 Quantification of Impingement and Entrainment Impacts at Cooling Water Intake Structures Presented by:

Ashley L. Allen U. S. EPA, Office of Water Washington, DC ( 202) 566 1012 Presented to:

NOAA National Workshop on LNG and Related Facilities Silver Spring, MD July 20, 2004 Scope of Environmental Impact Analysis for Cooling Water Intake Structures ° 550 Phase II facilities ° ~ 600 Phase III facilities ° Facilities occur on all types of waterbodies:

  Lakes and reservoirs   Great Lakes   Rivers and streams   Estuaries   Oceans ° Hundreds of fish species (> 300) as well as many other types of aquatic organisms impacted Distribution of Phase II and Phase III Existing Facilities*

Phase II Facilities

Phase III Facilities

* Surveyed facilities only What is " Environmental Impact"?

° Section 316( b) of the CWA requires that " the location,

design, construction, and capacity of cooling water intake structures reflect the best technology available for minimizing adverse environmental impact"

° EPA believes it is reasonable to interpret adverse environmental impact as including loss of aquatic organisms to impingement and entrainment ° Reductions in impingement and entrainment is a useful metric for determining performance at facilities Four Objectives for 316( b)

Environmental Impact Analysis:

A. Develop a national estimate of magnitude of impingement and entrainment B. Standardize impingement and entrainment rates using common biological metrics so that rates can be compared across species, years, facilities, and geographical regions C. Calculate changes in metrics associated with various regulatory options D. Provide data for estimating national economic benefits of reducing impingement and entrainment Impingement and Entrainment Data Availability ° 46 out of 550 Phase II facilities with useful studies ° Extrapolation used to cover facilities without data ° Phase II facility universe divided into regions on the basis of waterbody type and geography   Freshwater ° Great Lakes ° Inland   Saltwater ° North Atlantic ° Mid Atlantic ° South Atlantic ° Gulf of Mexico ° California Modeling Foregone Fishery Yields ° EPA used the Thompson Bell equilibrium yield model to calculate yields foregone due to I& E of commercial and recreational fish Y k = foregone yield ( pounds) due to I& E losses in year k L jk= losses of individual fish of stage j in the year k S ja= cumulative survival fraction from stage j to age a W a average weight ( pounds) of fish at age a F a= instantaneous annual fishing mortality rate for fish of age a Z a = instantaneous annual total mortality rate for fish of age a ( )

Y LSWFZ e k a j jk ja a a a Za =

( ) 1 ° Model assumptions:

  I& E losses result in reductions in the number of harvestable adults   Fishing mortality and natural mortality remain constant ° Foregone yield was divided among recreational and commercial harvests according to state wide aggregate catch rates in each category for each species   Commercial yield foregone expressed as pounds   Recreational yield translated into numbers of individual fish using expected weight of a harvestable fish Harvest Yield Foregone . continued Additional Loss Metrics:

° " Production Foregone"

  Total expected growth ( pounds) lost due to I& E   All species: commercial, recreational, forage ° " Secondary Yield Foregone"

  Uses a trophic transfer efficiency factor to convert production foregone of forage fish into additional production foregone of commercial and recreational fish   Additional production foregone of commercial and recreational fish is processed through Thompson Bell to calculate foregone fishery yield Additional Loss Metrics  continued ° Equivalent Adult Model ( EAM)

  Expressed losses at all life stages as Age 1 equivalents   Useful for comparing loss rates among species,

years, facilities, and regions Final Results

° The metrics do not require knowledge of the size of an existing fish population for purposes of calculation ° Metrics examine only the incremental yield foregone due to I& E ° Outputs for economic benefits analysis:

  Pounds of commercial fish harvest foregone   Number of harvested recreational fish foregone   Production foregone ( in pounds) of all fish Monetization of Benefits Associated with Reducing Environmental Impacts at Cooling Water Intake Structures Presented by:

Erik Helm, Ph. D.

U. S. EPA, Office of Water Washington, DC ( 202) 566 1066 Presented to:

NOAA National Workshop on LNG and Related Facilities Silver Spring, MD July 20, 2004 Commercial Benefits ° EPA used a literature search and benefits transfer to produce monetized values ° Producer surplus ( welfare) as a percentage of gross revenues ° It was assumed that the small changes in catch would not affect market prices ° The commercial fishing benefits of the rule were estimated to be 40% ( average value from literature) of the market value of the increased fish catch produced through I& E reductions Recreational Benefits ° EPA used NMFS data to estimate regional ( saltwater) random utility models ° The models were estimated in two stages 1. site choice model 2. trip frequency model ° Inland ( fresh water) values were estimated with a central tendencies benefits transfer Nonuse Benefits ° EAD used Benefits Transfer ( meta analysis)

to estimate nonuse benefits ° A Least Squares regression was estimated based on 81 obs. taken from 33 studies ° Estimated coefficients were multiplied by assigned mean values and weights based on economics literature and best professional judgment to estimate nonuse WTP values Issues Raised with Meta Analysis ° There were insufficient primary data sources giving nonuse WTP estimates for fish in the literature ° Studies in the nonuse database were too far removed from the 316( b) policy scenario ° Nonuse values can't exist without a fish population change ° Determining the relevant population of nonuser households was insufficiently addressed.


[Federal Register Volume 77, Number 178 (Thursday, September 13, 2012)]
[Notices]
[Page 56639]
[FR Doc No: 2012-22515]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Docket No. NJ12-13-000]

Bonneville Power Administration; Notice of Petition for
Declaratory Order

    Take notice that on September 4, 2012, pursuant to sections
35.28(e) and 207 of the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission's
(Commission) Rules of Practice and Procedure, 18 CFR 35.28(e) and 18
CFR 385.207, the Bonneville Power Administration (Bonneville),
submitted certain amendments to its Open Access Transmission Tariff
(tariff) and a Petition for Declaratory Order requesting the Commission
find that Bonneville's tariff, as amended by this filing, substantially
conforms or is superior to the Commission's pro forma tariff and that
Bonneville satisfies the requirements for reciprocity status.
    Any person desiring to intervene or to protest this filing must
file in accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of the Commission's Rules of
Practice and Procedure (18 CFR 385.211, 385.214). Protests will be
considered by the Commission in determining the appropriate action to
be taken, but will not serve to make protestants parties to the
proceeding. Any person wishing to become a party must file a notice of
intervention or motion to intervene, as appropriate. Such notices,
motions, or protests must be filed on or before the comment date. On or
before the comment date, it is not necessary to serve motions to
intervene or protests on persons other than the Applicant.
    The Commission encourages electronic submission of protests and
interventions in lieu of paper using the ``eFiling'' link at http://www.ferc.gov. Persons unable to file electronically should submit an
original and 14 copies of the protest or intervention to the Federal
Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street NE., Washington, DC
20426.
    This filing is accessible on-line at http://www.ferc.gov, using the
``eLibrary'' link and is available for review in the Commission's
Public Reference Room in Washington, DC. There is an ``eSubscription''
link on the Web site that enables subscribers to receive email
notification when a document is added to a subscribed docket(s). For
assistance with any FERC Online service, please email
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or call<PHONE_NUMBER> (toll free). For
TTY, call<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on October 4, 2012.

    Dated: September 6, 2012.
Kimberly D. Bose,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2012-22515 Filed 9-12-12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 82, Number 181 (Wednesday, September 20, 2017)]
[Notices]
[Pages 44008-44010]
[FR Doc No: 2017-19966]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-81614; File No. SR-CBOE-2017-060]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; Chicago Board Options Exchange,
Incorporated; Notice of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of a
Proposed Rule Change To Amend the Fees Schedule

September 14, 2017.
    Pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934
(the ``Act''),\1\ and Rule 19b-4 thereunder,\2\ notice is hereby given
that on September 1, 2017, Chicago Board Options Exchange, Incorporated
(the ``Exchange'' or ``CBOE'') 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
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

    The Exchange proposes to amend its Fees Schedule. Specifically, the
Exchange proposes to adopt a discount in the form of a cap on
transaction fees for Market-Maker, Broker-Dealer, Non-Trading Permit
Holder Market-Maker, Professional/Voluntary Professional and Joint
Back-Office executions in VIX.
    The text of the proposed rule change is also available on the
Exchange's Web site (http://www.cboe.com/AboutCBOE/CBOELegalRegulatoryHome.aspx), 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 Schedule. Specifically, the
Exchange proposes to adopt a discount in the form of a cap on
transaction fees for Market-Maker, Broker-Dealer, Non-Trading Permit
Holder Market-Maker, Professional/Voluntary Professional and Joint
Back-Office (i.e., ``M'', ``B'', ``N'', ``W'' and ``J'' origin codes)
executions in VIX (the ``VIX Large Trade Discount''). Particularly,
regular transaction fees will only be charged for up to 250,000 VIX
options contracts per order for Market-Makers, Broker-Dealers, Non-
Trading Permit Holder Market-Makers, Professional/Voluntary
Professionals and Joint Back-Offices.\3\ The Exchange notes that the
proposed VIX Large Trade Discount is similar to the Customer Large
Trade Discount (``CLTD'') program which places a cap on the quantity of
Customer contracts (i.e., ``C'' origin code) that are assessed
transaction fees in certain options classes, including VIX.\4\ Like the
CLTD program, the Large Trade Discount will apply both in the Regular
Trading Hours (``RTH'') Session and the Extended Trading Hours
(``ETH'') Session, but for an order to be eligible to qualify for the
discount, the order in its entirety must be executed in either RTH or
ETH, but not both).\5\ Also

like the CLTD program, qualification of an order for the fee cap is
based on the trade date and order ID on each order. For complex orders,
the total contracts of an order (all legs by underlying symbol) are
counted for purposes of calculating the fee cap. To qualify for the
discount, the entire order quantity must be tied to a single order ID
(unless the order is a complex order with a number of legs that exceeds
system limitations) either within the CBOE Command system or PULSe or
in the front end system used to enter and/or transmit the order
(provided the Exchange is granted access to effectively audit such
front end system) (the order must be entered in its entirety on one
system so that the Exchange can clearly identify the total size of the
order). For an order entered via PULSe or another front end system, or
a complex order with multiple order IDs, a request must be submitted to
the Exchange within 3 business days of the transactions and must
identify all necessary information, including the order ID and related
trade details. Lastly, as noted above, only regular transaction fees
are capped. To avoid potential confusion, however the Exchange proposes
to make clear that floor brokerage fees are not subject to the cap on
fees.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ The discount will be on transaction fees only. Other fees,
such as the Index License Surcharge, will not be discounted.
    \4\ See CBOE's Fees Schedule, Customer Large Trade Discount
program.
    \5\ The Exchange notes that the trading sessions has separate
order books and require separate logins for access, and as there is
no ``rolling'' of orders by the Exchange between the two sessions,
in order to be eligible to qualify for the VIX Large Trade Discount,
an order must be executed in its entirety in either RTH or ETH, but
not partly in both.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange proposes to adopt the VIX Large Trade Discount in
order to incentivize the sending of large VIX orders. The greater
liquidity and trading volume that the proposed cap encourages would
benefit all market participants trading VIX options.
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.\6\ Specifically, the
Exchange believes the proposed rule change is consistent with the
Section 6(b)(5) \7\ 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. The Exchange
also believes the proposed rule change is consistent with Section
6(b)(4) of the Act,\8\ which provides that Exchange rules may provide
for the equitable allocation of reasonable dues, fees, and other
charges among its Trading Permit Holders.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b).
    \7\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5).
    \8\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(4).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange believes that adopting the VIX Large Trade Discount is
reasonable because Market-Makers, Broker-Dealers, Non-Trading Permit
Holder Market-Makers, Professional/Voluntary Professionals and Joint
Back-Offices participants (i.e., non-Customer, non-Firm market
participants) will receive a discount for very large trades that they
would not otherwise receive, which promotes and encourages larger VIX
executions on the Exchange. This change is equitable and not unfairly
discriminatory because all non-Customer, non-Firm market participants
whose large trades qualify for the discount in VIX will receive it. The
Exchange believes it's equitable and not unfairly discriminatory to
adopt a cap on transaction fees for VIX and not other products because
the Exchange desires to encourage VIX trading, which, along with
bringing greater VIX options trading opportunities to all market
participants [sic]. The Exchange believes that it is not unfairly
discriminatory to not apply the proposed cap to Customers, as Customers
are eligible for a discount on VIX discount under the CLTD program. The
Exchange believes that it is not unfairly discriminatory to not apply
the proposed VIX Large Trade Discount program to Firms (i.e., Clearing
Trading Holder Proprietary, ``F'' and ``L'' origin codes), as Firms are
eligible for discounts on VIX under the CBOE Clearing Trading Permit
Holder Proprietary Products Sliding Scales.

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

    CBOE does not believe that the proposed rule change will impose any
burden on competition that is not necessary or appropriate in
furtherance of the purposes of the Act because, while the cap does not
apply to Customers and Firms, other incentive programs already exist
for those market participants with respect to VIX trading.
Additionally, the proposed change is designed to encourage increased
VIX options volume, which provides greater trading opportunities for
all market participants. The Exchange believes that the proposed rule
change will not cause an unnecessary burden on intermarket competition
because VIX is only traded on CBOE. To the extent that the proposed
changes make CBOE a more attractive marketplace for market participants
at other exchanges, such market participants are welcome to become CBOE
market participants.

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 \9\ and paragraph (f) of Rule 19b-4 \10\
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.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \9\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A).
    \10\ 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_ADDRESS>Please include
File Number SR-CBOE-2017-060 on the subject line.

Paper Comments

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

All submissions should refer to File Number SR-CBOE-2017-060. 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, 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; 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-CBOE-2017-060 and should be
submitted on or before October 11, 2017.

    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets,
pursuant to delegated authority.\11\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \11\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Eduardo A. Aleman,
Assistant Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2017-19966 Filed 9-19-17; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 86, Number 195 (Wednesday, October 13, 2021)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 56840-56843]
[FR Doc No: 2021-22203]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. FAA-2021-0788; Project Identifier AD-2021-00489-T]
RIN 2120-AA64

Airworthiness Directives; The Boeing Company Airplanes

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM).

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

SUMMARY: The FAA proposes to adopt a new airworthiness directive (AD)
for certain The Boeing Company Model 737-700, -800, and -900ER series
airplanes. This proposed AD was prompted by reports of incorrectly
installed fuselage skin fasteners. This proposed AD would require a
detailed inspection of a certain body station bulkhead, between certain
stringers, for any incorrectly installed fastener common to fuselage
skin, and applicable on-condition actions. The FAA is proposing this AD
to address the unsafe condition on these products.

DATES: The FAA must receive comments on this proposed AD by November
29, 2021.

ADDRESSES: You may send comments, using the procedures found in 14 CFR

11.43 and 11.45, by any of the following methods:
     Federal eRulemaking Portal: Go to https://www.regulations.gov. Follow the instructions for submitting comments.
     Fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>.
     Mail: U.S. Department of Transportation, Docket
Operations, M-30, West Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140, 1200 New
Jersey Avenue SE, Washington, DC 20590.
     Hand Delivery: Deliver to Mail address above between 9
a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays.
    For service information identified in this NPRM, contact Boeing
Commercial Airplanes, Attention: Contractual & Data Services (C&DS),
2600 Westminster Blvd., MC 110-SK57, Seal Beach, CA 90740-5600;
telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>; internet https://www.myboeingfleet.com. You may
view this referenced service information at the FAA, Airworthiness
Products Section, Operational Safety Branch, 2200 South 216th St., Des
Moines, WA. For information on the availability of this material at the
FAA, call<PHONE_NUMBER>. It is also available at https://www.regulations.gov by searching for and locating Docket No. FAA-2021-
0788.

Examining the AD Docket

    You may examine the AD docket at https://www.regulations.gov by
searching for and locating Docket No. FAA-2021-0788; 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 NPRM, any comments
received, and other information. The street address for Docket
Operations is listed above.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:  Lu Lu, Aerospace Engineer, Airframe
Section, FAA, Seattle ACO Branch, 2200 South 216th St., Des Moines, WA
98198; phone and fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>; email: [email protected].

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Comments Invited

    The FAA invites you to send any written relevant data, views, or
arguments about this proposal. Send your comments to an address listed
under ADDRESSES. Include ``Docket No. FAA-2021-0788; Project Identifier
AD-2021-00489-T'' at the beginning of your comments. The most helpful
comments reference a specific portion of the proposal, explain the
reason for any recommended change, and include supporting data. The FAA
will consider all comments received by the closing date and may amend
this proposal because of those comments.
    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 post all comments received, without change, to
https://www.regulations.gov, including any personal information you
provide. The agency will also post a report summarizing each
substantive verbal contact received about this NPRM.

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 Lu
Lu, Aerospace Engineer, Airframe Section, FAA, Seattle ACO Branch, 2200
South 216th St., Des Moines, WA 98198; phone and fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>;
email: [email protected]. Any commentary that the FAA receives which is not
specifically designated as CBI will be placed in the public docket for
this rulemaking.

Background

    The FAA has received a report indicating incorrectly installed
fasteners were found at the station (STA) 727 bulkhead between
stringers S-22 and S-27. The fasteners, installed with a gap under the
fastener head, were found at the STA 727 bulkhead common to fuselage
skin, including the S-23 skin lap splice. Incorrectly installed
fasteners are suspected to exist on airplanes delivered within a
certain time period. The FAA has confirmed that the fastener
installation procedures were corrected on airplanes subsequently
delivered. This condition was the result of incorrect procedures used
to install affected fasteners during airplane production, which could
result in incorrectly installed fasteners going undetected. Continuous
operation of the airplane with incorrectly installed fasteners may
generate fatigue cracking that could adversely affect the structural
integrity of the airplane. Gaps under fastener heads will result in
bending loads on the bulkhead chord that could cause chord failure and
adjacent skin failure, resulting in reduced control of the airplane.

FAA's Determination

    The FAA is issuing this NPRM after determining that the unsafe
condition described previously is likely to exist or develop on other
products of the same type design.

Related Service Information Under 1 CFR Part 51

    The FAA reviewed Boeing Alert Requirements Bulletin 737-53A1384 RB,
dated September 10, 2020. This service information specifies procedures
for a detailed inspection for incorrectly installed fasteners at the
STA 727 bulkhead outer chord common to the fuselage skin between
stringers S-22 and S-27 on the left and right sides, and applicable on-
condition actions. In addition to repair and replacement, on-condition
actions include repetitive inspections for cracking of the fuselage
skin between stringers S-22 and S-27; an open hole high frequency eddy
current (HFEC) inspection for cracking at all incorrectly installed
fastener locations; and external and internal general visual
inspections for repairs of the STA 727 bulkhead. On-condition actions
also include repetitive HFEC and low frequency eddy current (LFEC)
inspections in unrepaired areas for cracking of the inner skin from the
wheel well; of the outer, upper, and lower chords from the wheel well;
and of the fail-safe chord from the cargo compartment.
    This service information is reasonably available because the
interested parties have access to it through their normal course of
business or by the means identified in ADDRESSES.

Proposed AD Requirements in This NPRM

    This proposed AD would require accomplishing the actions specified
in the service information already described except for any differences
identified as exceptions in the regulatory text of this proposed AD.
For information on the procedures and compliance times, see this
service information at https://www.regulations.gov by searching for and
locating Docket No. FAA-2021-0788.

Costs of Compliance

    The FAA estimates that this AD, if adopted as proposed, would
affect 78 airplanes of U.S. registry. The FAA estimates the following
costs to comply with this proposed AD:

                                                 Estimated Costs
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                Cost per      Cost on U.S.
               Action                         Labor cost            Parts cost        product        operators
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Inspections........................  13 work-hours x $85 per                  $0          $1,105         $86,190
                                      hour = $1,105.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The FAA estimates the following costs to do any necessary actions
that would be required based on the results of the proposed inspection.
The agency has no way of determining the number of aircraft that might
need these on-condition actions.

                                               On-Condition Costs
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                Action                            Labor cost              Parts cost        Cost per product
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Open hole HFEC inspections............  21 work-hours x $85 per hour =              $0  $1,785 per inspection
                                         $85 per inspection cycle.                       cycle.
HFEC and LFEC inspections.............  36 work-hours x $85 per hour =               0  3,060 per inspection
                                         $3,060 per inspection cycle.                    cycle.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The FAA has included all known costs in its cost estimate.
According to the manufacturer, however, some or all of the costs of
this proposed AD may be covered under warranty, thereby reducing the
cost impact on affected operators.

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 above, I certify this proposed
regulation:
    (1) Is not a ``significant regulatory action'' under Executive
Order 12866,
    (2) Would not affect intrastate aviation in Alaska, and
    (3) Would 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:

The Boeing Company: Docket No. FAA-2021-0788; Project Identifier AD-
2021-489-T.

(a) Comments Due Date

    The FAA must receive comments on this airworthiness directive
(AD) by November 29, 2021.

(b) Affected ADs

    None.

(c) Applicability

    This AD applies to The Boeing Company Model 737-700, -800, and -
900ER series airplanes, certificated in any category, and identified
in Boeing Alert Requirements Bulletin 737-53A1384 RB, dated
September 10, 2020.

(d) Subject

    Air Transport Association (ATA) of America Code 53, Fuselage.

(e) Unsafe Condition

    This AD was prompted by reports of incorrectly installed
fuselage skin fasteners. The FAA is issuing this AD to address
incorrectly installed fasteners. This condition, if not addressed,
could result in incorrectly installed fasteners going undetected.
Continuous operation of the airplane with undetected incorrectly
installed fasteners may generate fatigue cracking that could
adversely affect the structural integrity of the airplane.

(f) Compliance

    Comply with this AD within the compliance times specified,
unless already done.

(g) Required Actions

    Except as specified by paragraph (h) of this AD: At the
applicable times specified in the ``Compliance'' paragraph of Boeing
Alert Requirements Bulletin 737-53A1384 RB, dated September 10,
2020, do all applicable actions identified in, and in accordance
with, the Accomplishment Instructions of Boeing Alert Requirements
Bulletin 737-53A1384 RB, dated September 10, 2020.

    Note 1 to paragraph (g): Guidance for accomplishing the actions
required by this AD can be found in Boeing Alert Service Bulletin
737-53A1384, dated September 10, 2020, which is referred to in
Boeing Alert Requirements Bulletin 737-53A1384 RB, dated September
10, 2020.

(h) Exceptions to Service Information Specifications

    (1) Where the ``Effectivity'' paragraph and the Condition and
Compliance Time columns of the tables in the ``Compliance''
paragraph of Boeing Alert Requirements Bulletin 737-53A1384 RB,
dated September 10, 2020, use the phrase ``the Original Issue date
of Requirements Bulletin 737-53A1384 RB,'' this AD requires using
``the effective date of this AD.''
    (2) Where Boeing Alert Requirements Bulletin 737-53A1384 RB,
dated September 10, 2020, specifies contacting Boeing for

repair instructions or for alternative inspections: This AD requires
doing the repair, or doing the alternative inspections and
applicable on-condition actions, using a method approved in
accordance with the procedures specified in paragraph (i) of this
AD.

(i) Alternative Methods of Compliance (AMOCs)

    (1) The Manager, Seattle ACO Branch, FAA, has the authority to
approve AMOCs for this AD, if requested using the procedures found
in 14 CFR 39.19. In accordance with 14 CFR 39.19, send your request
to your principal inspector or responsible Flight Standards Office,
as appropriate. If sending information directly to the manager of
the certification office, send it to the attention of the person
identified in paragraph (j)(1) of this AD. Information may be
emailed to: [email protected].
    (2) Before using any approved AMOC, notify your appropriate
principal inspector, or lacking a principal inspector, the manager
of the responsible Flight Standards Office.
    (3) An AMOC that provides an acceptable level of safety may be
used for any repair, modification, or alteration required by this AD
if it is approved by The Boeing Company Organization Designation
Authorization (ODA) that has been authorized by the Manager, Seattle
ACO Branch, FAA, to make those findings. To be approved, the repair
method, modification deviation, or alteration deviation must meet
the certification basis of the airplane, and the approval must
specifically refer to this AD.

(j) Related Information

    (1) For more information about this AD, contact Lu Lu, Aerospace
Engineer, Airframe Section, FAA, Seattle ACO Branch, 2200 South
216th St., Des Moines, WA 98198; phone and fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>; email:
[email protected].
    (2) For service information identified in this AD, contact
Boeing Commercial Airplanes, Attention: Contractual & Data Services
(C&DS), 2600 Westminster Blvd., MC 110-SK57, Seal Beach, CA 90740-
5600; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>; internet https://www.myboeingfleet.com. You may view this referenced service
information at the FAA, Airworthiness Products Section, Operational
Safety Branch, 2200 South 216th St., Des Moines, WA. For information
on the availability of this material at the FAA, call<PHONE_NUMBER>.

    Issued on September 9, 2021.
Lance T. Gant,
Director, Compliance & Airworthiness Division, Aircraft Certification
Service.
[FR Doc. 2021-22203 Filed 10-12-21; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


[Federal Register Volume 80, Number 31 (Tuesday, February 17, 2015)]
[Notices]
[Pages 8301-8302]
[FR Doc No: 2015-03146]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Docket No. IC15-1-000]

Commission Information Collection Activities (FERC-598 & FERC-
716); Comment Request

AGENCY: Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, DOE.

ACTION: Comment request.

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

SUMMARY: In compliance with the requirements of the Paperwork Reduction
Act of 1995, 44 U.S.C. 3507(a)(1)(D), the Federal Energy Regulatory
Commission (Commission or FERC) is submitting its information
collections FERC-598 (Self-Certification for Entities Seeking Exempt
Wholesale Generator Status or Foreign Utility Company Status) and FERC-
716 [Good Faith Requests for Transmission Service and Good Faith
Responses by Transmitting Utilities Under Sections 211(a) and 213(a) of
the Federal Power Act (FPA)] to the Office of Management and Budget
(OMB) for review of the information collection requirements. Any
interested person may file comments directly with OMB and should
address a copy of those comments to the Commission as explained below.
The Commission previously issued a Notice in the Federal Register (79
FR 68424, 11/17/2014) requesting public comments. The Commission
received no comments on either the FERC-598 or the FERC-716 and is
making this notation in its submittal to OMB.

DATES: Comments on the collection of information are due by March 19,
2015.

ADDRESSES: Comments filed with OMB, identified either by the OMB
Control No. 1902-0166 (FERC-598) or 1902-0170 (FERC-716) should be sent
via email to the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs:
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Attention: Federal Energy Regulatory
Commission Desk Officer. The Desk Officer may also be reached via
telephone at<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    A copy of the comments should also be sent to the Commission, in
Docket No. IC15-1-000, by either of the following methods:
     eFiling at Commission's Web site: http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/efiling.asp.
     Mail/Hand Delivery/Courier: Federal Energy Regulatory
Commission, Secretary of the Commission, 888 First Street NE.,
Washington, DC 20426.
    Instructions: All submissions must be formatted and filed in
accordance with submission guidelines at: http://www.ferc.gov/help/submission-guide.asp. For user assistance contact FERC Online Support
by email at<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or by phone at:<PHONE_NUMBER>
(toll-free), or<PHONE_NUMBER> for TTY.
    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 http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/docs-filing.asp.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ellen Brown may be reached by email at
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>by telephone at<PHONE_NUMBER>, and by fax at
(202) 273-0873.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
    Type of Request: Three-year extension of the information collection
requirements for all collections described below with no changes to the
current reporting requirements. Please note that each collection is
distinct from the next.
    Comments: Comments are invited on: (1) Whether the collections of
information are 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 collections of information, including the
validity of the methodology and assumptions used; (3) ways to enhance
the quality, utility and clarity of the information collections; and
(4) ways to minimize the burden of the collections of information on
those who are to respond, including the use of automated collection
techniques or other forms of information technology.

FERC-598 (Self-Certification for Entities Seeking Exempt Wholesale
Generator Status or Foreign Utility Company Status)

    OMB Control No.: 1902-0166.
    Abstract: The Commission uses the data in the FERC-598 information
collection to implement the statutory provisions of Title XII,
subchapter F of the Energy Policy Act of 2005 (EPAct 2005).\1\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ Energy Policy Act of 2005, Public Law 109-58, 119 Stat. 594
(2005).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    EPAct 2005 repealed the Public Utility Holding Company Act of 1935
(PUHCA 1935) in its entirety, and adopted in its place the Public
Utility Holding Company Act of 2005 (PUHCA 2005). This change enabled
the Commission to exempt from the requirements of PUHCA 2005 the
holding companies that hold responsibility over wholesale generators
from PUHCA 2005 on a case-by-case basis. The Commission amended its
regulations (in Order No. 667 \2\) to add procedures for self-
certification by entities seeking exempt wholesale generator (EWG) and
Foreign Utility Company (FUCO) status. This self-certification is
similar to the process available to entities that seek qualifying
facility status.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \2\ Repeal of the Public Utility Holding Company Act of 1935 and
Enactment of the Public Utility Holding Company Act of 2005, 70 FR
75592 (2005), order on rehearing, Order 667-A, 71 FR 28446 (2006),
order on rehearing, Order 667-B, 71 FR 42750 (2006), order on
rehearing, Order 667-C, 118 FERC 61133 (2007).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    An EWG is a ``person engaged directly, or indirectly through one or
more affiliates . . . and exclusively in the business of owning or
operating, or both owning and operating, all or part of one or more
eligible facilities and selling electric energy at wholesale.'' \3\ A
FUCO is a company that ``owns or operates facilities that are not
located in any state and that are used for the generation,
transmission, or distribution of electric energy for sale or the
distribution at retail of natural or manufactured gas for heat, light,
or power, if such company: (1) Derives no part of its income, directly
or indirectly, from the generation, transmission, or distribution of
electric energy for sale or the distribution at retail of natural or
manufactured gas for heat, light, or power, within the United States;
and (2) neither the company nor any of its subsidiary companies is a
public-utility company operating in the United States.''
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ 18 CFR 366.1.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    An EWG, FUCO, or its representative seeking to self-certify its
status must file with the Commission a notice of self-certification
demonstrating that it satisfies the definition of EWG or FUCO. In the
case of EWGs, the person filing a notice of self-certification must
also file a copy of the notice of self-certification with the state
regulatory authority of the state in which the facility is located and
that person must also represent to the Commission in its

submission that it has filed a copy of the notice with the appropriate
state regulatory authority.\4\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ 18 CFR 366.7.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Submission of the information collected by FERC-598 is necessary
for the Commission to carry out its responsibilities under EPAct
2005.\5\ The Commission implements its responsibilities through the
Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) Title 18 Part 366. These filing
requirements are mandatory for entities seeking to self-certify their
EWG or FUCO status.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ 42 U.S.C. 16451 et seq.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Type of Respondent: EWGs and FUCOs.
    Estimate of Annual Burden: The Commission estimates the annual
public reporting burden for the information collection as:

                 FERC-598 (Self-Certification for Entities Seeking Exempt Wholesale Generator Status or Foreign Utility Company Status)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                            Annual number of                      Average burden &     Total annual
                                            Number of        responses per     Total number of   cost per response    burden hours &        Cost per
                                           respondents         respondent         responses             \6\         total annual cost     respondent $
                                                      (1)                (2)      (1)*(2) = (3)                (4)      (3)*(4) = (5)          (5) / (1)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
EWGs/FUCOs............................                102                  1                102                  6                612               $423
                                                                                $423            $43,146
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\6\ The estimates for cost per response are derived using the following formula: Average Burden Hours per Response.
* $70.50 per Hour = Average Cost per Response. The cost per hour figure is the FERC average salary plus benefits. Subject matter experts found that
  industry employment costs closely resemble FERC's regarding the FERC-598 information collection.

FERC-716, [Good Faith Requests for Transmission Service and Good Faith
Responses by Transmitting Utilities Under Sections 211(a) and 213(a) of
the Federal Power Act (FPA) \7\]
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ Previously titled ``Transmission Services (Good Faith
Request, Response by Transmitting Utility, and Application) under
Sections 211 and 213a of the Federal Power Act''.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    OMB Control No.: 1902-0170.
    Abstract: The Commission uses the information collected under the
requirements of FERC-716 to implement the statutory provisions of
Sections 211 and Section 213 of the Federal Power Act as amended and
added by the Energy Policy Act 1992. FERC-716 also includes the
requirement to file a Section 211 request if the negotiations between
the transmission requestor and the transmitting utility are
unsuccessful. For the initial process, the information is not filed
with the Commission. However, the request and response may be analyzed
as a part of a Section 211 action. The Commission may order
transmission services under the authority of FPA 211.
    The Commission's regulations in the Code of Federal Regulations
(CFR), 18 CFR 2.20, provide standards by which the Commission
determines if and when a valid good faith request for transmission has
been made under section 211 of the FPA. By developing the standards,
the Commission sought to encourage an open exchange of data with a
reasonable degree of specificity and completeness between the party
requesting transmission services and the transmitting utility. As a
result, 18 CFR 2.20 identifies 12 components of a good faith estimate
and 5 components of a reply to a good faith request.
    Type of Respondent: Transmission Requestors and Transmitting
Utilities.
    Estimate of Annual Burden: The Commission estimates the annual
public reporting burden for the information collection as:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \8\ The estimates for cost per response are derived using the
following formula: Average Burden Hours per Response * $70.50 per
Hour = Average Cost per Response. The cost per hour figure is the
FERC average salary plus benefits. Subject matter experts found that
industry employment costs closely resemble FERC's regarding the
FERC-716 information collection.

    FERC-716 (Good Faith Requests for Transmission Service and Good Faith Responses by Transmitting Utilities Under Sections 211(a) and 213(a) of the
                                                                Federal Power Act (FPA))
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                Average      Total annual
                                                             Number of    Annual  number   Total number     burden and     burden hours      Cost per
                                                            respondents    of  responses   of responses      cost per        and total    respondent ($)
                                                                          per respondent                   response \8\     annual cost
                                                                     (1)             (2)     (1)*(2)=(3)             (4)     (3)*(4)=(5)         (5)/(1)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Information exchange between parties....................               3               1               3             100             300            7050
                                                                                $7050         $21,150
Application submitted to FERC if parties' negotiations                 3               1               3             2.5             7.5          176.25
 are unsuccessful.......................................                                                         $176.25         $528.75
                                                         -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Total...............................................  ..............  ..............               6  ..............           307.5        7,226.25
                                                                                $21,678.75
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Dated: February 11, 2015.
Kimberly D. Bose,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2015-03146 Filed 2-13-15; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P