.36.
    The Commission strongly encourages electronic filing. Please file
comments, motions to intervene, notices of intent, and competing
applications using the Commission's eFiling system at 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 at
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>(866) 208-3676 (toll free), or (202) 502-
8659 (TTY). In lieu of electronic filing, please send a paper copy to:
Secretary, Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street NE.,
Washington, DC 20426. The first page of any filing should include
docket number P-13567-001.
    More information about this project, including a copy of the
application, can be viewed or printed on the ``eLibrary'' link of
Commission's Web site at http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/elibrary.asp.
Enter the docket number (P-13567) in the docket number field to access
the document. For assistance, contact FERC Online Support.

    Dated: October 10, 2013.
Nathaniel J. Davis, Sr.,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2013-24480 Filed 10-17-13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 79, Number 150 (Tuesday, August 5, 2014)]
[Notices]
[Pages 45577-45581]
[FR Doc No: 2014-18434]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-72720; File No. SR-NYSEArca-2014-81]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; NYSE Arca, Inc.; Notice of Filing
and Immediate Effectiveness of Proposed Rule Change Amending the NYSE
Arca Options Fee Schedule and the NYSE Arca Equities Schedule of Fees
and Charges for Exchange Services, Related to Co-Location Services

July 30, 2014.
    Pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) \1\ of the Securities Exchange Act of
1934 (the ``Act'') \2\ and Rule 19b-4 thereunder,\3\ notice is hereby
given that, on July 23, 2014, NYSE Arca, Inc. (the ``Exchange'' or
``NYSE Arca'') filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the
``Commission'') the proposed rule change as described in Items I, II,
and III below, which Items have been prepared by the self-regulatory
organization. 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\ 15 U.S.C. 78a.
    \3\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4.

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

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

    The Exchange proposes to amend the NYSE Arca Options Fee Schedule
(``Options Fee Schedule'') and, through its wholly owned subsidiary
NYSE Arca Equities, Inc., to amend the NYSE Arca Equities Schedule of
Fees and Charges for Exchange Services (``Equities Fee Schedule'' and,
together with the Options Fee Schedule, ``Fee Schedules''), related to
co-location services. The Exchange proposes to implement the fee change
effective July 28, 2014. The text of the proposed rule change is
available on the Exchange's Web site at www.nyse.com, at the principal
office of the Exchange, 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 self-regulatory organization
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 those 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 parts of such statements.

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

1. Purpose
    The Exchange proposes to amend the Fee Schedules related to co-
location services. The Exchange proposes to implement the fee change
effective July 28, 2014.\4\ The proposed change is intended to, among
other things, streamline the offerings available to Users in the data
center, make the Fee Schedules easier to understand and administer, and
eliminate references to services that would be discontinued because
they are no longer utilized by Users.\5\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ The Securities and Exchange Commission (``Commission'')
initially approved the Exchange's co-location services in Securities
Exchange Act Release No. 63275 (November 8, 2010), 75 FR 70048
(November 16, 2010) (SR-NYSEArca-2010-100) (the ``Original Co-
location Approval''). The Exchange operates a data center in Mahwah,
New Jersey (the ``data center'') from which it provides co-location
services to Users.
    \5\ For purposes of the Exchange's co-location services, the
term ``User'' includes (i) ETP Holders and Sponsored Participants
that are authorized to obtain access to the NYSE Arca Marketplace
pursuant to NYSE Arca Equities Rule 7.29 (see NYSE Arca Equities
Rule 1.1(yy)); (ii) OTP Holders, OTP Firms and Sponsored
Participants that are authorized to obtain access to the NYSE Arca
System pursuant to NYSE Arca Options Rule 6.2A (see NYSE Arca
Options Rule 6.1A(a)(19)); and (iii) non-ETP Holder, non-OTP Holder
and non-OTP Firm broker-dealers and vendors that request to receive
co-location services directly from the Exchange. See, e.g.,
Securities Exchange Act Release Nos. 65970 (December 15, 2011), 76
FR 79242 (December 21, 2011) (SR-NYSEArca-2011-74) and 65971
(December 15, 2011), 76 FR 79267 (December 21, 2011) (SR-NYSEArca-
2011-75). As specified in the Fee Schedules, a User that incurs co-
location fees for a particular co-location service pursuant thereto
would not be subject to co-location fees for the same co-location
service charged by the Exchange's affiliates NYSE MKT LLC and New
York Stock Exchange LLC. See Securities Exchange Act Release No.
70173 (August 13, 2013), 78 FR 50459 (August 19, 2013) (SR-NYSEArca-
2013-80).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Cages
    A User is able to purchase a cage to house its cabinets within the
data center. A cage would typically be purchased by a User that has
several cabinets within the data center and that wishes to arrange its
cabinets contiguously while also enhancing privacy around its cabinets.
The Exchange charges fees for cages based on the size of the cage,
which directly corresponds to the number of cabinets housed therein.\6\
The Exchange proposes to amend the Fee Schedules to reflect that a User
must have at least two cabinets in the data center to purchase a cage.
Existing pricing for cages would not change.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ See Securities Exchange Act Release Nos. 67669 (August 15,
2012), 77 FR 50746 (August 22, 2012) (SR-NYSEArca-2012-62); and
67667 (August 15, 2012), 77 FR 50743 (August 22, 2012) (SR-NYSEArca-
2012-63).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

LCN CSP Access
    The Exchange's ``Liquidity Center Network'' (``LCN'') is a local
area network that is available in the data center. A User is currently
able to act as a content service provider (a ``CSP'' User) and deliver
services to another User in the data center (a ``Subscribing''
User).\7\ These services could include, for example, order routing/
brokerage services and/or data delivery services. LCN CSP connections
allow the CSP User to send data to, and communicate with, all the
properly authorized Subscribing Users at once, via a specific,
dedicated LCN connection (an ``LCN CSP'' connection). The Fee Schedules
include related pricing.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange proposes to discontinue the one gigabit (``Gb'') LCN
CSP connection offering, which is no longer utilized by Users, and to
remove references to related pricing from the Fee Schedules. The 10 Gb
LCN CSP connection offering would remain available, as would the
related pricing in the Fee Schedules. Also, a CSP User would remain
able to deliver its services to a Subscribing User via direct cross
connect, as is currently the case and as was the case prior to the
introduction of the LCN CSP connection offering.
Bundled Network Access
    A User is currently able to select from three ``bundled''
connectivity options, at various bandwidths (i.e., one, 10 and 40 Gb),
when connecting to the data center. The Exchange proposes to
discontinue ``bundled'' connectivity options that are no longer
utilized by Users and to remove references to related pricing from the
Fee Schedules. In particular, the Exchange would discontinue (1)
``Option 2'' completely, (2) the 10 Gb LX and 40 Gb bandwidth
``bundles'' under ``Option 1,'' and (3) the one Gb, 10 Gb LX and 40 Gb
``bundles'' under Option 3. Current ``Option 3'' would be renumbered as
``Option 2.''
Initial Install Services
    When a User selects a new cabinet in the data center it is charged
the ``Initial Install Services'' fee ($800 per dedicated cabinet or
$400 for per eight-rack unit in a partial cabinet), which includes
initial racking of equipment in the cabinet, provision of a certain
number of cables (10 per dedicated cabinet or five per eight-rack unit
in a partial cabinet), and a certain number of hours of labor (four per
dedicated cabinet or two per eight-rack unit in a partial cabinet).\8\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \8\ The Exchange explained the Initial Install Services fee when
it introduced partial cabinet offerings. See Securities Exchange Act
Release No. 71130 (December 18, 2013), 78 FR 77765 (December 24,
2013) (SR-NYSEArca-2013-143).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange proposes that the Initial Install Services would no
longer limit the number of cables that are included and that references
to those limits would be removed from the Fee Schedules. A User would
therefore be provided with the number of cables required to provision
the cabinet for initial installation. The existing limit on the number
of labor hours included would remain.
Hot Hands and Related Services
    The Exchange currently offers a ``Hot Hands Service,'' which allows
Users to use on-site data center personnel to maintain User
equipment.\9\ The applicable fee in the Fee Schedules for Hot Hands
Service is $200 per hour if scheduled during normal business hours
(i.e., on non-Exchange holidays, Monday to Friday, 9 a.m. to 5 p.m.)
and if scheduled at least one day in advance. A higher fee applies if,
for example, the

Hot Hands Service is scheduled during extended business hours (i.e.,
Monday to Friday, 5 p.m. to 9 a.m., Exchange holidays, and weekends, if
scheduled at least one day in advance) or if the Hot Hands Service is
``expedited'' (i.e., if not scheduled at least one day in advance).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \9\ See Original Co-location Approval.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange proposes to consolidate all the current categories of
Hot Hands Service under a single Hot Hands Service category and charge
a single rate of $100 per half hour. The proposed $100 per half hour
charge would be equivalent to the existing $200 per hour rate in the
Fee Schedules, except that it would reflect a charge for Hot Hands
Service in half hour increments. The other existing rates that
currently apply to Hot Hands Service during extended business hours or
for expedited Hot Hands Service would be discontinued.
    Several other related services described in the Fee Schedules are
available to Users, for which the same $200 per hour rate applies as is
currently applicable for the standard Hot Hands Service, as follows:
\10\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \10\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

     ``Rack and Stack''
     Installation of one server in a User's cabinet. This
service encompasses handling, unpacking, tagging, and installation of
the server as well as one network connection within the User's rack.
     ``Install and Document Cable''
     Labor charges to install and document the fitting of
cable(s) in a User's cabinet(s) in excess of the cables included in the
cabinet Initial Install Services fee (as described above); and
     ``Technician Support Service--Non Emergency''
     Network technician equipped to support User network
troubleshooting activity and to provide all necessary testing
instruments to support the User request. One prior day's notice is
required.
    The Exchange proposes to perform these services under the single
Hot Hands Service category proposed above, at the proposed Hot Hands
Service rate of $100 per half hour. Because of the elimination of the
limit on the number of cables included with the Initial Install
Services fee, the ``Install and Document Cable'' service that would be
subsumed into the Hot Hands Service fee would apply to additional labor
hours needed to complete an initial install above the amount of time
included in the Initial Install Services fee (i.e., greater than four
hours per dedicated cabinet or two hours per eight-rack unit in a
partial cabinet).
    Several other related services described in the Fee Schedules are
available to Users in the data center for which the service fee is
different than the current $200 per hour Hot Hands Service fee, as
follows: \11\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \11\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

     ``Power Recycling''--$50 per reset.
     Reboot of power on one server or switch as well as
observing and reporting on the status of the reboot back to the User.
     ``Equipment Maintenance Call Escalation''--$100 per call.
     Hardware maintenance-break fix services.
     ``Technician Support Service--Emergency''--$325 per hour.
     Network technician equipped to support User network
troubleshooting activity and to provide all necessary testing
instruments to support the User request. Two hour notice is required.
    The Exchange also proposes to perform these services under the
single Hot Hands Service category proposed above, similarly at the
proposed Hot Hands Service rate of $100 per half hour.
Obsolete Dates
    Certain services in the data center that are described in the Fee
Schedules identify introductory dates during which discounted pricing
had been in effect. These dates have passed. The Exchange proposes to
eliminate the obsolete references to these dates. This proposed change
would have no impact on pricing.
General
    As is the case with all Exchange co-location arrangements, (i)
neither a User nor any of the User's customers would be permitted to
submit orders directly to the Exchange unless such User or customer is
an ETP Holder, an OTP Holder or OTP Firm, a Sponsored Participant or an
agent thereof (e.g., a service bureau providing order entry services);
(ii) use of the co-location services proposed herein would be
completely voluntary and available to all Users on a non-discriminatory
basis; \12\ and (iii) a User would only incur one charge for the
particular co-location service described herein, regardless of whether
the User connects only to the Exchange or to the Exchange and one or
both of its affiliates.\13\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \12\ As is currently the case, Users that receive co-location
services from the Exchange will not receive any means of access to
the Exchange's trading and execution systems that is separate from,
or superior to, that of other Users. In this regard, all orders sent
to the Exchange enter the Exchange's trading and execution systems
through the same order gateway, regardless of whether the sender is
co-located in the data center or not. In addition, co-located Users
do not receive any market data or data service product that is not
available to all Users, although Users that receive co-location
services normally would expect reduced latencies in sending orders
to, and receiving market data from, the Exchange.
    \13\ See SR-NYSEArca-2013-80, supra note 5 at 50459. The
Exchange's affiliates have also submitted the same proposed rule
change to propose the changes described herein. See SR-NYSEMKT-2014-
61 and SR-NYSE-2014-37.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The proposed change is not otherwise intended to address any other
issues relating to co-location services and/or related fees, and the
Exchange is not aware of any problems that Users would have in
complying with the proposed change.
2. Statutory Basis
    The Exchange believes that the proposed rule change is consistent
with Section 6(b) of the Act,\14\ in general, and furthers the
objectives of Sections 6(b)(4) and 6(b)(5) of the Act,\15\ in
particular, because it provides for the equitable allocation of
reasonable dues, fees, and other charges among its members, issuers and
other persons using its facilities and does not unfairly discriminate
between customers, issuers, brokers or dealers.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \14\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b).
    \15\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(4) and (5).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange believes that the proposed change is reasonable
because the Exchange offers the services described herein as a
convenience to Users, but in doing so incurs certain costs, including
costs related to the data center facility, hardware and equipment and
costs related to personnel required for initial installation and
ongoing monitoring, support and maintenance of such services. The
Exchange believes that the proposed change is consistent with the Act
because it would permit the Exchange to streamline the offerings
available to Users in the data center, make the Fee Schedules easier to
understand and administer, and eliminate references in the Fee
Schedules to services that would be discontinued because they are no
longer utilized by Users.
    The Exchange believes that it is reasonable to require that a User
have a minimum of two cabinets in the data center in order to purchase
a cage because a User with one cabinet typically would not be
interested in placing a cage around a single cabinet, due to the lack
of necessity and the added cost that the User would incur. The Exchange
also believes that this is reasonable because the existing monthly cage
fees reflect the opportunity cost to the Exchange of giving up floor
space in the data center for the cage's physical footprint and the
value of such space to the User, in that such floor space otherwise
could be utilized for additional cabinets for the same or other

Users or other Exchange purposes. Placing just a single cabinet in a
cage would not be consistent with this opportunity cost. However,
existing pricing for cages would not change, and requiring a minimum of
two cabinets also would not result in a price increase for a cage,
because the price for the cage would not increase until a User's number
of cabinets reaches the next pricing tier for cages (i.e., 15-28
cabinets).
    The Exchange believes that it is reasonable to discontinue the
services in the data center that are no longer utilized by Users and to
remove references to related pricing from the Fee Schedules because the
resulting Fee Schedules would be more streamlined and easier to read,
understand and administer. This would also contribute to a more
efficient process for managing the various services offered to Users,
which would improve the utilization of the data center resources, both
with respect to personnel and infrastructure (i.e., hardware, software,
etc.).
    The Exchange believes that it is reasonable to eliminate the limit
on the number of cables that are included in the Initial Install
Services fee because it would assist Users in meeting the growing needs
of their business operations. Some Users require fewer cables than the
current limits, while other Users require more. However, the Exchange
generally anticipates that, on average, these amounts would be
consistent with the amounts currently specified in the Fee Schedules.
The existing limits on labor hours would remain. Therefore, a User
whose cable requirements result in labor hours that exceed the amount
included in the Initial Install Services fee would be required to
utilize Hot Hands Service and pay the corresponding fee.
    The Exchange believes that it is reasonable to charge a single rate
of $100 per half hour for Hot Hands Service, including for Hot Hands
Service during extended business hours and for expedited Hot Hands
Service. The proposed $100 per half hour charge would be equivalent to
the existing $200 per hour rate in the Fee Schedules, except that it
would reflect billing for Hot Hands Service in half hour increments.
This is reasonable because it would consolidate several similar
services under one category with a single applicable rate, thereby
eliminating the need for Users to identify the type of Hot Hands
Service they are requesting, the timing for the request, or for the
Exchange to monitor and record the initiation time of the corresponding
performance of the service. The Exchange believes that charging $100
per half hour is reasonable because it would represent an overall
decrease compared to the several, current Hot Hands Service categories
(i.e., during extended business hours and for expedited Hot Hands
Service).
    The Exchange believes that it is reasonable to perform other
related services under the Hot Hands Service category, for which the
same $200 per hour rate currently applies for the standard Hot Hands
Service, because this would simplify the descriptions of the various
categories of services available to Users. However, despite the
proposed change, the applicable rate would remain consistent with the
current rate in the Fee Schedules (i.e., $100 per half hour instead of
$200 per full hour), as would the actual performance of these services,
because the data center personnel would be the same as the personnel
performing Hot Hands Service.
    The Exchange also believes that it is reasonable to perform various
other related services under the proposed single Hot Hands Service
category, at the proposed rate of $100 per half hour, despite different
fees currently applying to such services. This would contribute to
further simplifying the descriptions of the various categories of
services available to Users and make the Fee Schedules easier to
understand and administer. The applicable base rate would decrease for
Technician Support Service--Emergency. The current premium that is
factored into the $325 per hour rate to account for the ``emergency''
nature of the service request would be eliminated, which is reasonable
because it would address the needs of Users to have their requirements
attended to in the data center via the Hot Hands Service, even when
time is of the essence for resolution. In contrast, the base rate for
``Power Recycling'' would increase from $50 per reset to $100 per half
hour. The Exchange believes that this is reasonable because several of
the other services in the data center to which Users have access would
decrease in cost as a result of this proposal (i.e., Hot Hands Service
during extended business hours and for expedited Hot Hands Service as
well as the Technician Support Service--Emergency). On balance,
therefore, rates charged to Users would decrease as a result of the
proposed change, even if a User pays a slightly higher fee for ``Power
Recycling'' under the single Hot Hands Service category. Also, while
the current rate in the Fee Schedules for ``Equipment Maintenance Call
Escalation'' is $100 per call, this service may only take a half hour
to complete, in which case the resulting fee charged to a User may be
comparable to the current base rate in the Fee Schedules. Despite the
proposed change, the actual performance of these services would remain
the same, because the data center personnel would be the same as the
personnel performing Hot Hands Service.
    The Exchange believes that it is reasonable to eliminate references
in the Fee Schedules to dates that have already passed because these
references are obsolete and no longer have an impact on pricing.
    As with fees for existing co-location services, the fees proposed
herein would be charged only to those Users that voluntarily select the
related services, which would be available to all Users. Accordingly,
the Exchange believes that the proposed change is equitable and not
unfairly discriminatory because it will result in fees being charged
only to Users that voluntarily select to receive the corresponding
services and because those services will be available to all Users.
Furthermore, the Exchange believes that the services and fees proposed
herein are not unfairly discriminatory and are equitably allocated
because, in addition to the services being completely voluntary, they
are available to all Users on an equal basis (i.e., the same products
and services are available to all Users).
    For the reasons above, the proposed change would not unfairly
discriminate between or among market participants that are otherwise
capable of satisfying any applicable co-location fees, requirements,
terms and conditions established from time to time by the Exchange.
    Finally, the Exchange believes that it is subject to significant
competitive forces, as described below in the Exchange's statement
regarding the burden on competition.
    For these reasons, the Exchange believes that the proposal is
consistent with the Act.

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

    In accordance with Section 6(b)(8) of the Act,\16\ the Exchange
believes that the proposed rule change will not impose any burden on
competition that is not necessary or appropriate in furtherance of the
purposes of the Act. The proposed change is not intended to address a
competitive issue with other exchanges that offer co-location or
related services, or competitive issues between Users of these services
in the

data center, but rather to streamline the offerings available to Users
in the data center and eliminate references to services that are no
longer utilized by Users, thereby making the Fee Schedules easier to
understand and administer.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \16\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(8).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Finally, the Exchange notes that it operates in a highly
competitive market in which market participants can readily favor
competing venues if they deem fee levels at a particular venue to be
excessive. In such an environment, the Exchange must continually
review, and consider adjusting, its services and related fees and
credits to remain competitive with other exchanges. For the reasons
described above, the Exchange believes that the proposed rule change
reflects this competitive environment.

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

    No written comments were solicited or received with respect to the
proposed rule change.

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

    The foregoing rule change is effective upon filing pursuant to
Section 19(b)(3)(A) \17\ of the Act and subparagraph (f)(2) of Rule
19b-4 \18\ thereunder, because it establishes a due, fee, or other
charge imposed by the Exchange.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \17\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A).
    \18\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(2).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    At any time within 60 days of the filing of such 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 shall institute proceedings under
Section 19(b)(2)(B) \19\ of the Act to determine whether the proposed
rule change should be approved or disapproved.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \19\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(2)(B).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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_ADDRESS>Please include
File Number SR-NYSEArca-2014-81 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-NYSEArca-2014-81. 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 Web site (http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml). Copies of the submission, all subsequent amendments, all
written statements with respect to the proposed rule change that are
filed with the Commission, and all written communications relating to
the proposed rule change between the Commission and any person, other
than those that may be withheld from the public in accordance with the
provisions of 5 U.S.C. 552, will be available for Web site viewing and
printing in the Commission's Public Reference Room, 100 F Street NE.,
Washington, DC 20549-1090, on official business days between the hours
of 10:00 a.m. and 3:00 p.m. Copies of the filing will also be available
for inspection and copying at the NYSE's principal office and on its
Internet Web site at www.nyse.com. All comments received will be posted
without change; the Commission does not edit personal identifying
information from submissions. You should submit only information that
you wish to make available publicly. All submissions should refer to
File Number SR-NYSEArca-2014-81 and should be submitted on or before
August 26, 2014.

    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets,
pursuant to delegated authority.\20\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \20\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Kevin M. O'Neill,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2014-18434 Filed 8-4-14; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 82, Number 158 (Thursday, August 17, 2017)]
[Notices]
[Pages 39119-39120]
[FR Doc No: 2017-17354]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Docket No. CP17-482-000]

Ohio River System LLC; Notice of Application

    Take notice that on August 3, 2017, Ohio River System LLC (ORS),
8111 Westchester Drive, Suite 600, Dallas, Texas 75225, filed in Docket
No. CP17-482-000 an application pursuant to section 7(c) of the Natural
Gas Act (NGA) requesting a limited jurisdiction certificate in order to
provide jurisdictional transportation service on its Ohio River System
gathering facilities (ORS System). ORS further seeks a determination by
the Commission that the proposed interstate transportation service will
not otherwise affect the status of the ORS System as a gathering system
not otherwise subject to the Commission's jurisdiction or affect the
non-jurisdictional status of any other operation in which ORS is
currently engaged. ORS proposes to provide 150,000 million British
thermal units per day of interstate transportation service, via
displacement, for Rover Pipeline LLC (Rover) to allow Rover's shippers
to deliver gas to Rockies Express Pipeline LLC's system utilizing the
ORS System. The Rover system will interconnect with the ORS System near
Cadiz, Ohio and no new facilities are proposed to be constructed, all
as more fully set forth in the application which is on file with the
Commission and open to public inspection. The filing is available for
review at the Commission in the Public Reference Room or may be viewed
on the Commission's Web site web at http://www.ferc.gov using the
``eLibrary'' link. Enter the docket number excluding the last three
digits in the docket number field to access the document. For
assistance, contact FERC at<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or call toll-
free,<PHONE_NUMBER> or TYY,<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    Any questions concerning this application may be directed to Alan
Vaina, Senior Vice President, Energy Transfer Partners, L.P., 6051
Wallace Road Ext, Suite 399, Wexford, Pennsylvania 15090, by telephone
at<PHONE_NUMBER>, or by email at<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or
Lisa Tonery, Partner, Orrick, Herrington & Sutcliffe LLP, 51 West 52nd
Street, New York, New York 10019, by telephone at<PHONE_NUMBER>, or by
email at<EMAIL_ADDRESS>    Pursuant to section 157.9 of the Commission's rules, 18 CFR 157.9,
within 90 days of this Notice the Commission staff will either:
Complete its environmental assessment (EA) and place it into the
Commission's public record (eLibrary) for this proceeding; or issue a
Notice of Schedule for Environmental Review. If a Notice of Schedule
for Environmental Review is issued, it will indicate, among other
milestones, the anticipated date for the Commission staff's issuance of
the EA for this proposal. The filing of the EA in the Commission's
public record for this proceeding or the issuance of a Notice of
Schedule for Environmental Review will serve to notify federal and
state agencies of the timing for the completion of all necessary
reviews, and the subsequent need to complete all federal authorizations
within 90 days of the date of issuance of the Commission staff's EA.
    There are two ways to become involved in the Commission's review of
this project. First, any person wishing to obtain legal status by
becoming a party to the proceedings for this project should, on or
before the comment date stated below file with the Federal Energy
Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street NE., Washington, DC 20426, a
motion to intervene in accordance with the requirements of the
Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedure (18 CFR 385.214 or
385.211) and the Regulations under the NGA (18 CFR 157.10). A person
obtaining party status will be placed on the service list maintained by
the Secretary of the Commission and will receive copies of all
documents filed by the applicant and by all other parties. A party must
submit seven copies of filings made in the proceeding with the
Commission and must mail a copy to the applicant and to every other
party. Only parties to the proceeding can ask for court review of
Commission orders in the proceeding.
    However, a person does not have to intervene in order to have
comments considered. The second way to participate is by filing with
the

Secretary of the Commission, as soon as possible, an original and two
copies of comments in support of or in opposition to this project. The
Commission will consider these comments in determining the appropriate
action to be taken, but the filing of a comment alone will not serve to
make the filer a party to the proceeding. The Commission's rules
require that persons filing comments in opposition to the project
provide copies of their protests only to the party or parties directly
involved in the protest.
    Persons who wish to comment only on the environmental review of
this project should submit an original and two copies of their comments
to the Secretary of the Commission. Environmental commentors will be
placed on the Commission's environmental mailing list, will receive
copies of the environmental documents, and will be notified of meetings
associated with the Commission's environmental review process.
Environmental commentors will not be required to serve copies of filed
documents on all other parties. However, the non-party commentors will
not receive copies of all documents filed by other parties or issued by
the Commission (except for the mailing of environmental documents
issued by the Commission) and will not have the right to seek court
review of the Commission's final order.
    The Commission strongly encourages electronic filings of comments,
protests and interventions in lieu of paper using the ``eFiling'' link
at http://www.ferc.gov. Persons unable to file electronically should
submit an original and 7 copies of the protest or intervention to the
Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street NE., Washington,
DC 20426.
    Comment Date: 5:00 p.m. Eastern Time on August 31, 2017.

    Dated: August 10, 2017.
Kimberly D. Bose,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2017-17354 Filed 8-16-17; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register: January 29, 2010 (Volume 75, Number 19)]
[Notices]
[Page 4894-4895]
[DOCID:fr29ja10-125]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-61413; File No. SR-NSCC-2009-12]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; National Securities Clearing
Corporation; Notice of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of Proposed
Rule Change To Revise Fee Schedule

January 25, 2010.
    Pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934
(``Act''),\1\ notice is hereby given that on December 31, 2009,
National Securities Clearing Corporation (``NSCC'') 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 primarily by NSCC. NSCC filed the proposal pursuant to
Section 19(b)(3)(A)(ii) of the Act \2\ and Rule 19b-4(f)(2) \3\
thereunder so that the proposal was effective upon filing with the
Commission. 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\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A)(ii).
    \3\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(2).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

    The purpose of the proposed rule change is to revise certain fees
for NSCC services and make other technical changes to the NSCC Fee
Schedule.

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

    In its filing with the Commission, NSCC 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. NSCC has prepared summaries, set forth in sections (A),
(B) and (C) below, of the most significant aspects of such
statements.\4\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ The Commission has modified the text of the summaries
prepared by NSCC.

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

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

    NSCC proposes revising certain service fees and making other
technical changes to its Fee Schedule. Increased fees are proposed for
Fund/SERV transactions and certain clearance activity.\5\ There will
also be an increase in the monthly fee for the mutual fund Profile
Phase II Service; \6\ however, NSCC is introducing a corresponding
credit for users of the service with twenty-five or fewer funds in
their fund family.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ The Clearance Activity Fee formerly appeared on the NSCC Fee
Schedule as the Trade Netting Fee. NSCC proposes changing the name
to Clearance Activity Fee to reflect that the fee covers trade
recording as well as netting services. The fee uses a tiered
structure graduated to the number of sides submitted monthly for
trade recording and netting. It also includes a value into the net
fee and a value out of the net fee.
    \6\ NSCC offers two levels of the Profile service. Profile Phase
I transmits mutual fund price and rate information. Profile Phase II
stores data elements such as accumulation, breakpoints, and
commission eligibility that relate to mutual fund processing rules.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    NSCC also proposes eliminating or reducing certain fees. The
monthly fee charged to members that act on behalf of brokers or dealers
will be eliminated, and the Flip Trades fee will be reduced.
    Fee structure changes and other technical Fee Schedule
modifications are proposed. The fee structure for trade processing
accounts will be revised from a tiered structure to a flat monthly
charge per account. A change reflecting that flat fee will remove
monthly maximum cumulative charges associated with Trade Input, the
Trade Processing System, and the Global Clearance Network Service.\7\
Provisions in the Fee Schedule stating that Trade Recording Fees are
charged for all Online Comparison System and Intra-day Comparison
System trades placed in NSCC's comparison system will be removed.\8\
This is because those systems no longer submit locked-in bond or
foreign security trades to NSCC. Additional Fee Schedule changes will
remove monthly maximum cumulative membership fees for Fund/SERV,
Networking, and Mutual Fund Commission Settlement, relocate the
Clearance Activity Fee to demonstrate its position in NSCC's processing
flow,\9\ and provide a technical adjustment to the number of
Participant Fees.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ This charge will no longer apply to Municipal Comparison-
Only Members.
    \8\ These changes are reflected in a footnote to section I.C. of
the Fee Schedule.
    \9\ The introductory paragraph of the Trade Clearance Fees
section will also be revised to reflect that the fee includes trade
recording services.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    These proposed fee revisions are consistent with NSCC's overall
pricing philosophy of aligning service fees with underlying costs. The
effective date for these fee adjustments was January 4, 2010. The
changes to NSCC's Fee Schedule can be found in Exhibit 5 to proposed
rule change SR-NSCC-2009-12 at http://www.dtcc.com/downloads/legal/
rule_filings/2009/nscc/2009-12.pdf.
    NSCC believes that the proposed rule change is consistent with the
requirements of Section 17A of the Act \10\ and the rules and
regulations thereunder because it updates NSCC's fee schedule to
provide an equitable allocation of fees among its members.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \10\ 15 U.S.C. 78q-1.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

(B) Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement on Burden on Competition

    NSCC does not believe that the proposed rule change will have any
impact or impose any burden on competition.

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

    Written comments relating to the proposed rule change have not yet
been solicited or received. NSCC will notify the Commission of any
written comments received by NSCC.

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)(ii) of the Act \11\ and Rule 19b-4(f)(2) \12\ thereunder
because the proposed rule change is establishing or changing a due,
fee, or other charge applicable only to a member. At any time within
sixty days of the filing of such rule change, the Commission may
summarily abrogate 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.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \11\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A)(ii).
    \12\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(2).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

     Electronic comments may be submitted by using the
Commission's Internet comment form (http://www.sec.gov/rules/
sro.shtml), or
     Send an e-mail to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Please include
File No. SR-NSCC-2009-12 on the subject line.

Paper Comments

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

All submissions should refer to File Number SR-NSCC-2009-12. This file
number should be included on the subject line if e-mail is used. To
help the Commission process and review your comments more efficiently,
please use only one method. The Commission will post all comments on
the Commission's Internet Web site (http://www.sec.gov/rules/
sro.shtml). Copies of the submission, all subsequent amendments, all
written statements with respect to the proposed rule change that are
filed with the Commission, and all written communications relating to
the proposed rule change between the Commission and any person, other
than those that may be withheld from the public in accordance with the
provisions of 5 U.S.C. 552, will be available for inspection and
copying in the Commission's Public Reference Section, 100 F Street,
NE., Washington DC 20549, on official business days between the hours
of 10 a.m. and 3 p.m. Copies of such filings also will be available for
inspection and copying at the principal office of NSCC and on NSCC's
Web site at http://www.dtcc.com/downloads/legal/rule_filings/2009/
nscc/2009-12.pdf. All comments received will be posted without change;
the Commission does not edit personal identifying information from
submissions. You should submit only information that you wish to make
available publicly. All submissions should refer to file number SR-
NSCC-2009-12 and should be submitted on or before February 19, 2010.

    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets,
pursuant to delegated authority.\13\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \13\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Florence E. Harmon,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2010-1854 Filed 1-28-10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 76, Number 114 (Tuesday, June 14, 2011)]
[Notices]
[Pages 34715-34716]
[FR Doc No: 2011-14643]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES

Food and Drug Administration

[Docket No. FDA-2010-D-0530]

Draft Guidance for Industry; Considering Whether an FDA-Regulated
Product Involves the Application of Nanotechnology; Availability

AGENCY: Food and Drug Administration, HHS.

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) is announcing the
availability of a draft guidance for industry entitled ``Considering
Whether an FDA-Regulated Product Involves the Application of
Nanotechnology''. This guidance is intended to provide industry with
FDA's current thinking on whether FDA-regulated products contain
nanomaterials or otherwise involve the application of nanotechnology.
The points to consider are intended to be broadly applicable to all
FDA-regulated products, with the understanding that additional guidance
may be articulated for specific product areas, as appropriate in the
future.

DATES: Although you can comment on any guidance at any time (see 21 CFR
10.115(g)(5)), to ensure that the Agency considers your comment on this
draft guidance before it begins work on the final version of the
guidance, submit either electronic or written comments on the draft
guidance by August 15, 2011.

ADDRESSES: Submit written requests for single copies of the guidance to
the Office of Policy, Office of the Commissioner, Food and Drug
Administration, 10903 New Hampshire Ave., Silver Spring, MD 20993-0002.
Send one self-addressed adhesive label to assist that office in
processing your requests. See the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section for
electronic access to the draft guidance document.
    Submit electronic comments on the draft guidance to http://www.regulations.gov. Submit written comments to the Division of Dockets
Management (HFA-305), Food and Drug Administration, 5630 Fishers Lane,
rm. 1061, Rockville, MD 20852.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ritu Nalubola, Office of Policy,
Office of the Commissioner,Food and Drug Administration, 10903 New
Hampshire Ave., Bldg. 32, rm. 4236, Silver Spring, MD 20993-0002, 301-
796-4830, e-mail<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or Carlos Pe[ntilde]a,
Office of the Chief Scientist, Office of the Commissioner, Food and
Drug Administration, 10903 New Hampshire Ave., Bldg. 32, rm. 4264,
Silver Spring, MD 20993-0002,<PHONE_NUMBER>, e-mail:
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Background

    FDA is announcing the availability of a draft guidance for industry
entitled ``Considering Whether an FDA-Regulated Product Involves the
Application of Nanotechnology''. The guidance is intended for
manufacturers, suppliers, importers, and other stakeholders. The
guidance describes FDA's current thinking on whether FDA-regulated
products contain nanomaterials or otherwise involve the application of
nanotechnology. As a first step toward developing FDA's framework for
considering whether FDA-regulated products include nanomaterials or
otherwise involve nanotechnology, the Agency has developed the points
discussed in the guidance. These points to consider are intended to be
broadly applicable to all FDA-regulated products, with the
understanding that additional guidance may be articulated for specific
product areas, as appropriate in the future. The guidance document does
not establish any regulatory definitions. Rather, it is intended to
help industry and others identify when they should consider potential
implications for regulatory status, safety, effectiveness, or public
health impact that may arise with the application of nanotechnology in
FDA-regulated products. Public input on the

guidance may also inform the development of any future actions, as
needed.

II. Significance of Guidance

    This level 1 draft guidance is being issued consistent with FDA's
good guidance practices regulation (21 CFR 10.115). The draft guidance,
when finalized, will represent the Agency's current thinking on this
topic. It does not create or confer any rights for or on any person and
does not operate to bind FDA or the public. An alternative approach may
be used if such approach satisfies the requirements of the applicable
statutes and regulations.

III. Comments

    Interested persons may submit to the Division of Dockets Management
(see ADDRESSES) either electronic or written comments regarding this
document. It is only necessary to send one set of comments. It is no
longer necessary to send two copies of mailed comments. Identify
comments with the docket number found in brackets in the heading of
this document. Received comments may be seen in the Division of Dockets
Management between 9 a.m. and 4 p.m., Monday through Friday.

IV. Electronic Access

    Persons with access to the Internet may obtain the draft guidance
at either http://www.fda.gov/RegulatoryInformation/Guidances/ucm257698.htm or http://www.regulations.gov.

    Dated: June 2, 2011.
Leslie Kux,
Acting Assistant Commissioner for Policy.
[FR Doc. 2011-14643 Filed 6-13-11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4160-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 87, Number 240 (Thursday, December 15, 2022)]
[Notices]
[Page 76617]
[FR Doc No: 2022-27198]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

Combined Notice of Filings

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

Filings Instituting Proceedings

    Docket Numbers: RP23-205-000.
    Applicants: MountainWest Pipeline, LLC.
    Description: Annual Gas Sales Report of MountainWest Pipeline, LLC.
    Filed Date: 11/22/22.
    Accession Number: 20221122-5233.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. ET 12/15/22.

    Docket Numbers: RP23-272-000.
    Applicants: Enable Gas Transmission, LLC.
    Description: Sec.  4(d) Rate Filing: New NRA--Performance
Proppants, LLC to be effective 12/12/2022.
    Filed Date: 12/9/22.
    Accession Number: 20221209-5035.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. ET 12/21/22.

    Docket Numbers: RP23-273-000.
    Applicants: Tennessee Gas Pipeline Company, L.L.C.
    Description: Sec.  4(d) Rate Filing: Volume No. 2--Castleton
SP377543 SP377544 SP378154 SP378159 Citadel SP378150 to be effective 1/
1/2023.
    Filed Date: 12/9/22.
    Accession Number: 20221209-5036.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. ET 12/21/22.

    Any person desiring to intervene or protest in any of the above
proceedings must file in accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of the
Commission's Regulations (18 CFR 385.211 and 385.214) on or before 5:00
p.m. Eastern time on the specified comment date. Protests may be
considered, but intervention is necessary to become a party to the
proceeding.
    The filings are accessible in the Commission's eLibrary system
(https://elibrary.ferc.gov/idmws/search/fercgensearch.asp) by querying
the docket number.
    eFiling is encouraged. More detailed information relating to filing
requirements, interventions, protests, service, and qualifying
facilities filings can be found at: http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/efiling/filing-req.pdf. For other information, call<PHONE_NUMBER>
(toll free). For TTY, call<PHONE_NUMBER>.

    Dated: December 9, 2022.
Debbie-Anne A. Reese,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2022-27198 Filed 12-14-22; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 79, Number 29 (Wednesday, February 12, 2014)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 8358-8360]
[FR Doc No: 2014-02954]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. FAA-2014-0070; Directorate Identifier 2011-SW-062-AD]
RIN 2120-AA64

Airworthiness Directives; Bell Helicopter Textron Canada
Helicopters

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM).

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

SUMMARY: We propose to adopt a new airworthiness directive (AD) for
Bell Helicopter Textron Canada (BHTC) Model 407 helicopters. This
proposed AD would require inspecting the aft fuselage upper skin (upper
skin) for a crack and the upper left longeron assembly (longeron
assembly) for a crack, corrosion, or defect. This AD would require
replacing or repairing a part or section, depending on the inspection's
outcome. This proposed AD is prompted by reports of cracks in the upper
left-hand longeron. The proposed actions are intended to prevent
failure of the longeron assembly or the upper skin, which could lead to
a structural failure and loss of helicopter control.

DATES: We must receive comments on this proposed AD by April 14, 2014.

ADDRESSES: You may send comments by any of the following methods:
     Federal eRulemaking Docket: Go to http://www.regulations.gov. Follow the online instructions for sending your
comments electronically.
     Fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>.
     Mail: Send comments to the U.S. Department of
Transportation, Docket Operations, M-30, West Building Ground Floor,
Room W12-140, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., Washington, DC 20590-0001.
     Hand Delivery: Deliver to the ``Mail'' address between 9
a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays.

Examining the AD Docket

    You may examine the AD docket on the Internet at http://www.regulations.gov or in person at the Docket Operations Office
between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal
holidays. The AD docket contains this proposed AD, the foreign
authority's AD, the economic evaluation, any comments received, and
other information. The street address for the Docket Operations Office
(telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>) is in the ADDRESSES section. Comments will be
available in the AD docket shortly after receipt.
    For service information identified in this proposed AD, contact
Bell Helicopter Textron Canada Limited, 12,800 Rue de l'Avenir,
Mirabel, Quebec J7J1R4; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER> or<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax
(450) 433-0272; or at http://www.bellcustomer.com/files/. You may
review the referenced service information at the FAA, Office of the
Regional Counsel, Southwest Region, 2601 Meacham Blvd., Room 663, Fort
Worth, Texas 76137.

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

Comments Invited

    We invite you to participate in this rulemaking by submitting
written comments, data, or views. We also invite comments relating to
the economic, environmental, energy, or federalism impacts that might
result from adopting the proposals in this document. The most helpful
comments reference a specific portion of the proposal, explain the
reason for any recommended change, and include supporting data. To
ensure the docket does not contain duplicate comments, commenters
should send only one copy of written comments, or if comments are filed
electronically, commenters should submit only one time.
    We will file in the docket all comments that we receive, as well as
a report summarizing each substantive public contact with FAA personnel
concerning this proposed rulemaking. Before acting on this proposal, we
will consider all comments we receive on or before the closing date for
comments. We will consider comments filed after the comment period has
closed if it is possible to do so without incurring expense or delay.
We may change this proposal in light of the comments we receive.

Discussion

    Transport Canada Civil Aviation (TCCA), which is the aviation
authority for Canada, has issued Canadian AD No. CF-2011-42, dated
November 9, 2011, to correct an unsafe condition for certain BHTC Model
407 helicopters. TCCA advises that longeron assemblies, part numbers
(P/Ns) 206-031-314-037, 206-031-314-177, and 206-031-314-219B,
installed on helicopters with

1,200 or more hours air time, are prone to cracking. The TCCA AD
requires, based on hours air time since new, visually inspecting the
aft fuselage upper skin for cracks and replacing the skin if cracked.
The TCCA AD also requires visually inspecting the longeron assembly for
cracks and general condition. If the longeron assembly is serviceable,
the TCCA AD requires repeating the inspection of the longeron assembly
for cracks and general condition at intervals based on whether external
strap doublers are installed. If the longeron assembly is cracked, the
TCCA AD requires repairing or replacing it, installing three external
strap doublers, and repeating the inspection of the longeron assembly
if it was repaired. Installing a new longeron assembly, P/N 206-031-
314-237B, and the three external strap doublers constitutes terminating
action of the TCCA AD.

FAA's Determination

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

Related Service Information

    BHTC has issued Alert Service Bulletin 407-11-95, Revision C, dated
April 20, 2012 (ASB), to correct an unsafe condition for Model 407
helicopters, serial numbers 53000 through 53900, 53911 through 54061,
and 54300, with a flight time of 1200 or more hours, and with a
longeron assembly, P/N 206-031-314-037, 206-031-314-177, or 206-031-
314-219B. The ASB states that BHTC received reports of longeron
assemblies cracking in service. The ASB:
     Specifies a one-time inspection of the aft fuselage top
skin and repetitive inspections of the upper left longeron assembly;
     Provides a repair procedure for the longeron assembly;
     Allows for the installation of longeron assembly, P/N 206-
031-314-237B, and three external strap doublers as terminating action
for the repetitive inspection requirements.

Proposed AD Requirements

    We propose the following:
    Within 50 hours time-in-service (TIS), or prior to reaching 1,250
hours TIS since new, whichever occurs later, visually inspect the upper
skin for a crack using a 10X or higher power magnifying glass.
     If there is a crack in the upper skin, before further
flight, remove the skin and inspect the longeron assembly, paying
attention to the upper flange, for a crack, corrosion, or other damage
using a 10X or higher power magnifying glass. If there are no cracks,
corrosion, or other damage in the longeron assembly, before further
flight, replace the upper skin with an airworthy upper skin. Repeat the
inspection of the longeron assembly at intervals not to exceed 50 hours
TIS. If there is a crack, corrosion, or other damage in the longeron
assembly, before further flight: Repair the longeron assembly or
replace it with an airworthy longeron assembly, P/N 206-031-314-237B,
and reinstall the upper skin or replace it with an airworthy upper
skin. Install three external strap doublers. Repeat the inspection of
the longeron assembly at intervals not to exceed 50 hours TIS.
     If there is no crack in the upper skin, within 10 hours
TIS, visually inspect the longeron assembly using a 10X or higher power
magnifying glass for a crack, corrosion, or other damage. If there is a
crack, corrosion, or other damage in the longeron assembly, before
further flight: Repair the longeron assembly or replace it with an
airworthy longeron assembly, P/N 206-031-314-237B. Install three
external strap doublers. Repeat the inspection of the upper skin and
longeron assembly at intervals not to exceed 50 hours TIS. If there are
no cracks, corrosion, or other damage in the longeron assembly, repeat
the inspection of the upper skin and longeron assembly at intervals not
to exceed 50 hours TIS.
     Replacing the longeron assembly with longeron assembly, P/
N 206-031-314-237B, and installing three external strap doublers
constitutes terminating action for this AD. If there is no crack in the
upper skin and no crack, corrosion or other damage in the longeron
assembly, you may install three external strap doublers, which will
extend the recurring 50 hours TIS inspection interval to 150 hours TIS.

Costs of Compliance

    We estimate that this proposed AD would affect 584 helicopters of
U.S. Registry and that labor costs average $85 an hour. Based on these
estimates, we estimate the following costs:
    A one-time visual inspection of the aft fuselage upper skin would
require 1 work-hour and no parts for a total cost of $85 per
helicopter, $49,640 for the U.S. fleet.
    A visual inspection of the longeron and replacing the aft fuselage
upper skin would require 3 work hours for a labor cost of $255 per
helicopter. Parts would cost $723 for parts for total cost of $978 per
helicopter.
    Repairing the longeron if needed and installing the doublers would
require 16 work hours for a labor cost of $1,360. Parts would cost
$3,928 for a total cost of $5,288 per helicopter.
    Replacing the longeron with P/N 206-031-314-237B combined with the
installation of the three external strap doublers would require 24 work
hours for a labor cost of $2,040. Parts would cost $13,560 for a total
cost of $15,600 per helicopter.

Authority for This Rulemaking

    Title 49 of the United States Code specifies the FAA's authority to
issue rules on aviation safety. Subtitle I, section 106, describes the
authority of the FAA Administrator. ``Subtitle VII: Aviation
Programs,'' describes in more detail the scope of the Agency's
authority.
    We are issuing this rulemaking under the authority described in
``Subtitle VII, Part A, Subpart III, Section 44701: General
requirements.'' Under that section, Congress charges the FAA with
promoting safe flight of civil aircraft in air commerce by prescribing
regulations for practices, methods, and procedures the Administrator
finds necessary for safety in air commerce. This regulation is within
the scope of that authority because it addresses an unsafe condition
that is likely to exist or develop on products identified in this
rulemaking action.

Regulatory Findings

    We determined that this proposed AD would not have federalism
implications under Executive Order 13132. This proposed AD would not
have a substantial direct effect on the States, on the relationship
between the national Government and the States, or on the distribution
of power and responsibilities among the various levels of government.
    For the reasons discussed, I certify this proposed regulation:
    1. Is not a ``significant regulatory action'' under Executive Order
12866;
    2. Is not a ``significant rule'' under the DOT Regulatory Policies
and Procedures (44 FR 11034, February 26, 1979);
    3. Will not affect intrastate aviation in Alaska to the extent that
it justifies making a regulatory distinction; and
    4. Will not have a significant economic impact, positive or
negative,

on a substantial number of small entities under the criteria of the
Regulatory Flexibility Act.
    We prepared an economic evaluation of the estimated costs to comply
with this proposed AD and placed it in the AD docket.

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39

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

The Proposed Amendment

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

PART 39--AIRWORTHINESS DIRECTIVES

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):

Bell Helicopter Textron Canada: Docket No. FAA-2014-0070;
Directorate Identifier 2011-SW-062-AD.

 (a) Applicability

    This AD applies to Bell Helicopter Textron Canada (BHTC) Model
407 helicopters, with a serial number 53000 through 53900, 53911
through 54061, and 54300, with an upper left longeron assembly
(longeron assembly), part number (P/N) 206-031-314-037, 206-031-314-
177, or 206-031-314-219B, installed, certificated in any category.

 (b) Unsafe Condition

    This AD defines the unsafe condition as a crack in the aft
fuselage upper skin or a crack, corrosion, or defect in the longeron
assembly. This condition could cause structural failure and
consequently, loss of helicopter control.

(c) Comments Due Date

    We must receive comments by April 14, 2014.

(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

    Within 50 hours time-in-service (TIS), or prior to reaching
1,250 hours TIS since new, whichever occurs later, visually inspect
the helicopter's aft fuselage upper skin (upper skin) for a crack
using a 10X or higher power magnifying glass.
    (1) If there is a crack in the upper skin, before further
flight, remove the skin and inspect the longeron assembly, paying
attention to the upper flange, for a crack, corrosion, or other
damage using a 10X or higher power magnifying glass.
    (i) If there are no cracks, corrosion, or other damage in the
longeron assembly, before further flight, replace the upper skin
with an airworthy upper skin. Repeat the inspection of the longeron
assembly at intervals not to exceed 50 hours TIS.
    (ii) If there is a crack, corrosion, or other damage in the
longeron assembly, before further flight:
    (A) Repair the longeron assembly or replace it with an airworthy
longeron assembly, part number (P/N) 206-031-314-237B, and reinstall
the upper skin or replace it with an airworthy upper skin.
    (B) Install three external strap doublers in accordance with
Part III, paragraphs 5 through10 of Bell Alert Service Bulletin 407-
11-95, Revision C, dated April 20, 2012 (ASB).
    (C) Repeat the inspection of the longeron assembly at intervals
not to exceed 50 hours TIS.
    (2) If there is no crack in the upper skin, within 10 hours TIS,
visually inspect the longeron assembly using a 10X or higher power
magnifying glass for a crack, corrosion, or other damage.
    (i) If there is a crack, corrosion, or other damage in the
longeron assembly, before further flight:
    (A) Repair the longeron assembly or replace it with an airworthy
longeron assembly, P/N 206-031-314-237B.
    (B) Install three external strap doublers in accordance with
Part III, paragraphs 5 through 10 of the ASB.
    (C) Repeat the inspection of the upper skin and longeron
assembly at intervals not to exceed 50 hours TIS.
    (ii) If there are no cracks, corrosion, or other damage in the
longeron assembly, repeat the inspection of the upper skin and
longeron assembly at intervals not to exceed 50 hours TIS.
    (3) Replacing the longeron assembly with longeron assembly, P/N
206-031-314-237B, and installing three external strap doublers
constitutes terminating action for this AD.
    (4) If there is no crack in the upper skin and there is no
crack, corrosion, or other damage in the longeron assembly, you may
install three external strap doublers in accordance with Part III,
paragraphs 5 through 10 of the ASB. This option extends the
recurring 50 hours TIS inspection interval to 150 hours TIS.

(f) Alternative Methods of Compliance (AMOCs)

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

(g) Additional Information

    The subject of this AD is addressed in Transport Canada Civil
Aviation (TCCA) AD No. CF-2011-42, dated November 9, 2011. You may
view the TCCA AD in the AD docket on the Internet at http://www.regulations.gov.

(h) Subject

    Joint Aircraft Service Component (JASC) Code: 5313, Fuselage
Main, Longeron/Stringer.

    Issued in Fort Worth, Texas, on January 31, 2014.
Lance T. Gant,
Acting Directorate Manager, Rotorcraft Directorate, Aircraft
Certification Service.
[FR Doc. 2014-02954 Filed 2-11-14; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


[Federal Register: August 29, 2008 (Volume 73, Number 169)]
[Notices]
[Page 51009-51011]
[DOCID:fr29au08-130]

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

DEPARTMENT OF LABOR

Occupational Safety and Health Administration

[Docket No. OSHA-2007-0043]

TUV America, Inc.; Expansion of Recognition

AGENCY: Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA), Labor.

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: This notice announces the Occupational Safety and Health
Administration's final decision expanding the recognition of TUV
America, Inc., (TUVAM) as a Nationally Recognized Testing Laboratory
under 29 CFR 1910.7.

DATES: The expansion of recognition becomes effective on August 29,
2008.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: MaryAnn Garrahan, Director, Office of

Technical Programs and Coordination Activities, NRTL Program,
Occupational Safety and Health Administration, U.S. Department of
Labor, 200 Constitution Avenue, NW., Room N-3655, Washington, DC 20210,
or phone<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Notice of Final Decision

    The Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) hereby
gives notice that it is expanding recognition of TUV America, Inc.,
(TUVAM) as a Nationally Recognized Testing Laboratory (NRTL). TUVAM's
expansion covers the use of additional test standards. OSHA's current
scope of recognition for TUVAM may be found in the following
informational Web page: http://www.osha.gov/dts/otpca/nrtl/tuvam.html.
    OSHA recognition of an NRTL signifies that the organization has met
the legal requirements in Section 1910.7 of Title 29, Code of Federal
Regulations (29 CFR 1910.7). Recognition is an acknowledgment that the
organization can perform independent safety testing and certification
of the specific products covered within its scope of recognition and is
not a delegation or grant of government authority. As a result of
recognition, employers may use products approved by the NRTL to meet
OSHA standards that require testing and certification.
    The Agency processes applications by an NRTL for initial
recognition or for expansion or renewal of this recognition following
requirements in Appendix A to 29 CFR 1910.7. This appendix requires
that the Agency publish two notices in the Federal Register in
processing an application. In the first notice, OSHA announces the
application and provides its preliminary finding and, in the second
notice, the Agency provides its final decision on the application.
These notices set forth the NRTL's scope of recognition or
modifications of that scope. OSHA maintains an informational Web page
for each NRTL that details its scope of recognition. These pages can be
accessed from the Web site at http://www.osha.gov/dts/otpca/nrtl/
index.html.
    In an earlier action involving TUVAM, OSHA issued a Federal
Register notice modifying its recognition, along with the recognition
of other NRTLs, by replacing or deleting test standards that standards-
developing organizations previously revised or withdrew (70 FR 11273,
March 8, 2005). In a subsequent Federal Register notice, OSHA granted
TUVAM's most recent application, which was for an expansion of
recognition (70 FR 51373, August 30, 2005).
    TUVAM submitted an application, dated October 6, 2005 (see Exhibit
11-1, as cited in the preliminary notice), to expand its recognition to
include 142 additional test standards. It amended its application on
February 17, 2006, to add two more test standards, and then in June
2006 and July 2007 further amended its application to reduce its
request to 89 test standards (see Exhibits 11-2 through 11-4). One
standard, however, has been withdrawn by the standards-developing
organization. Thus, TUVAM's request includes 88 standards. The NRTL
Program staff has determined that the remaining 88 standards are
``appropriate test standards'' within the meaning of 29 CFR 1910.7(c).
In connection with this request, OSHA staff performed an on-site review
of TUVAM's Massachusetts testing facility and recommended that TUVAM's
recognition be expanded to include the additional 88 test standards
listed below (see Exhibit 11-5).
    Based on the review, OSHA published a preliminary notice announcing
the expansion application in the Federal Register on February 7, 2008
(73 FR 7325). Comments were requested by February 22, 2008, but no
comments were received in response to this notice. OSHA is now
proceeding with this final notice to grant TUVAM's expansion
application.
    You may obtain or review copies of all public documents pertaining
to the TUVAM application by contacting the Docket Office, Occupational
Safety and Health Administration, U.S. Department of Labor, 200
Constitution Avenue, NW., Room N-2625, Washington, DC 20210. Docket No.
OSHA-2007-0043 (formerly NRTL2-2001) contains all materials in the
record concerning TUVAM's recognition.
    The current addresses of the TUVAM's facilities (sites) already
recognized by OSHA are: TUV Product Services (TUVAM), 5 Cherry Hill
Drive, Danvers, MA 01923; TUV Product Services (TUVAM), 10040 Mesa Rim
Road, San Diego, CA 92121; and TUV Product Services (TUVAM), 1775 Old
Highway 8 NW, Suite 104, New Brighton (Minneapolis), MN 55112.

Final Decision and Order

    NRTL Program staff examined the TUVAM's application, the assessor's
recommendation, and other pertinent information. Based upon this
examination and the assessor's recommendation, OSHA finds that TUVAM
has met the requirements of 29 CFR 1910.7 for expansion of its
recognition, subject to the limitation and conditions listed below.
Pursuant to the authority in 29 CFR 1910.7, OSHA hereby expands the
recognition of TUVAM, subject to this limitation and these conditions.

Limitation

    OSHA limits the expansion of TUVAM's recognition to testing and
certification of products for demonstration of conformance to the
following test standards, each of which OSHA has determined is an
appropriate test standard, within the meaning of 29 CFR 1910.7(c):

UL 48 Electric Signs
UL 69 Electric-Fence Controllers
UL 82 Electric Gardening Appliances
UL 201 Garage Equipment
UL 325 Door, Drapery, Gate, Louver, and Window Operators and Systems
UL 399 Drinking-Water Coolers
UL 474 Dehumidifiers
UL 482 Portable Sun/Heat Lamps
UL 497A Secondary Protectors for Communication Circuits
UL 506 Specialty Transformers
UL 561 Floor-Finishing Machines
UL 563 Ice Makers
UL 588 Seasonal and Holiday Decorative Products
UL 676 Underwater Luminaires and Submersible Junction Boxes
UL 696 Electric Toys
UL 697 Toy Transformers
UL 745-1 Portable Electric Tools
UL 745-2-1 Particular Requirements for Drills
UL 745-2-2 Particular Requirements for Screwdrivers and Impact Wrenches
UL 745-2-3 Particular Requirements for Grinders, Polishers, and Disk-
Type Sanders
UL 745-2-4 Particular Requirements for Sanders
UL 745-2-5 Particular Requirements for Circular Saws and Circular
Knives
UL 745-2-6 Particular Requirements for Hammers
UL 745-2-8 Particular Requirements for Shears and Nibblers
UL 745-2-9 Particular Requirements for Tappers
UL 745-2-11 Particular Requirements for Reciprocating Saws
UL 745-2-12 Particular Requirements for Concrete Vibrators
UL 745-2-14 Particular Requirements for Planers
UL 745-2-17 Particular Requirements for Routers and Trimmers
UL 745-2-30 Particular Requirements for Staplers
UL 745-2-31 Particular Requirements for Diamond Core Drills
UL 745-2-32 Particular Requirements for Magnetic Drill Presses
UL 745-2-33 Particular Requirements for Portable Bandsaws

UL 745-2-34 Particular Requirements for Strapping Tools
UL 745-2-35 Particular Requirements for Drain Cleaners
UL 745-2-36 Particular Requirements for Hand Motor Tools
UL 745-2-37 Particular Requirements for Plate Jointers
UL 749 Household Dishwashers
UL 775 Graphic Arts Equipment
UL 778 Motor-Operated Water Pumps
UL 826 Household Electric Clocks
UL 858 Household Electric Ranges
UL 859 Household Electric Personal Grooming Appliances
UL 867 Electrostatic Air Cleaners
UL 875 Electric Dry-Bath Heaters
UL 921 Commercial Dishwashers
UL 935 Fluorescent-Lamp Ballasts
UL 969 Marking and Labeling Systems
UL 977 Fused Power-Circuit Devices
UL 979 Water Treatment Appliances
UL 984 Hermetic Refrigerant Motor-Compressors
UL 987 Stationary and Fixed Electric Tools
UL 1018 Electric Aquarium Equipment
UL 1028 Hair Clipping and Shaving Appliances
UL 1030 Sheathed Heating Elements
UL 1086 Household Trash Compactors
UL 1088 Temporary Lighting Strings
UL 1097 Double Insulation Systems for Use in Electrical Equipment
UL 1206 Electric Commercial Clothes-Washing Equipment
UL 1230 Amateur Movie Lights
UL 1240 Electric Commercial Clothes-Drying Equipment
UL 1411 Transformers and Motor Transformers for Use In Audio-, Radio-,
and Television-Type Appliances
UL 1419 Professional Video and Audio Equipment
UL 1431 Personal Hygiene and Health Care Appliances
UL 1449 Surge Protective Devices
UL 1484 Residential Gas Detectors
UL 1559 Insect-Control Equipment--Electrocution Type
UL 1561 Dry-Type General Purpose and Power Transformers
UL 1563 Electric Spas, Equipment Assemblies, and Associated Equipment
UL 1573 Stage and Studio Luminaires and Connector Strips
UL 1574 Track Lighting Systems
UL 1594 Sewing and Cutting Machines
UL 1598 Luminaires
UL 1741 Inverters, Converters, Controllers and Interconnection System
Equipment for Use With Distributed Energy Resources
UL 1778 Uninterruptible Power Supply Equipment
UL 1786 Direct Plug-In Nightlights
UL 1838 Low Voltage Landscape Lighting Systems
UL 1963 Refrigerant Recovery/Recycling Equipment
UL 1993 Self-Ballasted Lamps and Lamp Adapters
UL 2044 Commercial Closed-Circuit Television Equipment
UL 2111 Overheating Protection for Motors
UL 2157 Electric Clothes Washing Machines and Extractors
UL 2158 Electric Clothes Dryers
UL 60335-2-3 Household and Similar Electrical Appliances, Part 2:
Particular Requirements for Electric Irons
UL 60745-1 Hand-Held Motor-Operated Electric Tools--Safety--Part 1:
General Requirements
UL 61010A-2-020 Electrical Equipment for Laboratory Use; Part 2:
Particular Requirements for Laboratory Centrifuges
UL 61010A-2-061 Electrical Equipment for Laboratory Use; Part 2:
Particular Requirements for Laboratory Atomic Spectrometers with
Thermal Atomization and Ionization
UL 61010B-2-031 Electrical Equipment for Measurement, Control, and
Laboratory Use; Part 2: Particular Requirements for Hand-Held Probe
Assemblies for Electrical Measurement and Test

    The designations and titles of the above test standards were
current at the time of the preparation of this notice.
    OSHA's recognition of TUVAM, or any NRTL, for a particular test
standard is limited to equipment or materials (i.e., products) for
which OSHA standards require third-party testing and certification
before use in the workplace. Consequently, if a test standard also
covers any product(s) for which OSHA does not require such testing and
certification, an NRTL's scope of recognition does not include that
product(s).
    Test standards listed above may be approved as an American National
Standard by the American National Standards Institute (ANSI). However,
for convenience, we use the designation of the standards-developing
organization for the standard as opposed to the ANSI designation. Under
our procedures, any NRTL recognized for an ANSI-approved test standard
may use either the latest proprietary version of the test standard or
the latest ANSI version of that standard. You may contact ANSI to find
out whether a test standard is currently ANSI-approved.

Conditions

    TUVAM must also abide by the following conditions of the
recognition, in addition to those conditions already required by 29 CFR
1910.7:
    OSHA must be allowed access to TUVAM's facilities and records to
ascertain continuing compliance with the terms of its recognition and
to perform investigations as OSHA deems necessary;
    If TUVAM has reason to doubt the efficacy of any test standard it
is using under this program, it must promptly inform the test standard
developing organization of this concern and provide that organization
with appropriate relevant information upon which its concern is based;
    TUVAM must not engage in, or permit others to engage in, any
misrepresentation of the scope or conditions of its recognition. As
part of this condition, TUVAM agrees that it will allow no
representation that it is either a recognized or an accredited
Nationally Recognized Testing Laboratory (NRTL) without clearly
indicating the specific equipment or material to which this recognition
applies, and also clearly indicating that its recognition is limited to
certain products;
    TUVAM must inform OSHA as soon as possible, in writing, of any
change of ownership, facilities, or key personnel, and of any major
changes in its operations as an NRTL, including details of these
changes;
    TUVAM will meet all the terms of its recognition and will always
comply with all OSHA policies pertaining to this recognition; and
    TUVAM will continue to meet the requirements for recognition in all
areas where it has been recognized.

    Signed at Washington, DC, this 22nd day of August, 2008.
Edwin G. Foulke, Jr.,
Assistant Secretary of Labor for Occupational Safety and Health.
[FR Doc. E8-20169 Filed 8-28-08; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4510-26-P