[Federal Register Volume 78, Number 124 (Thursday, June 27, 2013)]
[Notices]
[Pages 38713-38714]
[FR Doc No: 2013-15439]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

[EPA-HQ-OA-2012-0033; FRL-9828-7]

Additional Documents Available for Public Review Related to
Willingness To Pay Survey for Chesapeake Bay Total Maximum Daily Load:
Instrument, Pre-Test, and Implementation; Comment Request

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency has made available for
public review a revised Supporting Statement and additional
documentation related to

its recent information collection request (ICR) submission to OMB
entitled ``Willingness to Pay Survey for Chesapeake Bay Total Maximum
Daily Load: Instrument, Pre-test, and Implementation'' (EPA ICR No.
2456.01, OMB Control No. 2010-NEW). The additional documents, now
available in the associated docket, are: The Peer Review Report, the
Focus Group and Cognitive Interview Report and the Description of
Hydrological, Biochemical, and Ecosystem Models (Attachment 17 of the
revised Supporting Statement). These documents may provide useful
information to interested parties regarding the development and design
of the survey instruments proposed for this project. Full transcripts
of the focus groups and cognitive interviews were not prepared and are
therefore not available. Public comments were previously requested on
the ICR via the Federal Register on May 24, 2012 during a 60-day
comment period, which was later extended for an additional 30 days. An
additional 30-day comment period was initiated upon submission of the
ICR to OMB for review and consideration. This notice allows for an
additional 30 days of public comments on the ICR in light of the
availability of the additional documentation.

DATES: Additional comments may be submitted on or before July 29, 2013.

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, referencing Docket ID Number EPA-HQ-
OA-2012-0033, to (1) EPA online using www.regulations.gov (our
preferred method); by email to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>by fax at (202) 566-
9744; or by mail to: EPA Docket Center, Environmental Protection
Agency, Mail Code 28221T, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave. NW., Washington, DC
20460, and (2) OMB via email to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Address
comments to OMB Desk Officer for EPA.
    EPA's policy is that all comments received will be included in the
public docket without change including any personal information
provided, unless the comment includes profanity, threats, information
claimed to be Confidential Business Information (CBI) or other
information whose disclosure is restricted by statute.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Dr. Nathalie Simon, National Center
for Environmental Economics, Office of Policy, (1809T), Environmental
Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave. NW., Washington, DC 20460;
telephone number:<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax number:<PHONE_NUMBER>; email
address<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The revised Supporting Statement, the Peer
Review Report, the Focus Group and Cognitive Interview Report and the
Description of Hydrological, Biochemical, and Ecosystem Models are
available in the public docket for this ICR together with other
supporting documents made available previously which explain in detail
the information that the EPA will be collecting. The docket can be
viewed online at www.regulations.gov or in person at the EPA Docket
Center, EPA West, Room 3334, 1301 Constitution Ave. NW., Washington,
DC. The telephone number for the Docket Center is<PHONE_NUMBER>. For
additional information about EPA's public docket, visit http://www.epa.gov/dockets.
    Abstract: The Clean Water Act (CWA) directs EPA to coordinate
Federal and State efforts to improve water quality in the Chesapeake
Bay. In 2009, Executive Order (E.O.) 13508 reemphasized this mandate,
directing EPA to define the next generation of tools and actions to
restore water quality in the Bay and describe the changes to be made to
regulations, programs, and policies to implement these actions. The
Chesapeake Bay watershed encompasses 64,000 square miles in parts of
six states and the District of Columbia. It is the largest estuary in
the United States and the third largest in the world. The Chesapeake
Bay's unique set of ecological and cultural elements has motivated
efforts to preserve and restore its condition for more than 25 years.
Significant progress has been made over that period however, pollution
budgets, called Total Maximum Daily Loads (TMDLs), are necessary to
continue progress toward the goal of a healthy Bay. The watershed
states of New York, Pennsylvania, Delaware, West Virginia, Virginia,
and Maryland, as well as the District of Columbia, have developed
Watershed Implementation Plans (WIPs) detailing the steps each will
take to meet its obligations under the TMDL.
    As part of the next phase of this effort, EPA is undertaking an
assessment of the costs and benefits of meeting Total Maximum Daily
Loads (TMDLs), of nitrogen, phosphorus, and sediment for the Chesapeake
Bay. As an input to the TMDL benefits study, EPA's National Center for
Environmental Economics (NCEE) is seeking approval to conduct a stated
preference survey to collect data on households' use of Chesapeake Bay
and its watershed, willingness to pay for a variety of water quality
improvements likely to follow from pollution reduction programs, and
demographic information. If approved, the survey would be administered
by mail in two phases to a sample of 9,140 residents living in the
Chesapeake Bay states, Chesapeake Bay watershed, and other eastern
states within 100 miles of the Atlantic Ocean.
    Benefits from meeting the TMDL for the Chesapeake Bay will accrue
to those who live near the Bay or visit for recreation, those who live
near or visit lakes and rivers in the watershed, and those who live
further away and/or may never visit the Bay but have a general concern
for the environment quality of the Bay. While benefits from the first
two categories can be measured using hedonic property value,
recreational demand, and other revealed preference approaches, only
stated preference methods can capture nonuse benefits. This study will
provide policy makers with additional information on the public's
preferences for improvements to the Chesapeake Bay and lakes in the
watershed. NCEE will use the survey responses to estimate willingness
to pay for changes related to reductions in nitrogen, phosphorous, and
sediment loadings to the Bay and lakes in the Chesapeake Bay watershed.
The analysis relies on state of the art theoretical and statistical
tools for non-market welfare analysis. The results of this study will
inform the public and policy makers about the benefits of improvements
to the Chesapeake Bay and lakes in the watershed. A non-response survey
will also be administered to inform the interpretation and validation
of survey responses. Participation in the survey will be voluntary and
the identity of the respondents will be kept confidential to the extent
provided by law.

    Dated: June 20, 2013.
Shelley Levitt,
Acting Director, National Center for Environmental Economics.
[FR Doc. 2013-15439 Filed 6-26-13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


[Federal Register Volume 79, Number 90 (Friday, May 9, 2014)]
[Notices]
[Page 26741]
[FR Doc No: 2014-10702]

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

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: RP13-294-000.
    Applicants: Gulf South Pipeline Company, LP.
    Description: ENS Activity Report for 2013.
    Filed Date: 2/7/14.
    Accession Number: 20140207-5024.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 5/5/14.

    Docket Numbers: RP14-759-000.
    Applicants: Cameron Interstate Pipeline, LLC.
    Description: Annual Report of Operational Imbalances and Cash-out
Activity of Cameron Interstate Pipeline, LLC.
    Filed Date: 4/18/14.
    Accession Number: 20140418-5102.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 4/30/14.

    Docket Numbers: RP14-761-000.
    Applicants: Cameron Interstate Pipeline, LLC.
    Description: Annual Report of Penalty Revenues for Cameron
Interstate Pipeline, LLC.
    Filed Date: 4/18/14.
    Accession Number: 20140418-5109.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 4/30/14.

    Docket Numbers: RP14-774-000.
    Applicants: Portland Natural Gas Transmission System.
    Description: Maps 2014 to be effective 6/1/2014.
    Filed Date: 4/28/14.
    Accession Number: 20140428-5063.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 5/12/14.

    Docket Numbers: RP14-775-000.
    Applicants: Alliance Pipeline L.P.
    Description: May 1-14 2014 Auction to be effective 5/1/2014.
    Filed Date: 4/28/14.
    Accession Number: 20140428-5080.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 5/12/14.

    Docket Numbers: RP14-776-000.
    Applicants: Algonquin Gas Transmission, LLC.
    Description: ConEd Ramapo Release May 1, 2014 to be effective 5/1/
2014.
    Filed Date: 4/28/14.
    Accession Number: 20140428-5223.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 5/12/14.

    Docket Numbers: RP14-777-000.
    Applicants: Algonquin Gas Transmission, LLC.
    Description: Brooklyn Union Ramapo Release May 1, 2014 to be
effective 5/1/2014.
    Filed Date: 4/28/14.
    Accession Number: 20140428-5233.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 5/12/14.

    Docket Numbers: RP14-778-000.
    Applicants: Algonquin Gas Transmission, LLC.
    Description: Keyspan Ramapo Release May 1, 2014 to be effective 5/
1/2014.
    Filed Date: 4/28/14.
    Accession Number: 20140428-5237.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 5/12/14.

    Docket Numbers: RP14-779-000.
    Applicants: Texas Eastern Transmission, LP.
    Description: EQT Negotiated Rate Release 5-1-2014 to be effective
5/1/2014.
    Filed Date: 4/28/14.
    Accession Number: 20140428-5247.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 5/12/14.

    Docket Numbers: RP14-780-000.
    Applicants: Texas Eastern Transmission, LP.
    Description: 2014 Maps to be effective 5/29/2014.
    Filed Date: 4/28/14.
    Accession Number: 20140428-5270.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 5/12/14.

    Docket Numbers: RP14-781-000.
    Applicants: Algonquin Gas Transmission, LLC.
    Description: 2014 Map to be effective 5/29/2014.
    Filed Date: 4/28/14.
    Accession Number: 20140428-5271.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 5/12/14.

    Docket Numbers: RP14-90-000.
    Applicants: Texas Gas Transmission, LLC.
    Description: Motion to Place Tariff Records into Effect May 1, 2014
in RP14-90 to be effective 5/1/2014.
    Filed Date: 4/28/14.
    Accession Number: 20140428-5096.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 5/12/14.

    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.

Filings in Existing Proceedings

    Docket Numbers: RP14-573-001.
    Applicants: KPC Pipeline, LLC.
    Description: KPC Fuel Reimbursement Adjustment--Compliance Filing
to be effective 4/1/2014.
    Filed Date: 4/28/14.
    Accession Number: 20140428-5194.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 5/12/14.

    Docket Numbers: RP14-768-001.
    Applicants: Natural Gas Pipeline Company of America.
    Description: Amended Macquarie Energy Negotiated Rate to be
effective 5/1/2014.
    Filed Date: 4/28/14.
    Accession Number: 20140428-5239.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 5/12/14.

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

    Dated: April 29, 2014.
Kimberly D. Bose,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2014-10702 Filed 5-8-14; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 79, Number 236 (Tuesday, December 9, 2014)]
[Notices]
[Pages 73057-73058]
[FR Doc No: 2014-28758]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Project No. 12589-020]

Public Service Company of Colorado; Notice of Application
Accepted for Filing, Soliciting Comments, Motions To Intervene, and
Protests

    Take notice that the following hydroelectric application has been
filed with the Commission and is available for public inspection:
    a. Type of Application: Application for Temporary Variance of
Minimum Flow Requirement.
    b. Project No.: 12589-020.
    c. Date Filed: November 12, 2014.
    d. Applicant: Public Service Company of Colorado d.b.a. Xcel Energy
(licensee).
    e. Name of Project: Tacoma Project.
    f. Location: Cascade Creek in San Juan and La Plata counties,
Colorado.
    g. Filed Pursuant to: Federal Power Act, 16 U.S.C. 791(a)-825(r).
    h. Applicant Contact: Bruce Cotie, Hydro-West Manager, (303) 273-
4917, or<EMAIL_ADDRESS>    i. FERC Contact: John Aedo,<PHONE_NUMBER>, or<EMAIL_ADDRESS>    j. Deadline for filing comments, motions to intervene, protests,
and recommendations is 30 days from the issuance date of this notice by
the Commission. The Commission strongly encourages electronic filing.
Please file motions to intervene, protests, comments, or
recommendations 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. Please include the project number (P-12589-020)
on any comments, motions to intervene, protests, or recommendations
filed.
    k. Description of Request: The licensee requests a temporary
variance of the maximum flow diversion requirements in Cascade Creek.
U.S. Forest Service Section 4(e) Condition No. 17 (found in the project
license) limits diversions to the flowline of no greater than 2 cubic
feet per second (cfs), when natural inflow is less than 9 cfs. However,
the licensee requests that it be allowed to divert 4 cfs into the
flowline from December 15, 2014 to April 15, 2015. The licensee states
that the increased diversion is necessary to keep a temporary, above-
ground flowline from freezing while it performs repairs to a damaged
section of flowline during the winter.
    l. Locations of the Application: A copy of the application is
available for inspection and reproduction at the Commission's Public
Reference Room, located at 888 First Street NE., Room 2A, Washington,
DC 20426, or by calling<PHONE_NUMBER>. This filing may also be viewed
on the Commission's Web site at http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/elibrary.asp. Enter the docket number excluding the last three digits
in the docket number field to access the document. You may also
register online at http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/esubscription.asp to
be notified via email of new filings and issuances related to this or
other pending projects. For assistance, call 1-866-208-3676 or email
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>for TTY, call<PHONE_NUMBER>. A copy is
also available for inspection and reproduction at the address in item
(h) above.
    m. Individuals desiring to be included on the Commission's mailing
list should so indicate by writing to the Secretary of the Commission.
    n. Comments, Protests, or Motions to Intervene: Anyone may submit
comments, a protest, or a motion to intervene in accordance with the
requirements of Rules of Practice and Procedure, 18 CFR 385.210, .211,
.214. In determining the appropriate action to take, the Commission
will consider all protests or other comments filed, but only those who
file a motion to intervene in accordance with the Commission's Rules
may become a party to the proceeding. Any comments, protests, or
motions to intervene must be received on or before the specified
comment date for the particular application.
    o. Filing and Service of Responsive Documents: Any filing must (1)
bear in all capital letters the title ``COMMENTS'', ``PROTEST'', or
``MOTION TO INTERVENE'' as applicable; (2) set forth in the heading the
name of the applicant and the project number of the application to
which the filing responds; (3) furnish the name, address, and telephone
number of the person protesting or intervening; and (4) otherwise
comply with the requirements of 18 CFR 385.2001 through 385.2005. All

comments, motions to intervene, or protests must set forth their
evidentiary basis and otherwise comply with the requirements of 18 CFR
4.34(b). All comments, motions to intervene, or protests should relate
to project works which are the subject of the variance. Agencies may
obtain copies of the application directly from the applicant. A copy of
any protest or motion to intervene must be served upon each
representative of the applicant specified in the particular
application. If an intervener files comments or documents with the
Commission relating to the merits of an issue that may affect the
responsibilities of a particular resource agency, they must also serve
a copy of the document on that resource agency. A copy of all other
filings in reference to this application must be accompanied by proof
of service on all persons listed in the service list prepared by the
Commission in this proceeding, in accordance with 18 CFR 4.34(b) and
385.2010.

    Dated: December 2, 2014.
Kimberly D. Bose,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2014-28758 Filed 12-8-14; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register: November 14, 2008 (Volume 73, Number 221)]
[Notices]
[Page 67504]
[DOCID:fr14no08-69]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Docket No. NJ08-6-001]

Orlando Utilities Commission; Notice of Filing

November 6, 2008.
    Take notice that on October 31, 2008, Orlando Utilities Commission
filed revised tariff sheets to Attachment K of its Open Access
Transmission Tariff in compliance with the Commission's July 9, 2008
Order.
    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.
Anyone filing a motion to intervene or protest must serve a copy of
that document on the Applicant and all the parties in this proceeding.
    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 e-mail
notification when a document is added to a subscribed docket(s). For
assistance with any FERC Online service, please e-mail
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or call<PHONE_NUMBER> (toll free). For
TTY, call<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on November 21, 2008.

Kimberly D. Bose,
Secretary.
 [FR Doc. E8-27057 Filed 11-13-08; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register: July 31, 2007 (Volume 72, Number 146)]
[Notices]
[Page 41722]
[DOCID:fr31jy07-58]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Docket No. ER07-936-000, Docket No. ER07-958-000]

Tiverton Power, LLC, Rumford Power, LLC; Notice of Issuance of
Order

July 24, 2007.
    Tiverton Power, LLC (Tiverton Power) and Rumford Power, LLC
(Rumford Power) filed an application for market-based rate authority,
with an accompanying rate schedule. The proposed market-based rate
schedule provides for the sale of energy, capacity and ancillary
services at market-based rates. Tiverton Power and Rumford Power also
requested waivers of various Commission regulations. In particular,
Tiverton Power and Rumford Power requested that the Commission grant
blanket approval under 18 CFR Part 34 of all future issuances of
securities and assumptions of liability by Tiverton Power and Rumford
Power.
    On July 18, 2007, pursuant to delegated authority, the Director,
Division of Tariffs and Market Development--West, granted the requests
for blanket approval under Part 34 (Director's Order). The Director's
Order also stated that the Commission would publish a separate notice
in the Federal Register establishing a period of time for the filing of
protests. Accordingly, any person desiring to be heard concerning the
blanket approvals of issuances of securities or assumptions of
liability by Tiverton Power and Rumford Power should file a protest
with the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street, NE.,
Washington, DC 20426, in accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of the
Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedure. 18 CFR 385.211, 385.214
(2004).
    Notice is hereby given that the deadline for filing protests is
August 17, 2007.
    Absent a request to be heard in opposition to such blanket
approvals by the deadline above, Tiverton Power and Rumford Power are
authorized to issue securities and assume obligations or liabilities as
a guarantor, indorser, surety, or otherwise in respect of any security
of another person; provided that such issuance or assumption is for
some lawful object within the corporate purposes of Tiverton Power and
Rumford Power, compatible with the public interest, and is reasonably
necessary or appropriate for such purposes.
    The Commission reserves the right to require a further showing that
neither public nor private interests will be adversely affected by
continued approvals of Tiverton Power's and Rumford Power's Rissuance
of securities or assumptions of liability.
    Copies of the full text of the Director's Order are available from
the Commission's Public Reference Room, 888 First Street, NE.,
Washington, DC 20426. The Order may also be viewed on the Commission's
Web site at http://www.ferc.gov, using the eLibrary link. Enter the

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

Kimberly D. Bose,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. E7-14764 Filed 7-30-07; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 78, Number 175 (Tuesday, September 10, 2013)]
[Notices]
[Page 55249]
[FR Doc No: 2013-21958]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Docket No. EL13-86-000]

Grand Valley Rural Power Lines, Inc., Holy Cross Electric
Association, Inc., Intermountain Rural Electric Association, Inc.,
Yampa Valley Electric Association, Inc. v. Public Service Company of
Colorado; Notice of Complaint

    Take notice that on August 30, 2013, pursuant to Rules 206 and 212
of the Rules of Practice and Procedure of the Federal Energy Regulatory
Commission (Commission), 18 CFR 385.206 and 385.212 (2013) and sections
201, 206 and 306 of the Federal Power Act, 16 U.S.C. 824, 824(e) and
825(e) 2013, Grand Valley Rural Power Lines, Inc., Holy Cross Electric
Association, Inc., Intermountain Rural Electric Association, Inc., and
Yampa Valley Electric Association, Inc. (collectively, Complainants or
Cooperative Customers) filed a formal complaint against the Public
Service Company of Colorado (Respondent or PSCo), alleging that the ROE
component to the production formula rate applicable to the Cooperative
Customers under PSCo's Assured Power and Energy Requirements Service
Tariff is unjust, unreasonable, and contrary to section 205 of the
Federal Power Act. The Complainants request a determination that the
appropriate ROE for the production formula rate is 9.04 percent.
    The Complainants certify that copies of the complaint were served
on the contacts for the Respondents as listed on the Commission's list
of Corporate Officials and on parties of the regulatory agencies the
Complainants reasonably expect to be affected by this complaint.
    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. The Respondent's
answer and all interventions, or protests must be filed on or before
the comment date. The Respondent's answer, motions to intervene, and
protests must be served on the Complainants.
    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 5 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: 5:00 p.m. Eastern Time on September 19, 2013.

    Dated: September 3, 2013.
Nathaniel J. Davis, Sr.,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2013-21958 Filed 9-9-13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register: November 2, 2005 (Volume 70, Number 211)]
[Notices]
[Page 66477-66478]
[DOCID:fr02no05-143]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-52656; File No. 4-429]

Joint Industry Plan; Order Approving Amendment No. 16 to the Plan
for the Purpose of Creating and Operating an Intermarket Option Linkage
Relating to the Definition of Firm Customer Quote Size and Limitations
on Sending Secondary P/A Orders

October 24, 2005.

I. Introduction

    On April 13, 2005, April 26, 2005, April 26, 2005, April 27, 2005,
May 27, 2005 and June 2, 2005, the International Securities Exchange,
Inc. (``ISE''), American Stock Exchange LLC (``Amex''), Chicago Board
Options Exchange, Incorporated (``CBOE''), Pacific Exchange, Inc.
(``PCX''), Boston Stock Exchange, Inc. (``BSE''), and Philadelphia
Stock Exchange, Inc. (``Phlx'') (collectively, the ``Participants'')
respectively submitted to the Securities and Exchange Commission
(``Commission'') an amendment (``Joint Amendment No. 16'') to the Plan
for the Purpose of Creating and Operating an Intermarket Option Linkage
(the ``Linkage Plan'').\1\

The Participants are proposing: (i) To amend the definition of ``Firm
Customer Quote Size'' (``FCQS'') \2\ to provide automatic executions
for Principal Acting as Agent Orders (``P/A Orders'') \3\ sent via the
intermarket option linkage (``Linkage'') up to the full size of a
Participant's disseminated quotation; and (ii) to eliminate a 15-second
waiting period between the sending of P/A Orders. The proposed
amendment to the Linkage Plan was published in the Federal Register on
September 16, 2005.\4\ No comments were received on the proposed
amendment. This order approves the proposed amendment to the Linkage
Plan.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ On July 28, 2000, the Commission approved a national market
system plan for the purpose of creating and operating an intermarket
options market linkage proposed by the Amex, CBOE, and ISE. See
Securities Exchange Act Release No. 43086 (July 28, 2000), 65 FR
48023 (August 4, 2000). Subsequently, upon separate requests by the
Phlx, PCX, and BSE, the Commission issued orders to permit these
exchanges to participate in the Linkage Plan. See Securities
Exchange Act Release Nos. 43573 (November 16, 2000), 65 FR 70850
(November 28, 2000), 43574 (November 16, 2000), 65 FR 70851
(November 28, 2000) and 49198 (February 5, 2004), 69 FR 7029
(February 12, 2004).
    \2\ See Section 2(11) of the Linkage Plan.
    \3\ See Section 2(16)(a) of the Linkage Plan.
    \4\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 52401 (September 9,
2005), 70 FR 54781.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

II. Description and Purpose of the Proposed Amendment

    The purpose of Joint Amendment No. 16 is to modify the Linkage Plan
in two respects. First, the definition of FCQS will be amended to
reflect that all Participants disseminate dynamic option quotes with
size. Specifically, Participants propose to amend the Linkage Plan so
that the FCQS will be calculated based on the size of the disseminated
quotation of the Participant receiving the P/A Order. Secondly, Joint
Amendment No. 16 will eliminate a 15-second waiting period for sending
a subsequent P/A Order currently provided for in the Linkage Plan.
Finally, Joint Amendment No. 16 will clarify the conditions under which
automatic execution is required in response to P/A Orders.

III. Discussion

    After careful consideration, the Commission finds that the proposed
amendment to the Linkage Plan is consistent with the requirements of
the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (``Act'') and the rules and
regulations thereunder. Specifically, the Commission finds that the
proposed amendment to the Linkage Plan is consistent with Section 11A
of the Act \5\ and Rule 608 under the Act,\6\ in that the proposed
amendment to calculate FCQS on the basis of the size of the Participant
receiving the P/A Order is appropriate and should facilitate the use of
the Linkage for the Participants. This change, coupled with the
proposed elimination of the 15-second waiting period for sending a
subsequent P/A Order should facilitate investors' intermarket access to
superior prices disseminated by Participants other than the one to
which the order was initially sent.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ 15 U.S.C. 78k-l.
    \6\ 17 CFR 242.608.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

IV. Conclusion

    It is therefore ordered, pursuant to Section 11A of the Act \7\ and
Rule 608 thereunder,\8\ that the proposed Joint Amendment No. 16 is
hereby approved.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ 15 U.S.C. 78k-l.
    \8\ 17 CFR 242.608.
    \9\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(29).

    For the Commission, by the Division of Market Regulation,
pursuant to delegated authority.\9\
Jonathan G. Katz,
Secretary.
 [FR Doc. E5-6054 Filed 11-1-05; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 8010-01-P


[Federal Register: January 5, 2010 (Volume 75, Number 2)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Page 262-264]
[DOCID:fr05ja10-16]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. FAA-2009-1228; Directorate Identifier 2009-NM-015-AD]
RIN 2120-AA64

Airworthiness Directives; Lockheed Martin Corporation/Lockheed
Martin Aeronautics Company Model 382, 382B, 382E, 382F, and 382G
Airplanes

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM).

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

SUMMARY: We propose to adopt a new airworthiness directive (AD) for all
Lockheed Martin Corporation/Lockheed Martin Aeronautics Company Model
382, 382B, 382E, 382F, and 382G airplanes. This proposed AD would
require repetitive inspections for any damage of the lower surface of
the center wing box, and corrective actions if necessary. This proposed
AD results from reports of fatigue cracks of the lower surface of the
center wing box. We are proposing this AD to detect and correct such
cracks, which could result in the structural failure of the wings.

DATES: We must receive comments on this proposed AD by February 19,
2010.

ADDRESSES: You may send comments by any of the following methods:
     Federal eRulemaking Portal: Go to http://
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: U.S. Department of Transportation, Docket
Operations, M-30, West Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140, 1200 New
Jersey Avenue, SE., Washington, DC 20590, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m.,
Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays.
    For service information identified in this proposed AD, contact
Lockheed Martin Corporation/Lockheed Martin Aeronautics Company,
Airworthiness Office, Dept. 6A0M, Zone 0252, Column

P-58, 86 S. Cobb Drive, Marietta, Georgia 30063; telephone 770-494-
5444; fax<PHONE_NUMBER>; e-mail<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Internet http://
www.lockheedmartin.com/ams/tools/TechPubs.html. You may review copies
of the referenced service information at the FAA, Transport Airplane
Directorate, 1601 Lind Avenue, SW., Renton, Washington. For information
on the availability of this material at the FAA, call<PHONE_NUMBER> or
425-227-1152.

Examining the AD Docket

    You may examine the AD docket on the Internet at http://
www.regulations.gov; or in person at the Docket Management Facility
between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal
holidays. The AD docket contains this proposed AD, the regulatory
evaluation, any comments received, and other information. The street
address for the Docket Office (telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>) is in the
ADDRESSES section. Comments will be available in the AD docket shortly
after receipt.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Carl Gray, Aerospace Engineer,
Airframe Branch, ACE-117A, FAA, Atlanta Aircraft Certification Office,
1701 Columbia Avenue, College Park, Georgia 30337; telephone (404) 474-
5554; fax<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Comments Invited

    We invite you to send any written relevant data, views, or
arguments about this proposed AD. Send your comments to an address
listed under the ADDRESSES section. Include ``Docket No. FAA-2009-1228;
Directorate Identifier 2009-NM-015-AD'' at the beginning of your
comments. We specifically invite comments on the overall regulatory,
economic, environmental, and energy aspects of this proposed AD. We
will consider all comments received by the closing date and may amend
this proposed AD because of those comments.
    We will post all comments we receive, without change, to http://
www.regulations.gov, including any personal information you provide. We
will also post a report summarizing each substantive verbal contact we
receive about this proposed AD.

Discussion

    We have received reports of fatigue cracks of the lower surface of
the center wing box. Large fatigue cracks, some with multiple origins
indicating link-up of smaller fatigue cracks, and generalized small
fatigue cracks have been found during wing durability testing and in-
service operations. This condition, if not corrected, could result in
reduced wing residual strength below the design limit load capacity,
which could result in the structural failure of the wings.

Relevant Service Information

    We have reviewed Lockheed Service Bulletin 382-57-85 (82-790),
Revision 2, dated August 23, 2007, including Appendices A, B, C, D, E,
F, and G, Revision 1, dated March 8, 2007. The service bulletin
describes procedures for doing repetitive nondestructive inspections of
the lower surface of the center wing box (including the panel,
stringers, beam caps, panel repairs, fittings, and cold-work holes) for
any damage (including cracking, corrosion, structural deformation, and
dents), and corrective action, if necessary. The corrective action
includes contacting Lockheed for repair instructions.

FAA's Determination and Requirements of This Proposed AD

    We are proposing this AD because we evaluated all relevant
information and determined the unsafe condition described previously is
likely to exist or develop in other products of the same type design.
This proposed AD would require accomplishing the actions specified in
the service information described previously, except as discussed under
``Differences Between the Proposed AD and Relevant Service
Information.''

Differences Between the Proposed AD and Relevant Service Information

    Although the service bulletin specifies that operators may contact
the manufacturer for disposition of certain repair conditions, this
proposed AD would require operators to repair those conditions using a
method approved by the FAA.
    Although the service bulletin specifies that operators can adjust
thresholds and intervals, use alternate repetitive inspection
intervals, and use alternate inspection methods if applicable, this
proposed AD would require any alternate methods to be approved by the
Manager, Atlanta ACO.
    Although the service bulletin provides a longer compliance time of
22,000 flight hours to inspect cold-worked holes, this AD would require
all holes to be inspected within 10,000 flight hours, as reports
indicate that fatigue cracks are of sufficient size and density,
requiring a shorter compliance time.
    Operators should note that, although the Accomplishment
Instructions of Lockheed Service Bulletin 382-57-85 (82-790), Revision
2, dated August 23, 2007, including Appendixes A, B, C, D, E, F, and G,
Revision 1, dated March 8, 2007, describe procedures for submitting a
report of any damages, this proposed AD would not require such action.

Costs of Compliance

    We estimate that this proposed AD would affect 15 airplanes of U.S.
registry. We also estimate that it would take about 2,000 work-hours
per product to comply with this proposed AD. The average labor rate is
$80 per work-hour. Based on these figures, we estimate the cost of this
proposed AD to the U.S. operators to be $2,400,000, or $160,000 per
airplane.

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 above, 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), and
    3. Will not have a significant economic impact, positive or
negative, on a substantial number of small entities under the criteria
of the Regulatory Flexibility Act.

    You can find our regulatory evaluation and the estimated costs of
compliance in the AD Docket.

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39

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

The Proposed Amendment

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

PART 39--AIRWORTHINESS DIRECTIVES

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

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

Sec.  39.13  [Amended]

    2. The FAA amends Sec.  39.13 by adding the following new AD:

Lockheed Martin Corporation/Lockheed Martin Aeronautics Company:
Docket No. FAA-2009-1228; Directorate Identifier 2009-NM-015-AD.

Comments Due Date

    (a) We must receive comments by February 19, 2010.

Affected ADs

    (b) None.

Applicability

    (c) This AD applies to all Lockheed Martin Corporation/Lockheed
Martin Aeronautics Company Model 382, 382B, 382E, 382F, and 382G
series airplanes, certificated in any category.

Subject

    (d) Air Transport Association (ATA) of America Code 57: Wings.

Unsafe Condition

    (e) This AD results from reports of fatigue cracks of the lower
surface of the center wing box. The Federal Aviation Administration
is issuing this AD to detect and correct such cracks, which could
result in the structural failure of the wings.

Compliance

    (f) You are responsible for having the actions required by this
AD performed within the compliance times specified, unless the
actions have already been done.

Inspection

    (g) At the times specified in paragraphs (g)(1), (g)(2), and
(g)(3) of this AD, whichever occurs latest: Do a nondestructive
inspection of the lower surface of the center wing box for any
damage, in accordance with Lockheed Service Bulletin 382-57-85 (82-
790), Revision 2, dated August 23, 2007, including Appendixes A, B,
C, D, E, F, and G, Revision 1, dated March 8, 2007. Repeat the
inspections thereafter at intervals not to exceed 10,000 flight
hours.
    (1) Prior to the accumulation of 40,000 total flight hours on
the center wing.
    (2) Within 365 days after the effective date of this AD.
    (3) Within 10,000 flight hours on the center wing box after the
accomplishment of the service bulletin if done before the effective
date of this AD.

    Note 1:  These inspection procedures supplement the existing
Hercules Air Freighter progressive inspection procedures and
previously issued Lockheed Martin service bulletins. After the
effective date of this AD, there are no inspection procedures in
those documents that fully meet the requirements of this AD.

Corrective Action

    (h) If any damage is found during any inspection required by
this AD: Before further flight, repair any damage using a method
approved by the Manager, Atlanta Aircraft Certification Office
(ACO), FAA. For a repair method to be approved by the Manager,
Atlanta ACO, as required by this paragraph, the Manager's approval
letter must specifically refer to this AD.

Exceptions to the Service Bulletin

    (i) Lockheed Service Bulletin 382-57-85 (82-790), Revision 2,
dated August 23, 2007, including Appendixes A, B, C, D, E, F, and G,
Revision 1, dated March 8, 2007, specifies that operators may adjust
thresholds and intervals, use alternative repetitive inspection
intervals, and use alternative inspection methods, if applicable.
However, this AD requires that any alternative methods or intervals
be approved by the Manager, Atlanta ACO. For any alternative methods
or intervals to be approved by the Manager, Atlanta ACO, as required
by this paragraph, the Manager's approval letter must specifically
refer to this AD.
    (j) Where Lockheed Service Bulletin 382-57-85 (82-790), Revision
2, dated August 23, 2007, including Appendixes A, B, C, D, E, F, and
G, Revision 1, dated March 8, 2007, specifies that alternative
repetitive inspections intervals may be used for cold-worked holes,
this AD does not allow the longer interval. This AD requires that
all cold-worked and non-cold worked holes be re-inspected at 10,000-
flight-hour intervals.
    (k) Where Lockheed Service Bulletin 382-57-85 (82-790), Revision
2, dated August 23, 2007, including Appendixes A, B, C, D, E, F, and
G, Revision 1, dated March 8, 2007, describes procedures for
submitting a report of any damages, this AD does not require such
action.

Inspections Accomplished in Accordance With Lockheed Service Bulletin
382-57-83 (82-783)

    (l) Inspections accomplished before the effective date of this
AD, in accordance with Lockheed Service Bulletin 382-57-83 (82-783),
Revision 1, dated August 22, 2006, including Appendix B, dated March
18, 2005, are considered acceptable for compliance with the
corresponding action specified in paragraph (g) of this AD.

Alternative Methods of Compliance (AMOCs)

    (m)(1) The Manager, Atlanta Aircraft Certification Office, FAA,
has the authority to approve AMOCs for this AD, if requested using
the procedures found in 14 CFR 39.19. Send information to ATTN: Carl
Gray, Aerospace Engineer, Airframe Branch, ACE-117A, FAA, Atlanta
Aircraft Certification Office, 1701 Columbia Avenue, College Park,
GA 30337; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    (2) To request a different method of compliance or a different
compliance time for this AD, follow the procedures in 14 CFR 39.19.
Before using any approved AMOC on any airplane to which the AMOC
applies, notify your principal maintenance inspector (PMI) or
principal avionics inspector (PAI), as appropriate, or lacking a
principal inspector, your local Flight Standards District Office.
The AMOC approval letter must specifically reference this AD.

    Issued in Renton, Washington, on December 23, 2009.
Ali Bahrami,
Manager, Transport Airplane Directorate, Aircraft Certification
Service.
[FR Doc. E9-31289 Filed 1-4-10; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


[Federal Register: December 4, 2009 (Volume 74, Number 232)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Page 63590-63592]
[DOCID:fr04de09-17]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. FAA-2009-0553; Directorate Identifier 2008-NM-199-AD;
Amendment 39-16111; AD 2009-24-17]
RIN 2120-AA64

Airworthiness Directives; Boeing Model 747-100, 747-100B, 747-
200B, 747-200C, 747-200F, and 747SR Series Airplanes

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: We are issuing a new airworthiness directive (AD) for certain
Boeing Model 747-100, 747-100B, 747-200B, 747-200C, 747-200F, and 747SR
series airplanes. This AD requires a one-time general visual inspection
for missing fasteners in certain stringer-to-stringer clip joints at
the station (STA) 760 through STA 940 frames, and related investigative
and corrective actions if necessary. This AD results from a report of
broken and cracked frame shear ties, cracks on the frame doubler and
frame web, and missing fasteners in the stringer (S) -10L stringer-to-
stringer clip joint at the STA 820 frame. We are issuing this AD to
detect and correct missing fasteners in the stringer-to-stringer clip
joints, which could result in shear tie and skin cracks and rapid in-
flight decompression of the airplane.

DATES: This AD is effective January 8, 2010.
    The Director of the Federal Register approved the incorporation by
reference of a certain publication listed in the AD as of January 8,
2010.

ADDRESSES: For service information identified in this AD, contact
Boeing Commercial Airplanes, P.O. Box 3707, Seattle, Washington 98124-
2207; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax<PHONE_NUMBER>; e-mail<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
Internet https://www.myboeingfleet.com.

Examining the AD Docket

    You may examine the AD docket on the Internet at http://
www.regulations.gov; or in person at the Docket Management Facility
between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal
holidays. The AD docket contains this AD, the regulatory evaluation,
any comments received, and other information. The address for the
Docket Office (telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>) is the Document Management
Facility, U.S. Department of Transportation, Docket Operations, M-30,
West Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140, 1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE.,
Washington, DC 20590.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Nick Kusz, Aerospace Engineer,
Airframe Branch, ANM-120S, FAA, Seattle Aircraft Certification Office,
1601 Lind Avenue, SW., Renton, Washington 98057-3356; telephone (425)
917-6449; fax<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Discussion

    We issued a notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) to amend 14 CFR
part 39 to include an airworthiness directive (AD) that would apply to
certain Model 747-100, 747-100B, 747-200B, 747-200C, 747-200F, and
747SR series airplanes. That NPRM was published in the Federal Register
on June 23, 2009 (74 FR 29630). That NPRM proposed to require a one-
time general visual inspection for missing fasteners in certain
stringer-to-stringer clip joints at the station (STA) 760 through STA
940 frames, and related investigative and corrective actions if
necessary.

Comments

    We gave the public the opportunity to participate in developing
this AD. We considered the comment received. Boeing concurs with the
contents of the NPRM.

Conclusion

    We reviewed the relevant data, considered the comments received,
and determined that air safety and the public interest require adopting
the AD as proposed.

Costs of Compliance

    We estimate that this AD affects 84 airplanes of U.S. registry. The
following table provides the estimated costs for U.S. operators to
comply with this AD.

                                                                     Estimated Costs
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                      Average labor rate                                              Number of U.S.-
            Action                  Work hours             per hour                Parts         Cost per product  registered airplanes     Fleet cost
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Inspection...................                     4                   $80                    $0  $320 per                            84  $26,880 per
                                                                                inspection                              inspection
                                                                                cycle.                                  cycle.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

    This AD will not have federalism implications under Executive Order
13132. This AD will 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 that this AD:
    (1) Is not a ``significant regulatory action'' under Executive
Order 12866,
    (2) Is not a ``significant rule'' under DOT Regulatory Policies and
Procedures (44 FR 11034, February 26, 1979), and
    (3) 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.
    You can find our regulatory evaluation and the estimated costs of
compliance in the AD Docket.

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39

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

Adoption of the Amendment

0
Accordingly, under the authority delegated to me by the Administrator,
the FAA amends 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 AD:

2009-24-17 Boeing: Amendment 39-16111. Docket No. FAA-2009-0553;
Directorate Identifier 2008-NM-199-AD.

Effective Date

    (a) This airworthiness directive (AD) is effective January 8,
2010.

Affected ADs

    (b) None.

Applicability

    (c) This AD applies to Boeing Model 747-100, 747-100B, 747-200B,
747-200C, 747-200F, and 747SR series airplanes, certificated in any
category; as identified in Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 747-
53A2751, dated October 9, 2008.

Subject

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

Unsafe Condition

    (e) This AD results from a report of broken and cracked frame
shear ties, cracks on the frame doubler and frame web, and missing
fasteners in the stringer (S)-10L stringer-to-stringer clip joint at
the station (STA) 820 frame. We are proposing this AD to detect and
correct missing fasteners at the stringer-to-stringer clip joints,
which could result in shear tie and skin cracks and rapid in-flight
decompression of the airplane.

Compliance

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

Inspection for Missing Fasteners

    (g) Within 3,000 flight cycles after the effective date of this
AD: Do a one-time general visual inspection for missing fasteners in
the left and right side S-10, S-10A, and S-11 stringer-to-stringer
clip joints at the STA 760 through 940 frames, in accordance with
the Accomplishment Instructions of Boeing Alert Service Bulletin
747-53A2751, dated October 9, 2008. If any fasteners are missing,
before further flight, do detailed and surface high frequency eddy
current inspections to detect cracking of the adjacent frame and
skin structure in accordance with the Accomplishment Instructions of
the service bulletin. Install all missing fasteners before further
flight.
    (h) If any crack is found during the inspection required by
paragraph (g) of this AD: Before further flight, repair any cracked
shear ties, frame web, and/or skin in accordance with Boeing Alert
Service Bulletin 747-53A2751, dated October 9, 2008.
    (i) If any repair is done in accordance with paragraph (h) of
this AD, before 20,000 total flight cycles or within 3,000 flight
cycles from the repair installation, whichever occurs later: Do a
detailed inspection of the repair(s) and the adjacent structure
within 10

inches of the repair(s) for cracking. Repeat the inspection
thereafter at intervals not to exceed 3,000 flight cycles. If any
crack is found during this inspection, before further flight, repair
using a method approved in accordance with the procedures specified
in paragraph (j) of this AD.

Alternative Methods of Compliance (AMOCs)

    (j)(1) The Manager, Seattle Aircraft Certification Office (ACO),
FAA, has the authority to approve AMOCs for this AD, if requested
using the procedures found in 14 CFR 39.19. Send information to
Attn: Nick Kusz, Aerospace Engineer, Airframe Branch, ANM-120S, FAA,
Seattle Aircraft Certification Office, 1601 Lind Avenue, SW.,
Renton, Washington 98057-3356; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax (425)
917-6590. Or, e-mail information to 9-ANM-Seattle-ACO-AMOC-
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>    (2) To request a different method of compliance or a different
compliance time for this AD, follow the procedures in 14 CFR 39.19.
Before using any approved AMOC on any airplane to which the AMOC
applies, notify your principal maintenance inspector (PMI) or
principal avionics inspector (PAI), as appropriate, in the FAA
Flight Standards District Office (FSDO), or lacking a principal
inspector, your local FSDO. The AMOC approval letter must
specifically reference this AD.
    (3) An AMOC that provides an acceptable level of safety may be
used for any repair required by this AD, if it is approved by an
Authorized Representative for the Boeing Commercial Airplanes
Delegation Option Authorization Organization who has been authorized
by the Manager, Seattle ACO, to make those findings. For a repair
method to be approved, the repair must meet the certification basis
of the airplane, and the approval must specifically refer to this
AD.

Material Incorporated by Reference

    (k) You must use Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 747-53A2751,
dated October 9, 2008, as applicable, to do the actions required by
this AD, unless the AD specifies otherwise.
    (1) The Director of the Federal Register approved the
incorporation by reference of this service information under 5
U.S.C. 552(a) and 1 CFR part 51.
    (2) For service information identified in this AD, contact
Boeing Commercial Airplanes, P.O. Box 3707, Seattle, Washington
98124-2207; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax<PHONE_NUMBER>; e-mail
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Internet https://www.myboeingfleet.com.
    (3) You may review copies of the service information at the FAA,
Transport Airplane Directorate, 1601 Lind Avenue, SW., Renton,
Washington. For information on the availability of this material at
the FAA, call<PHONE_NUMBER> or<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    (4) You may also review copies of the service information that
is incorporated by reference at the National Archives and Records
Administration (NARA). For information on the availability of this
material at NARA, call<PHONE_NUMBER>, or go to: http://
www.archives.gov/federal_register/code_of_federal_regulations/
ibr_locations.html.

    Issued in Renton, Washington, on November 19, 2009.
Stephen P. Boyd,
Acting Manager, Transport Airplane Directorate, Aircraft Certification
Service.
[FR Doc. E9-28552 Filed 12-3-09; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


[Federal Register Volume 81, Number 52 (Thursday, March 17, 2016)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 14372-14374]
[FR Doc No: 2016-06041]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

17 CFR Part 300

[Release No. SIPA-175; File No. SIPC-2015-01]

Securities Investor Protection Corporation

AGENCY: Securities and Exchange Commission.

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: The Securities and Exchange Commission (``Commission'') is
approving a proposed rule change filed by the Securities Investor
Protection Corporation (``SIPC''). The rule change adds SIPC Rule 600,
entitled ``Rules Relating to Supplemental Report of SIPC Membership.''
Because SIPC rules have the force and effect as if promulgated by the
Commission, those rules are published in Title 17 of the Code of
Federal Regulations, where the rule change will be reflected.

DATES: Effective March 31, 2016.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Michael A. Macchiaroli, Associate
Director, at<PHONE_NUMBER>; Thomas K. McGowan, Associate Director, at
(202) 551-5521; Randall W. Roy, Deputy Associate Director, at (202)
551-5522; Timothy C. Fox, Branch Chief, at<PHONE_NUMBER>; Rose Russo
Wells, Senior Counsel, at<PHONE_NUMBER>; Office of Financial
Responsibility, Division of Trading and Markets, Securities and
Exchange Commission, 100 F Street NE., Washington, DC 20549-7010.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The Commission is approving a proposed rule
change filed by SIPC, adding SIPC Rule 600, 17 CFR 300.600.

I. Background

    On April 17, 2015, SIPC filed a proposed rule change with the
Commission under section 3(e)(2)(A) of the Securities Investor
Protection Act of 1970 (``SIPA''),\1\ and subsequently filed amendments
to the proposed rule change on June 23, 2015, July 24, 2015, and
September 29, 2015. The proposed rule change would add SIPC Rule 600
(``Rule 600''), entitled ``Rules Relating to Supplemental Report of
SIPC Membership.'' Notice requesting comment on the proposed rule
change, as amended, was published in the Federal Register on November
4, 2015.\2\ The Commission received one comment on the proposal.\3\ The
Commission is approving the proposed rule change under section 3(e)(2)
of SIPA.\4\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ 15 U.S.C. 78ccc(e)(2)(A).
    \2\ See Securities Investor Protection Corporation, Release No.
SIPA-173 (Oct. 28, 2015), 80 FR 68286 (Nov. 4, 2015).
    \3\ See email from Paul W. Lameo to Michael A. Macchiaroli dated
December 22, 2015. The comment requested clarification regarding a
number of technical questions concerning the process for filing
reports with SIPC. SIPC intends to issue Frequently Asked Questions
to respond to those and other technical questions.
    \4\ Under SIPA, to be final, rules proposed by SIPC must be
approved by the Commission. See 15 U.S.C. 78ccc(e)(2).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

II. Proposed Rule Change

    Pursuant to SIPA and SIPC Bylaws, broker-dealers that are SIPC
members pay semi-annual assessments to SIPC at the mid-point and at the
end of their fiscal year.\5\ The assessment payments are the main
source of funding for the SIPC Fund. The amount of the assessment a
broker-dealer must pay is based on the firm's revenues from its
securities business.\6\ Consequently, in relation to the payment of the
assessments, a broker-dealer must file with SIPC a Form SIPC-6 (General
Assessment Payment Form) with the mid-year assessment and a Form SIPC-7
(General Assessment Reconciliation Form) with the year-end assessment.
These forms show the broker-dealer's calculation of the assessment
amount based on its revenues from its securities business.\7\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ See 15 U.S.C. 78ddd(c); SIPC Bylaws, Article 6.
    \6\ See 15 U.S.C. 78ddd(c) and (d).
    \7\ Form SIPC-7 provides that the broker-dealer may deduct from
the end of fiscal year assessment the amount paid mid-year with the
filing of the Form SIPC-6.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Broker-dealers that limit their business to certain specified
activities or conduct their business outside of the United States are
exempt from being members of SIPC.\8\ Consequently, these broker-
dealers do not pay a SIPC assessment. However, they must file a

Form SIPC-3, which is a certification by the broker-dealer that it is
excluded from SIPC membership under SIPA.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \8\ See 15 U.S.C. 78ccc(a)(2)(A).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In 1972, as a result of significant discrepancies between the
assessment information reported to SIPC on the Forms SIPC-6 and SIPC-7
and information supplied in reports filed with the Commission on which
the calculation of the assessment was based, the Commission amended
Rule 17a-5 \9\ (the broker-dealer reporting rule).\10\ As amended, the
rule generally requires broker-dealers to file with the Commission a
SIPC supplemental report.\11\ The SIPC supplemental report includes a
schedule of assessment payments or a statement that the broker-dealer
qualified for exclusion from membership in SIPC. The SIPC supplemental
report also must include a report of an independent public accountant,
who must be engaged to perform certain procedures specified in Rule
17a-5 with respect to the information provided in the report.\12\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \9\ 17 CFR 240.17a-5.
    \10\ See Report of Securities Investor Protection Corporation
Assessments, Exchange Act Release No. 9766 (Sep. 15, 1972), 37 FR
18909 (Sep. 16, 1972).
    \11\ See 17 CFR 240.17a-5(e)(4).
    \12\ The items that must be included in the report and the
procedures to be performed by the accountant are listed in
paragraphs (e)(4)(ii)(A), (B), and (C) of Rule 17a-5.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    On July 30, 2013, the Commission amended Rule 17a-5.\13\ As part of
this rulemaking, the Commission determined that because Forms SIPC-3,
SIPC-6, and SIPC-7 are used solely by SIPC for purposes of levying its
assessments, the SIPC supplemental report should be filed only with
SIPC. The Commission also determined that SIPC should prescribe the
form and content of the SIPC supplemental report. Accordingly, the
Commission amended paragraph (e)(4) of Rule 17a-5 to provide that a
broker-dealer must file a SIPC supplemental report with SIPC that
contains such information and is in such format as determined by SIPC
by rule and approved by the Commission.\14\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \13\ See Broker-Dealer Reports, Exchange Act Release No. 70073
(Jul. 30, 2013), 78 FR 51910 (Aug. 21, 2013) (``Broker-Dealer
Reports'').
    \14\ See Broker-Dealer Reports, 78 FR 51926-7, 51991, 17 CFR
240.17a-5(e)(4)(i).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The rule change approved by the Commission adds SIPC Rule 600,
entitled ``Rules Relating to Supplemental Report of SIPC Membership.''
\15\ The purpose of Rule 600 is to replace the requirements currently
in Rule 17a-5 prescribing the information that must be included in, and
the format of, the SIPC supplemental report.\16\ The requirements of
Rule 600 are modeled on the requirements of Rule 17a-5.\17\ For
example, Rule 600 requires that the SIPC supplemental report include,
among other things, a copy of the Form SIPC-7 filed or a schedule of
assessment payments showing any overpayments applied and overpayments
carried forward, including payment dates and amounts; or, if exclusion
from membership was claimed, a statement that the broker-dealer
qualified for exclusion from membership under SIPA and the date the
Form SIPC-3 was filed with SIPC.\18\ Further, Rule 600 requires that
the SIPC supplemental report include a report of an independent public
accountant who is engaged to perform the following agreed-upon
procedures:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \15\ 17 CFR 300.600.
    \16\ See 17 CFR 240.17a-5(e)(4)(ii). Rule 17a-5 provides that
broker-dealers are required to file the SIPC supplemental reports
pursuant to the requirements in paragraph (e)(4)(ii) of the rule
until the earlier of the Commission approving a rule adopted by SIPC
or two years from the effective date of the amendment (that is, by
June 14, 2016). See 17 CFR 240.17a-5(e)(4)(ii). Consequently, if,
after two years from the effective date no such SIPC rule has been
approved, broker-dealers would no longer be required to file the
reports.
    \17\ Compare Rule 600, with 17 CFR 240.17a-5(e)(4)(ii).
    \18\ Compare Rule 600(b)(i) and (ii), with 17 CFR 240.17a-
5(e)(4)(ii).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

     Compare assessment payments made in accordance with Form
SIPC-6 and applied to the general assessment calculation on Form SIPC-7
with respective cash disbursements record entries;
     For all or any portion of a fiscal year, compare amounts
reflected in the audited financial statements required by Commission
rule with amounts reported in Form SIPC-7;
     Compare adjustments reported in Form SIPC-7 with
supporting schedules and working papers supporting the adjustments;
     Verify the arithmetical accuracy of the calculations
reflected in Form SIPC-7 and in the schedules and working papers
supporting any adjustments; and
     Compare the amount of any overpayment applied with the
Form SIPC-7 on which it was computed; or
     If exclusion from membership is claimed, compare the
income or loss reported in the audited financial statements required by
Commission rule with Form SIPC-3.\19\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \19\ Compare Rule 600(b)(iii), with 17 CFR 240.17a-5(e)(4)(ii).
Consistent with requirements in Rule 17a-5 regarding the independent
public accountant that is engaged to prepare reports covering the
annual reports of a broker-dealer, Rule 600 provides that the
independent public accountant who is engaged to perform the
enumerated agreed-upon procedures must be independent in accordance
with the provisions of 17 CFR 210.2-01 and that the accountant must
be engaged to perform the enumerated agreed-upon procedures in
accordance with standards of the Public Company Accounting Oversight
Board. See Rule 600(b)(iii); 17 CFR 240.17a-5(f)(1) and (g).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Rule 600 also incorporates prior relief by providing that a SIPC
member broker-dealer is exempt from filing the supplemental report if
the broker-dealer reports $500,000 or less in total revenue in its
``annual audited statement of income'' filed with the Commission.\20\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \20\ See Rule 600(a)(ii).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Finally, Rule 600 provides that a broker-dealer must file the
supplemental report within 60 days after the end of its fiscal year.

III. Discussion and Commission Action

    Section 3(e)(2)(A) of SIPA provides that the SIPC Board of
Directors must file with the Commission any proposed amendment to a
SIPC Rule.\21\ Section 3(e)(2)(B) of SIPA provides that within thirty-
five days of the date of publication of the notice of filing of a
proposed rule change in the Federal Register, or within such longer
period (1) as the Commission may designate of not more than ninety days
after such date if it finds such longer period to be appropriate and
publishes its reasons for so finding or (2) as to which SIPC consents,
the Commission shall: (i) By order approve such proposed rule change or
(ii) institute proceedings to determine whether such proposed rule
change should be disapproved.\22\ Further, section 3(e)(2)(D) of SIPA
provides that the Commission shall approve a proposed rule change if it
finds that the proposed rule change is in the public interest and is
consistent with the purposes of SIPA.\23\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \21\ 15 U.S.C. 78ccc(e)(2)(A).
    \22\ 15 U.S.C. 78ccc(e)(2)(B). SIPC has agreed to two 60-day
extensions; consequently, the Commission must act no later than
April 7, 2016. See emails from Hemant Sharma, Associate General
Counsel, SIPC, to Randall W. Roy, Deputy Associate Director,
Commission, dated December 3, 2015 and February 1, 2016.
    \23\ 15 U.S.C. 78ccc(e)(2)(D).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Commission finds, pursuant to section 3(e)(2)(D) of SIPA, that
the proposed rule change is in the public interest and consistent with
the purposes of SIPA. First, as noted above, paragraph (e)(4) of Rule
17a-5 provides that the broker-dealer must file with SIPC a report on
the SIPC annual general assessment reconciliation or exclusion from
membership forms that contains such information and is in such format
as determined by SIPC by rule and approved by the Commission. SIPC uses
broker-dealers' SIPC supplemental reports to evaluate whether broker-
dealers calculate their SIPC assessments correctly. These

assessments are the main source of funding for the SIPC Fund. The
Commission determined that because Forms SIPC-3, SIPC-6, and SIPC-7 are
used solely by SIPC for purposes of levying its assessments, SIPC
should prescribe by rule the form and content of the SIPC supplemental
report. Rule 600 prescribes the form and content of the report, in
accordance with paragraph (e)(4) of Rule 17a-5. Second, Rule 600 is
modelled on existing requirements in Rule 17a-5 prescribing the
information that must be included in, and the format of, the SIPC
supplemental report. Accordingly, the Commission finds that Rule 600 is
in the public interest and is consistent with the purposes of SIPA.
    It is therefore ordered by the commission, pursuant to section
3(e)(2) of SIPA, that the above-mentioned proposed rule change is
approved. In accordance with section 3(e)(2) of SIPA, the approved rule
change shall be given the force and effect as if promulgated by the
Commission.

IV. Statutory Authority

    Pursuant to SIPA, 15 U.S.C. 78aaa et seq., and particularly,
section 3(e)(15 U.S.C. 78ccc(e), SIPC is adding section 300.600 of
Title 17 of the Code of Federal Regulations in the manner set forth
below.

List of Subjects in 17 CFR Part 300

    Brokers, Securities.

Text of the Amendments

    In accordance with the foregoing, Title 17, Chapter II of the Code
of Federal Regulations is amended as follows:

PART 300--RULES OF THE SECURITIES INVESTOR PROTECTION CORPORATION

0
1. The authority citation for part 300 continues to read as follows:

    Authority:  15 U.S.C. 78ccc.

0
2. Add an undesignated center heading and Sec.  300.600 to read as
follows:

Rules Relating to Supplemental Report on SIPC Membership

Sec.  300.600  Rules relating to supplemental report on SIPC
membership.

    (a)(1) Who must file the supplemental report. Except as provided in
paragraph (a)(2) of this section, a broker or dealer must file with
SIPC, within 60 days after the end of its fiscal year, a supplemental
report on the status of its membership in SIPC (commonly referred to as
the ``Independent Accountants' Report on Applying Agreed-Upon
Procedures'') if a rule of the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC)
requires the broker or dealer to file audited financial statements
annually.
    (2) If the broker or dealer is a member of SIPC, the broker or
dealer is not required to file the supplemental report for any year in
which it reports $500,000 or less in total revenues in its annual
audited statement of income filed with the SEC.
    (b) Requirements of the supplemental report. The supplemental
report must cover the SIPC Annual General Assessment Reconciliation
Form (Form SIPC-7) or the Certification of Exclusion From Membership
Form (Form SIPC-3) for each year for which an SEC Rule requires audited
financial statements to be filed. The supplemental report must include
the following:
    (1) A copy of the form filed or a schedule of assessment payments
showing any overpayments applied and overpayments carried forward,
including payment dates, amounts, and name of SIPC collection agent to
whom mailed; or
    (2) If exclusion from membership was claimed, a statement that the
broker or dealer qualified for exclusion from membership under the
Securities Investor Protection Act of 1970, as amended, and the date
the Form SIPC-3 was filed with SIPC; and
    (3) An independent public accountant's report. The independent
public accountant, who must be independent in accordance with the
provisions of 17 CFR 210.2-01, must be engaged to perform the following
agreed-upon procedures in accordance with standards of the Public
Company Accounting Oversight Board (PCAOB):
    (i) Compare assessment payments made in accordance with the General
Assessment Payment Form (Form SIPC-6) and applied to the General
Assessment calculation on the Form SIPC-7 with respective cash
disbursements record entries;
    (ii) For all or any portion of a fiscal year, compare amounts
reflected in the audited financial statements required by an SEC rule
with amounts reported in the Form SIPC-7;
    (iii) Compare adjustments reported in the Form SIPC-7 with
supporting schedules and working papers supporting the adjustments;
    (iv) Verify the arithmetical accuracy of the calculations reflected
in the Form SIPC-7 and in the schedules and working papers supporting
any adjustments; and
    (v) Compare the amount of any overpayment applied with the Form
SIPC-7 on which it was computed; or
    (vi) If exclusion from membership is claimed, compare the income or
loss reported in the audited financial statements required by an SEC
rule with the Form SIPC-3.

    By the Commission.

    Dated: March 14, 2016.
Robert W. Errett,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2016-06041 Filed 3-16-16; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


[Federal Register: July 11, 2006 (Volume 71, Number 132)]
[Notices]
[Page 39110-39111]
[DOCID:fr11jy06-91]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

[EPA-HQ-OECA-2005-0075, FRL-8194-9]

Agency Information Collection Activities; Submission to OMB for
Review and Approval; Comment Request; NSPS for Large Appliance Surface
Coating; EPA ICR Number 0659.10, OMB Control Number 2060-0108

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: In compliance with the Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA) (44
U.S.C. 3501 et seq.), this document announces that an Information
Collection Request (ICR) has been forwarded to the Office of Management
and Budget (OMB) for review and approval. This is a request to renew an
existing approved collection. The ICR, which is abstracted below,
describes the nature of the information collection and its estimated
burden and cost.

DATES: Additional comments may be submitted on or before August 10,
2006.

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, referencing docket ID Number EPA-HQ-
OECA-2005-0075, to (1) EPA online using http://www.regulations.gov (our preferred method), by e-mail to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or by mail to: EPA

Docket Center (EPA/DC), Environmental Protection Agency, Enforcement
and Compliance Docket and Information Center, mail code 2201T, 1200
Pennsylvania Avenue, NW., Washington, DC 20460, and (2) OMB by mail to:
Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, Office of Management and
Budget (OMB), Attention: Desk Officer for EPA, 725 17th Street, NW.,
Washington, DC 20503.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Leonard Lazarus, Compliance Assessment
and Media Programs Division (CAMPD), Office of Compliance, (2223A),
Environmental Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW.,
Washington, DC 20460; telephone number:<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax number:
(202) 564-0050; e-mail address<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: EPA has submitted the following ICR to OMB
for review and approval according to the procedures prescribed in 5 CFR
1320.12. On September 21, 2005 (70 FR 55368), EPA sought comments on
this ICR pursuant to 5 CFR 1320.8(d). EPA received no comments. Any
additional comments on this ICR should be submitted to EPA and OMB
within 30 days of this notice.
    EPA has established a public docket for this ICR under docket ID
Number EPA-HQ-OECA-2005-0075, which is available for online viewing at
http://www.regulations.gov, or in person viewing at the Enforcement and

Compliance Docket and Information Center in the EPA Docket Center (EPA/
DC), EPA West, Room B102, 1301 Constitution Avenue, NW., Washington,
DC. The EPA/DC Public Reading Room is open from 8 a.m. to 4:30 p.m.,
Monday through Friday, excluding legal holidays. The telephone number
for the Reading Room is<PHONE_NUMBER>, and the telephone number for
the Enforcement and Compliance Docket and Information Center Docket is
(202) 566-1514.
    Use EPA's electronic docket and comment system at http://www.regulations.gov
, to submit or view public comments, access the

index listing of the contents of the docket, and to access those
documents in the docket that are available electronically. Once in the
system, select ``docket search,'' then key in the docket ID number
identified above. Please note that EPA's policy is that public
comments, whether submitted electronically or in paper, will be made
available for public viewing at http://www.regulations.gov as EPA

receives them and without change, unless the comment contains
copyrighted material, CBI, or other information whose public disclosure
is restricted by statute. For further information about the electronic
docket, go to http://www.regulations.gov.

    Title: NSPS for Large Appliance Surface Coating.
    ICR numbers: EPA ICR Number 0659.10, OMB Control Number 2060-0108.
    ICR Status: This ICR is scheduled to expire on June 30, 2006. Under
OMB regulations, the Agency may continue to conduct or sponsor the
collection of information while this submission is pending at OMB. An
Agency may not conduct or sponsor, and a person is not required to
respond to, a collection of information, unless it displays a currently
valid OMB control number. The OMB control numbers for EPA's regulations
in title 40 of the CFR, after appearing in the Federal Register when
approved, are listed in 40 CFR part 9, are displayed either by
publication in the Federal Register or by other appropriate means, such
as on the related collection instrument or form, if applicable. The
display of OMB control numbers in certain EPA regulations is
consolidated in 40 CFR part 9.
    Abstract: Respondents are owners or operators of large appliance
surface coating facilities. These standards apply to each large
appliance surface coating operation in which organic coatings are
applied, that commenced construction, modification or reconstruction
after December 24, 1980. Volatile Organic Compounds (VOCs) are the
pollutants regulated under this subpart. Owners or operators of the
affected facilities described must make initial reports when a source
becomes subject, conduct and report on a performance test, demonstrate
and report on continuous monitor performance, and maintain records of
the occurrence and duration of any startup, shutdown, or malfunction in
the operation of an affected facility. Semiannual reports of excess
emissions are required. These notifications, reports, and records are
essential in determining compliance; and are required, in general, of
all sources subject to New Source Performance Standards (NSPS).
    Any owner or operator subject to the provisions of this part shall
maintain a file of these measurements, and retain the file for at least
two years following the date of such measurements, maintenance reports,
and records. All reports are sent to the delegated state or local
authority. In the event that there is no such delegated authority, the

reports are sent directly to the EPA regional office.
    An agency may not conduct, or sponsor, and a person is not required
to respond to, a request for collection of information unless it
displays a currently valid OMB control number. The OMB control numbers
for EPA's regulations in 40 CFR are listed in 40 CFR part 9 and are
identified on the form and/or instrument, if applicable.
    Burden Statement: The annual public reporting and recordkeeping
burden for this collection of information is estimated to average 53
hours per response. Burden means the total time, effort, or financial
resources expended by persons to generate, maintain, retain, or
disclose or provide information to or for a Federal agency. This
includes the time needed to review instructions; develop, acquire,
install, and utilize technology and systems for the purposes of
collecting, validating, and verifying information, processing and
maintaining information, and disclosing and providing information;
adjust the existing ways to comply with any previously applicable
instructions and requirements which have subsequently changed; train
personnel to be able to respond to a collection of information; search
data sources; complete and review the collection of information; and
transmit or otherwise disclose the information.
    Respondents/Affected Entities: Owners or operators of large
appliance surface coating facilities.
    Estimated Number of Respondents: 72.
    Frequency of Response: Initial, Semiannually, On Occasion,
Initially.
    Estimated Total Annual Hour Burden: 7,659.
    Estimated Total Annual Cost: $8,400 includes no capital/startup
costs and $8,400 annualized O&M costs.
    Changes in the Estimates: There is an increase of 1,371 hours in
the total estimated burden currently identified in the OMB Inventory of
Approved ICR Burdens. This increase is due to an expansion of the
calculations to include managerial and clerical labor rates. The
increase in O&M costs is due to an increase in equipment maintenance
costs.

    Dated: June 29, 2006.
Sara Hisel McCoy,
Acting Director, Collection Strategies Division.
[FR Doc. E6-10865 Filed 7-10-06; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


[Federal Register: May 23, 2006 (Volume 71, Number 99)]
[Notices]
[Page 29619-29621]
[DOCID:fr23my06-37]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

[EPA-HQ-OW-2006-0369; FRL-8173-2]

Agency Information Collection Activities: Proposed Collection;
Comment Request; National Estuary Program; EPA ICR No. 1500.06; OMB
Control No. 2040-0138

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: In compliance with the Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA) (44
U.S.C. 3501 et seq.), this document announces that EPA is planning to
submit a request to renew an existing approved Information Collection
Request (ICR) to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB). This ICR is
scheduled to expire on November 30, 2006. Before submitting the ICR to
OMB for review and approval, EPA is soliciting comments on specific
aspects of the proposed information collection as described below.

DATES: Comments must be submitted on or before July 24, 2006.

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-OW-
2006-0369 by one of the following methods:
     http://www.regulations.gov: Follow the on-line

instructions for submitting comments.
     E-mail<EMAIL_ADDRESS>     Mail: U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, EPA Docket
Center (EPA/DC), Water Docket--Mail Code 4101T, 1200 Pennsylvania
Avenue NW., Washington, DC 20460.
     Hand delivery: Office of Water Docket, Environmental
Protection Agency, Public Reading Room, Room B102, 1301 Constitution
Ave. NW., Washington, DC 20004. Such deliveries are only accepted
during the Docket's normal hours of operation, and special arrangements
should be made for deliveries of boxed information.
    Instructions: Direct your comments to Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-OW-2006-
0369. EPA's policy is that all comments received will be included in
the public docket without change and may be made available online at

http://www.regulations.gov, including any personal information provided,

unless the comment includes information claimed to be Confidential
Business Information (CBI) or other information whose disclosure is
restricted by statute. Do not submit information that you consider to
be CBI or otherwise protected through http://www.regulations.gov or e-mail. The http://www.regulations.gov Web site is an ``anonymous

access'' system, which means that EPA will not know your identity or
contact information unless you provide it in the body of your comment.
If you send an e-mail comment directly to EPA without going through
http://www.regulations.gov your e-mail address will be automatically

captured and included as part of the comment that is placed in the
public docket and made available on the Internet. If you submit an
electronic comment, EPA recommends that you include your name and other
contact information in the body of your comment and with any disk or
CD-ROM you submit. If EPA cannot read your comment due to technical
difficulties and cannot contact you for clarification, EPA may not be
able to consider your comment. Electronic files should avoid the use of
special characters, any form of encryption, and be free of any defects
or viruses. For additional information about EPA's public docket visit
the EPA Docket Center homepage at http://www.epa.gov/epahome/dockets.htm
.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: John McShane, Oceans and Coastal
Protection Division, Office of Wetlands, Oceans, and Watersheds, Mail
Code 4504T, Environmental Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave.,
NW., Washington, DC 20460; telephone number:<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax number
(202) 566-1336; e-mail address<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

How Can I Access the Docket and/or Submit Comments?

    EPA has established a public docket for this ICR under Docket ID
No. EPA-HQ-OW-2006-0369, which is available for online viewing at
http://www.regulations.gov, or in person viewing at the Water Docket in

the EPA Docket Center (EPA/DC), EPA West, Room B102, 1301 Constitution
Ave., NW., Washington, DC. The EPA/DC Public Reading Room is open from
8 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., Monday through Friday, excluding legal holidays.
The telephone number for the Reading Room is<PHONE_NUMBER> and the
telephone number for the Water Docket is<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    Use http://www.regulations.gov to obtain a copy of the draft

collection of information, submit or view public comments, access the
index listing of the contents of the docket, and to access those
documents in the public docket that are available electronically. Once
in the system, select ``search,'' then key in the docket ID number
identified in this document.

What Information Is EPA Particularly Interested in?

    Pursuant to section 3506(c)(2)(A) of the PRA, EPA specifically
solicits comments and information to enable it to:
    (i) Evaluate whether the proposed collection of information is
necessary for the proper performance of the functions of the Agency,
including whether the information will have practical utility;
    (ii) Evaluate the accuracy of the Agency's estimate of the burden
of the proposed collection of information, including the validity of
the methodology and assumptions used;
    (iii) Enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information
to be collected; and
    (iv) Minimize the burden of the collection of information on those
who are to respond, including through the use of appropriate automated
electronic, mechanical, or other technological collection techniques or
other forms of information technology, e.g., permitting electronic
submission of responses. In particular, EPA is requesting comments from
very small businesses (those that employ less than 25 people) on
examples of specific additional efforts that EPA could make to reduce
the paperwork burden for very small businesses affected by this
collection.

What Should I Consider When I Prepare My Comments for EPA?

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

What Information Collection Activity or ICR Does This Apply to?

    Affected entities: Entities potentially affected by this action are
those state or local agencies or nongovernmental organizations in the
National Estuary Program (NEP) who receive grants under section 320 of
the Clean Water Act.
    Title: National Estuary Program.
    ICR Numbers: EPA ICR No. 1500.06, OMB Control No. 2040-0138.
    ICR Status: This ICR is currently scheduled to expire on November
30, 2006. An agency may not conduct or sponsor, and a person is not
required to respond to, a collection of information unless it displays
a currently valid OMB control number. The OMB control numbers for EPA's
regulations in title 40 of the CFR, after appearing in the Federal
Register when approved, are listed in 40 CFR part 9, are displayed
either by publication in the Federal Register or by other appropriate
means, such as on the related collection instrument or form, if
applicable. The display of OMB control numbers in certain EPA
regulations is consolidated in 40 CFR part 9.

Abstract

Annual Workplans

    The NEP involves collecting information from the state or local
agency or nongovernmental organizations that receive funds under
section 320 of the Clean Water Act. The regulation requiring this
information is found at 40 CFR part 35. Prospective grant recipients
seek funding to develop or oversee and coordinate implementation of
Comprehensive Conservation Management Plans (CCMPs) for estuaries of
national significance. In order to receive funds, grantees must submit
an annual workplan to EPA. The workplan consists of two parts: (a)
Progress on projects funded previously; and (b) new projects proposed
with dollar amounts and completion dates. The workplan is reviewed by
EPA and also serves as the scope of work for the grant agreement. EPA
also uses these workplans to track performance of each of the 28
estuary programs currently in the NEP.

Implementation Reviews

    EPA provides funding to NEPs to support long-term implementation of
CCMPs if such programs pass an implementation review process.
Implementation reviews are used to

determine progress each NEP is making in implementing its CCMP and
achieving environmental results. In addition to evaluating progress,
the results are used to identify areas of weakness each NEP should
address for long-term success in protecting and restoring their
estuaries. EPA will also compile successful tools and approaches as
well as lessons learned from all implementation reviews to transfer to
the NEPs and other watershed programs. For this ICR cycle,
implementation reviews will be required for seven programs in FY2006,
12 programs in FY2007, and nine programs in 2008.

Government Performance Results Act

    EPA requests that each of the 28 NEPs receiving section 320 funds
report information that can be used in the GPRA reporting process. This
reporting is done on an annual basis and is used to show environmental
results that are being achieved within the overall NEP Program. This
information is ultimately submitted to Congress along with GPRA
information from other EPA programs.
    Burden Statement: The annual public reporting and recordkeeping
burden for this collection of information is estimated to average 218
hours per response. Burden means the total time, effort, or financial
resources expended by persons to generate, maintain, retain, or
disclose or provide information to or for a Federal agency. This
includes the time needed to review instructions; develop, acquire,
install, and utilize technology and systems for the purposes of
collecting, validating, and verifying information, processing and
maintaining information, and disclosing and providing information;
adjust the existing ways to comply with any previously applicable
instructions and requirements which have subsequently changed; train
personnel to be able to respond to a collection of information; search
data sources; complete and review the collection of information; and
transmit or otherwise disclose the information.
    The ICR provides a detailed explanation of the Agency's estimate,
which is only briefly summarized here:
    Estimated total number of potential respondents: 28.
    Frequency of response: Annual.
    Estimated total average number of responses for each respondent: 2.
    Estimated total annual burden hours: 6,113.
    Estimated total annual costs: $409,349.

Are There Changes in the Estimates From the Last Approval?

    There are no changes in burden from the last approval.

What is the Next Step in the Process for This ICR?

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

    Dated: May 17, 2006.
Diane C. Regas,
Director, Office of Wetlands, Oceans and Watersheds.
 [FR Doc. E6-7829 Filed 5-22-06; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6560-50-P