[Federal Register Volume 78, Number 122 (Tuesday, June 25, 2013)]
[Notices]
[Pages 38090-38091]
[FR Doc No: 2013-15130]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

Public Notice for Waiver of Aeronautical Land-Use Assurance

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Notice of intent of waiver with respect to land; Morris
Municipal Airport, Morris, Illinois.

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

SUMMARY: The FAA is considering a proposal to change a 0.747-acre
portion of airport land from aeronautical use to non-aeronautical use
and to authorize the sale of airport property located at Morris
Municipal Airport, Morris, Illinois.
    The subject portion of airport property considered for release from
obligation to be maintained for aeronautical use and sale includes a
0.346-acre portion of Parcel G (110.55 total acres) and 0.401-acre
portion of Parcel C2 (73.27 total acres) that are located in the west
quadrant of the airport along Illinois Route 47 and currently not being
used directly for aeronautical purposes. Currently, ownership of the
property provides for protection of FAR Part 77 surfaces and compatible
land use which would continue to be protected with deed restrictions
required in the transfer of land ownership. The change from
aeronautical to non-aeronautical use would allow for the widening of
Route 47 which is directly adjacent to the airport. The aforementioned
land is not needed for aeronautical use.

DATES: Comments must be received on or before July 25, 2013.

ADDRESSES: Documents are available for review by prior appointment at
the FAA Airports District Office, Mr. Richard Pur, Airports Engineer,
Federal Aviation Administration, Chicago Airports District Office, 2300
East Devon Avenue, Des Plaines, Illinois 60018. Telephone: (847) 294-
7527/Fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>, and Morris Municipal Airport, 9980 North
Route 47, Morris, Illinois 60450, and<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    Written comments on the Sponsor's request must be delivered or
mailed to: Mr. Richard Pur, Airports Engineer, Federal Aviation
Administration, Chicago Airports District Office, 2300 East Devon
Avenue, Des Plaines, Illinois 60018. Telephone:<PHONE_NUMBER>/Fax:
(847) 294-7046.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr. Richard Pur, Airports Engineer,
Federal Aviation Administration, Chicago Airports District Office, 2300
East Devon Avenue, Des Plaines, Illinois 60018. Telephone: (847) 294-
7527/Fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: In accordance with section 47107(h) of Title
49, United States Code, this notice is required to be published in the
Federal Register 30 days before modifying the land-use assurance that
requires the property to be used for an aeronautical purpose.
    Existing Parcel G was originally acquired under AIP Grant 3-17-
SBGP-SB91 in July, 1991, and Parcel C2 was originally acquired under
AIP Grant 3-17-SBGP-74 in December, 2012, with the subject portions of
those parcels currently used for FAR Part 77 protection and to ensure
compatible land use. The City of Morris plans to sell the subject
property to the Illinois Department of Transportation--Division of
Highways for the purpose of widening Route 47 adjacent to the airport.
Fair Market Value will be obtained from the sale of the subject
property.
    Approval does not constitute a commitment by the FAA to financially
assist in the disposal of the subject

airport property nor a determination of eligibility for grant-in-aid
funding from the FAA. The use of the revenue generated from the sale of
the airport property will be in accordance with FAA's Policy and
Procedures concerning the Use of Airport Revenue, published in the
Federal Register on February 16, 1999 (64 FR 7696).

Tract 1--Subject Portion of Parcel G (Legal Description)

    That part of the Southwest Quarter of Section 15, Township 34
North, Range 7 East of the Third Principal Meridian, Grundy County,
Illinois, with bearings and grid distances referenced to the Illinois
State Plane Coordinate System, East Zone NAD 83 (2007 adj) described as
follows:
    Commencing at the southwest corner of said Southwest Quarter of
Section 15 per monument record recorded as document no. 393406 in the
Grundy County Recorder's Office; thence North 88 degrees 16 minutes 09
seconds East 60.48 feet on the south line of said Southwest Quarter to
the Point of Beginning; thence North 00 degrees 58 minutes 40 seconds
West 411.70 feet on the existing east right-of-way line of FAP 326 (IL
Rte. 47); thence North 89 degrees 01 minute 44 seconds East 14.99 feet;
thence South 00 degrees 58 minutes 44 seconds East 23.03 feet; thence
North 87 degrees 45 minutes 50 seconds East 10.00 feet; thence South 00
degrees 58 minutes 44 seconds East 279.89 feet; thence South 17 degrees
40 minutes 42 seconds East 52.20 feet; thence South 00 degree 58
minutes 44 seconds East 58.47 feet to said south line; thence South 88
degrees 16 minutes 09 minutes West 40.00 feet on said south line to the
Point of Beginning; containing 0.260 acre, more or less (area based on
ground distances), situated in the County of Grundy and State of
Illinois.

Tract 2--Subject Portion of Parcel G (Legal Description)

    That part of the Southwest Quarter of Section 15, Township 34
North, Range 7 East of the Third Principal Meridian, Grundy County,
Illinois, with bearings and grid distances referenced to the Illinois
State Plane Coordinate System, East Zone NAD 83 (2007 adj) described as
follows:
    Commencing at the southwest corner of said Southwest Quarter of
Section 15 per monument record recorded as document no. 393406 in the
Grundy County Recorder's Office; thence North 00 degrees 58 minutes 16
seconds West 610.50 feet on the west line of said Southwest Quarter to
the north line of property described in Book 313, Page 29; thence North
89 degrees 01 minute 44 seconds East 60.41 feet on said north line to
the Point of Beginning; thence North 00 degrees 58 minutes 40 seconds
West 413.02 feet on the existing east right-of-way line of FAP 326 (IL
Rte. 47) to a non-tangential curve; thence South 413.32 feet along a
8,075.00 foot radius curve to the right with a chord bearing South 03
degrees 00 minutes 11 seconds East 413.28 feet to said north line,
thence South 89 degrees 01 minute 44 seconds West 14.61 feet on said
north line to the Point of Beginning; containing 0.086 acre or 3,745
square feet, more or less (area based on ground distances), situated in
the County of Grundy and State of Illinois.

Tract 3--Subject Portion of Parcel C2 (Legal Description)

    That part of the Southwest Quarter of Section 10, Township 34
North, Range 7 East of the Third Principal Meridian, Grundy County,
Illinois, with bearings and grid distances referenced to the Illinois
State Plane Coordinate System, East Zone NAD 83 (2007 adj) described as
follows:
    Commencing at the southwest corner of said Southwest Quarter of
Section 10 per monument record recorded as document no. 393405 in the
Grundy County Recorder's Office; thence North 00 degrees 59 minutes 16
seconds West 817.70 feet on the west line of said Southwest Quarter;
thence North 88 degrees 25 minutes 01 seconds East 45.36 feet to the
existing east right-of-way line of FAP 326 (IL Rte. 47) and the Point
of Beginning; thence North 00 degrees 58 minutes 44 seconds West 408.60
feet on said east line; thence North 01 degree 52 minutes 59 seconds
East 131.38 feet on said east line; thence North 04 degrees 36 minutes
35 seconds West 197.24 feet on said east line; thence North 00 degree
55 minutes 36 seconds West 771.00 feet on said east line to the
northwest corner of property described in Condemnation Case No. 2011 ED
1 filed in the Grundy County Circuit Clerk's office; thence South 01
degree 39 minutes 56 seconds East 596.18 feet to a non-tangential
curve; thence southerly 620.26 feet along a 8,095.00 foot radius curve
to the right with a chord bearing South 03 degrees 10 minutes 02
seconds East 620.10 feet; thence South 14 degrees 10 minutes 10 seconds
West 76.57 feet; thence South 00 degrees 58 minutes 19 seconds East
453.56 feet; thence South 88 degrees 25 minutes 01 second West 5.53
feet to said existing east right-of-way line; thence North 00 degrees
58 minutes 44 seconds West 235.65 feet on said existing east right-of-
way line to the Point of Beginning; containing 0.401 acre or 17,470
square feet, more or less (area based on ground distances), situated in
the County of Grundy and State of Illinois.

    Issued in Des Plaines, Illinois, on June 7, 2013.
James G. Keefer,
Manager, Chicago Airports District Office, FAA, Great Lakes Region.
[FR Doc. 2013-15130 Filed 6-24-13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


[Federal Register: October 4, 2007 (Volume 72, Number 192)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Page 56618-56619]
[DOCID:fr04oc07-2]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. FAA-2007-27955; Directorate Identifier 2007-NE-15-AD;
Amendment 39-15201; AD 2007-19-10]
RIN 2120-AA64

Airworthiness Directives; Rolls-Royce plc RB211 Trent 500 Series
Turbofan Engines; Correction

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), Department of
Transportation (DOT).

ACTION: Final rule; correction.

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

SUMMARY: The FAA is correcting airworthiness directive (AD) 2007-19-10.
That AD applies to Rolls-Royce plc RB211 Trent 500 series turbofan
engines. We published that AD in the Federal Register on September 18,
2007 (72 FR 53108). The compliance limit of 2,190 cycles-since-new is
incorrect in two places. This document corrects that compliance limit
to 2,910 cycles-since-new. In all other respects, the original document
remains the same.

DATES: Effective Date: Effective October 4, 2007.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Christopher Spinney, Aerospace
Engineer, Engine Certification Office, FAA, Engine and Propeller
Directorate, 12 New England Executive Park, Burlington, MA 01803; e-
mail<EMAIL_ADDRESS>telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax (781)
238-7199.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: On September 18, 2007 (72 FR 53108), we
published a final rule AD, FR Doc. E7-18324, in the Federal Register.
That AD applies to Rolls-Royce plc RB211 Trent 500 series turbofan
engines. We need to make the following corrections:

Sec.  39.13  [Corrected]

0
On page 53109, in the second column, in the FAA's Determination and
Requirements of This AD paragraph, in the 22nd line, ``2,190 cycles-
since-new'' is corrected to read ``2,910 cycles-since-new''.
0
On page 53110, in the second column, in paragraph (e)(1), in the 7th
line, ``2,190 cycles-since-new'' is corrected to read ``2,910 cycles-
since-new''.

    Issued in Burlington, Massachusetts, on September 28, 2007.
Francis A. Favara,
Manager, Engine and Propeller Directorate, Aircraft Certification
Service.
[FR Doc. E7-19610 Filed 10-3-07; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


[Federal Register Volume 84, Number 149 (Friday, August 2, 2019)]
[Notices]
[Page 37864]
[FR Doc No: 2019-16458]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Docket No. CP19-488-000]

Columbia Gulf Transmission, LLC; Notice of Application

    Take notice that on July 16, 2019, Columbia Gulf Transmission, LLC
(Columbia Gulf), at 700 Louisiana Street, Suite 700, Houston, Texas
77002, filed an application in the above reference docket an
application pursuant to section 7(c) of the Natural Gas Act (NGA) and
Parts 157 and 284 of the Commission's regulations requesting
authorization to construct and operate the Louisiana XPress Project
(Project), all as more fully set forth in the application which is on
file with the Commission and open to public inspection. The filing is
available for review at the Commission in the Public Reference Room or
may be viewed on the Commission's website web at http://www.ferc.gov
using the ``eLibrary'' link. Enter the docket number excluding the last
three digits in the docket number field to access the document. For
assistance, contact FERC at<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or call toll-
free,<PHONE_NUMBER> or TYY,<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    Any questions concerning this application may be directed to
Richard Bralow, Sr. Legal Counsel. Columbia Gulf Transmission, LLC, 700
Louisiana Street, Houston, Texas 77002-2700 or by telephone at (832)
320-5177.
    Specifically, the Project will create 493,000 dekatherms per day
(Dth/d) of incremental mainline capacity on Columbia Gulf's pipeline
system. The incremental capacity created by the Project, in conjunction
with the utilization of existing capacity, will allow for open access
firm transportation service on approximately 850,000 Dth/d of capacity
on a north-to-south path from Columbia Gulf's Mainline Pool to a
primary point of delivery with Kinder Morgan Louisiana Pipeline LLC in
Evangeline Parish, Louisiana. The estimated cost of the Project is
$471,588,011.
    Pursuant to section 157.9 of the Commission's rules (18 CFR 157.9),
within 90 days of this Notice, the Commission staff will either:
Complete its environmental assessment (EA) and place it into the
Commission's public record (eLibrary) for this proceeding; or issue a
Notice of Schedule for Environmental Review. If a Notice of Schedule
for Environmental Review is issued, it will indicate, among other
milestones, the anticipated date for the Commission staff's issuance of
the final environmental impact statement (FEIS) or EA for this
proposal. The filing of the EA in the Commission's public record for
this proceeding or the issuance of a Notice of Schedule for
Environmental Review will serve to notify federal and state agencies of
the timing for the completion of all necessary reviews, and the
subsequent need to complete all federal authorizations within 90 days
of the date of issuance of the Commission staff's FEIS or EA.
    There are two ways to become involved in the Commission's review of
this project. First, any person wishing to obtain legal status by
becoming a party to the proceedings for this project should, on or
before the comment date stated below file with the Federal Energy
Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street NE, Washington, DC 20426, a
motion to intervene in accordance with the requirements of the
Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedure (18 CFR 385.214 or
385.211) and the Regulations under the NGA (18 CFR 157.10). A person
obtaining party status will be placed on the service list maintained by
the Secretary of the Commission and will receive copies of all
documents filed by the applicant and by all other parties. A party must
submit seven copies of filings made in the proceeding with the
Commission and must mail a copy to the applicant and to every other
party. Only parties to the proceeding can ask for court review of
Commission orders in the proceeding.
    However, a person does not have to intervene in order to have
comments considered. The second way to participate is by filing with
the Secretary of the Commission, as soon as possible, an original and
two copies of comments in support of or in opposition to this project.
The Commission will consider these comments in determining the
appropriate action to be taken, but the filing of a comment alone will
not serve to make the filer a party to the proceeding. The Commission's
rules require that persons filing comments in opposition to the project
provide copies of their protests only to the party or parties directly
involved in the protest.
    Persons who wish to comment only on the environmental review of
this project should submit an original and two copies of their comments
to the Secretary of the Commission. Environmental commentors will be
placed on the Commission's environmental mailing list, and will be
notified of any meetings associated with the Commission's environmental
review process. Environmental commentors will not be required to serve
copies of filed documents on all other parties. However, the non-party
commentors will not receive copies of all documents filed by other
parties or issued by the Commission and will not have the right to seek
court review of the Commission's final order.
    The Commission strongly encourages electronic filings of comments,
protests and interventions in lieu of paper using the eFiling link at
http://www.ferc.gov. Persons unable to file electronically should
submit an original and 7 copies of the protest or intervention to the
Federal Energy regulatory Commission, 888 First Street NE, Washington,
DC 20426.
    Comment Date: August 16, 2019.

    Dated: July 26, 2019.
Nathaniel J. Davis, Sr.,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2019-16458 Filed 8-1-19; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


------------------------------------------------------------------------
Revenue Needed....................         $6,068,890         $1,518,713
Projected Pilotage Demand.........             17,311              2,166
Hourly Rate.......................               $351               $701
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Review and finalize rates (proposed Sec.  404.108). As we noted in
our discussion of Table 9 under proposed Sec.  404.103, we are working
with the pilotage associations to close a significant gap between the
number of pilots needed and the working pilots we expect to be working
full-time and fully compensated in 2016. Closing the gap entails
training new applicant pilots, at considerable expense to the
associations. Ongoing training for current pilots is also an important
element of providing safe, efficient, and reliable pilotage service.
Ordinarily, current training expenses would not be recognized for
several years, which would reduce funds available for other immediate
association expenses. We find that the importance of training, both to
help achieve a full complement of needed pilots and to ensure skill
maintenance and development for current pilots, is a supportable
circumstance for imposing a necessary and reasonable temporary
surcharge for 2016, as authorized by 46 CFR 401.401, allowing each
association to recoup necessary and reasonable training expenses
incurred. We anticipate that there will be 2 applicant pilots in each
district for 2016, as we continue advancing towards our pilot strength
goals. Based on historic pilot costs, the stipend, per diem, and
training costs for each applicant pilot are approximately $150,000.
Thus, we estimate that the training expenses that each association will
incur will be approximately $300,000. Table 22 derives the proposed
percentage surcharge for each district by comparing this estimate to
each district's projected needed revenue.

                                   Table 22--Surcharge Calculation by District
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                             District 1         District 2         District 3
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Projected Needed Revenue (Sec.   404.106)..............         $5,510,398         $5,459,344         $7,587,603
Anticipated Training Expenses..........................           $300,000           $300,000           $300,000
Surcharge Needed *.....................................                 6%                 6%                 4%
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* All surcharge calculations are rounded up to the nearest whole percentage.

At the conclusion of the 2016 shipping season, we would account for
actual surcharge revenue and make adjustments as necessary to the
operating expenses for the following year.

VII. Regulatory Analyses

    We developed this proposed rule after considering numerous statutes
and executive orders (E.O.s) related to rulemaking. Below we summarize
our analyses based on these statutes or E.O.s.

A. Regulatory Planning and Review

    Executive Orders 13563 and 12866 direct agencies to assess the
costs and benefits of available regulatory alternatives and, if
regulation is necessary, to select regulatory approaches that maximize
net benefits (including potential economic, environmental, public
health and safety effects, distributive effects, and equity). Executive
Order 13563 emphasizes the importance of quantifying both costs and
benefits, of reducing costs, of harmonizing rules, and of promoting
flexibility.
    This proposed rule has not been designated a ``significant
regulatory action'' under section 3(f) of Executive Order 12866.
Accordingly, this proposed rule has not been reviewed by the Office of
Management and Budget (OMB). We consider all estimates and analysis in
this Regulatory Analysis to be subject to change in consideration of
public comments.
    The following table summarizes the affected population, costs, and
benefits of the proposed rule.

                                Table 23--Summary of Regulatory Economic Impacts
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                           Affected
       Proposed changes              Description          population           Costs              Benefits
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Rate Changes..................  Under the Great Lakes  126 vessels       $7,168,152......  --New rates cover an
                                 Pilotage Act of        journeying the                      association's
                                 1960, Coast Guard is   Great Lakes                         necessary and
                                 required to review     system annually.                    reasonable operating
                                 and adjust base                                            expenses.
                                 pilotage rates                                            --Provides fair
                                 annually.                                                  compensation,
                                                                                adequate training,
                                                                                and sufficient rest
                                                                                periods for pilots.
                                                                                --Ensures the
                                                                                association makes
                                                                                enough money to fund
                                                                                future improvements.
Procedural Changes............  Proposed changes to    3 pilot           No additional     --Provide maximum
                                 the annual             associations.     cost.             transparency and
                                 ratemaking                                                 simplicity in the
                                 methodology.                                               ratemaking
                                                                                methodology.
                                                                                --Make submitting
                                                                                data easier for
                                                                                pilots and more
                                                                                accurate.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Coast Guard is required to review and adjust pilotage rates on
the Great Lakes annually. See Parts III and IV of this preamble for
detailed discussions of the Coast Guard's legal basis and purpose for
this rulemaking and for background information on Great Lakes pilotage
ratemaking. Based on our annual review for this proposed rulemaking, we
are adjusting the pilotage rates for the 2016 shipping season to
generate for each district sufficient revenues to reimburse its
necessary and reasonable operating expenses, fairly compensate trained
and rested pilots, and provide an appropriate profit to use for
improvements. The rate changes in this proposed rule would, if
codified, lead to an increase in the cost per unit of service to
shippers in all three districts, and result in an estimated annual cost
increase to shippers of approximately $6,268,152 across all three
districts over 2015 payments (Table 24).
    In addition to the increase in payments that would be incurred by
shippers in all three districts from the previous year as a result of
the proposed rate changes, we propose authorizing a temporary surcharge
to allow the pilotage associations to recover training expenses that
would be incurred in 2016. We estimate that each district will incur
$300,000 in training expenses. These temporary surcharges would
generate a combined $900,000 in revenue for the pilotage associations
across all three districts.
    Therefore, after accounting for the implementation of the temporary
surcharges across all three districts, the annual payments made by
shippers during the 2016 shipping season are estimated to be
approximately $7,168,152 more than the payments that were made in 2015
(Table 24).\53\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \53\ Total payments across all three districts are equal to the
increase in payments incurred by shippers as a result of the rate
changes plus the temporary surcharges applied to traffic in
Districts One, Two, and Three.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    A draft regulatory assessment follows.
    This proposed rulemaking proposes revisions to the annual
ratemaking methodology (procedural changes), and applies the proposed
ratemaking methodology to increase Great Lakes pilotage rates and
surcharges from the current rates set in the 2015 final rule (rate
changes). The proposed methodology is discussed and applied in detail
in Parts V and VI of this preamble. The last full ratemaking was
concluded in 2015. The last annual rate review, conducted under 46 CFR
part 404, appendix C, was completed early in 2011.
    The shippers affected by these rate changes are those owners and
operators of domestic vessels operating on register (employed in
foreign trade) and owners and operators of foreign vessels on routes
within the Great Lakes system. These owners and operators must have
pilots or pilotage service as required by 46 U.S.C. 9302. There is no
minimum tonnage limit or exemption for these vessels. The statute
applies only to commercial vessels and not to recreational vessels.
    We used 2012-2014 vessel arrival data from the Coast Guard's Ship
Arrival Notification System (SANS) to estimate the average annual
number of vessels affected by the rate adjustment. Using that period,
we found that a mean of 126 vessels journeyed into the Great Lakes
system annually from the years 2012-2014. These vessels entered the
Great Lakes by transiting at least one of the three pilotage districts
before leaving the Great Lakes system. These vessels often make more
than one distinct stop, docking, loading, and unloading at facilities
in Great Lakes ports. Of the total trips for the 126 vessels, there
were 396 annual U.S. port arrivals before the vessels left the Great
Lakes system, based on 2012-2014 vessel data from SANS.
    The procedural changes are the proposed revisions to the annual
ratemaking methodology and several Great Lakes pilotage regulations.
These procedural changes are intended to clarify and simplify the
current methodology, and increase the accuracy

of collecting information on each pilot association's expenses and
revenues in order to lower the variance between projected revenue and
actual revenue. However, the rate changes resulting from the new
methodology would generate costs on industry in the form of higher
payments for shippers. The effect of the rate changes on shippers is
estimated from the District pilotage revenues. These revenues represent
the costs that shippers must pay for pilotage services. The Coast Guard
sets rates so that revenues equal the estimated cost of pilotage for
these services.
    We estimate the effect of the rate changes by comparing the total
projected revenues needed to cover costs in 2015 with the figures for
2016, plus the temporary surcharges authorized by the Coast Guard. The
last full year for which we have reported and audited financial
information for the pilot association expenses is 2013, as discussed in
Section VI of this preamble. We projected 2015 revenues using the rate
increases set in the 2014 and 2015 final rules. The 2014 final rule
\54\ increased rates by 2.5 percent and the 2015 final rule \55\
increased rates by 10 percent. Table 24 shows the 2015 revenue
projections.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \54\ See 79 FR 12084, Great Lakes Pilotage Rates-2014 Annual
Review and Adjustment (https://www.federalregister.gov/articles/2014/03/04/2014-04591/great-lakes-pilotage-rates-2014-annual-review-and-adjustment).
    \55\ See 80 FR 10365, Great Lakes Pilotage Rates-2015 Annual
Review and Adjustment (https://www.federalregister.gov/articles/2015/02/26/2015-04036/great-lakes-pilotage-rates-2015-annual-review-and-adjustment).

                                          Table 24--Revenue Adjustment
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                            2014 Revenue                           Total 2015
                Area                     2013 Revenue        adjustment        2015 Revenue        projected
                                          (audited)            (2.5%)       adjustment  (10%)       revenue
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
D1 Designated.......................         $1,990,865            $49,772           $204,064         $2,244,700
D1 Undesignated.....................          1,415,299             35,382            145,068          1,595,750
                                     ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Total, District 1...............          3,406,164             85,154            349,132          3,840,450
D2 Undesignated.....................          1,267,750             31,694            129,944          1,429,388
D2 Designated.......................          1,901,627             47,541            194,917          2,144,085
                                     ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Total, District 2...............          3,169,377             79,234            324,861          3,573,473
D3 Undesignated.....................          3,242,971             81,074            332,405          3,656,450
D3 Designated.......................          1,080,994             27,025            110,802          1,218,821
                                     ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Total, District 3...............          4,323,965            108,099            443,206          4,875,271
                                     ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        System Total................        $10,899,506           $272,488         $1,117,199        $12,289,193
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Table 25 details the additional cost increases to shippers by area
and district as a result of the rate changes and temporary surcharges
on traffic in Districts One, Two, and Three.

                                               Table 25--Effect of the Proposed Rule by Area and District
                                                                 [$U.S.; non-discounted]
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                Additional costs
                                                           Projected revenue  Projected revenue   Total costs 2015      Temporary        or savings of
                           Area                              needed in 2015     needed in 2016      (2016-2015)         surcharge        this proposed
                                                                                rule
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
D1 Designated............................................         $2,244,700         $3,025,852           $781,152  .................  .................
D1 Undesignated..........................................          1,595,750          2,484,546            888,796  .................  .................
                                                          ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Total, District 1....................................          3,840,450          5,510,398          1,669,948            300,000          1,969,948
D2 Undesignated..........................................          1,429,388          2,248,887            819,499  .................  .................
                                                          ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
D2 Designated............................................          2,144,085          3,210,457          1,066,372  .................  .................
    Total, District 2....................................          3,573,473          5,459,344          1,885,871            300,000          2,185,871
D3 Undesignated..........................................          3,656,450          5,120,638          1,464,188  .................  .................
D3 Designated............................................          1,218,821          2,466,965          1,248,144  .................  .................
                                                          ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Total, District 3....................................          4,875,271          7,587,603          2,712,332            300,000          3,012,332
                                                          ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
        System Total.....................................         12,289,193         18,557,345          6,268,152            900,000          7,168,152
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The resulting difference between the projected revenue in 2015 and
the projected revenue in 2016 is the annual change in payments from
shippers to pilots as a result of the rate change. This figure is
equivalent to the total additional payments from the previous year that
shippers would incur for pilotage services from this proposed rule.
    The effect of the rate change in this proposed rule on shippers
varies by area and district. The rate changes would lead to affected
shippers operating in District One, District Two, and District Three
experiencing an increase in payments of $1,669,948, $1,885,871, and
$2,712,332, respectively, from the previous year.
    In addition to the rate changes, temporary surcharges on traffic in

District One, District Two, and District Three would be applied for the
duration of the 2016 season in order for the pilotage associations to
recover training expenses incurred. We estimate that these surcharges
would generate an additional $300,000 in revenue for the pilotage
associations in each district, for a total additional revenue of
$900,000.
    To calculate an exact cost or savings per vessel is difficult
because of the variation in vessel types, routes, port arrivals,
commodity carriage, time of season, conditions during navigation, and
preferences for the extent of pilotage services on designated and
undesignated portions of the Great Lakes system. Some owners and
operators would pay more and some would pay less, depending on the
distance travelled and the number of port arrivals by their vessels.
However, the increase in costs reported earlier in this NPRM does
capture the adjustment in payments that shippers would experience from
the previous year. The overall adjustment in payments, after taking
into account the increase in pilotage rates and the addition of
temporary surcharges would be an increase in payments by shippers of
approximately $7,168,152 across all three districts.
    This proposed rule would allow the Coast Guard to meet the
requirements in 46 U.S.C. 9303 to review the rates for pilotage
services on the Great Lakes. The rate changes would promote safe,
efficient, and reliable pilotage service on the Great Lakes by ensuring
rates cover an association's operating expenses; provide fair pilot
compensation, adequate training, and sufficient rest periods for
pilots; and ensures the association makes enough money to fund future
improvements. The procedural changes would increase the accuracy of
pilotage data by utilizing a uniform financial reporting system (see
discussion of 46 CFR 403.300 in Part V of the preamble). The procedural
changes will also promote greater transparency and simplicity in the
ratemaking methodology through annual revenue audits (see discussion of
46 CFR 404.1 in Part V of the preamble).

B. Small Entities

    Under the Regulatory Flexibility Act, 5 U.S.C. 601-612, we have
considered whether this proposed rule would have a significant economic
effect on a substantial number of small entities. The term ``small
entities'' comprises small businesses, not-for-profit organizations
that are independently owned and operated and are not dominant in their
fields, and governmental jurisdictions with populations of less than
50,000 people.
    We expect that entities affected by the proposed rule would be
classified under the North American Industry Classification System
(NAICS) code subsector 483--Water Transportation, which includes the
following 6-digit NAICS codes for freight transportation: 483111--Deep
Sea Freight Transportation, 483113--Coastal and Great Lakes Freight
Transportation, and 483211--Inland Water Freight Transportation.
According to the Small Business Administration's definition, a U.S.
company with these NAICS codes and employing less than 500 employees is
considered a small entity.
    For the proposed rule, we reviewed recent company size and
ownership data for the period 2012 through 2014 in the Coast Guard's
Marine Information for Safety and Law Enforcement (MISLE) database, and
we reviewed business revenue and size data provided by publicly
available sources such as MANTA \56\ and Cortera.\57\ We found that
large, foreign-owned shipping conglomerates or their subsidiaries owned
or operated all vessels engaged in foreign trade on the Great Lakes.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \56\ See http://www.manta.com/.
    \57\ See https://www.cortera.com/.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    There are three U.S. entities affected by the proposed rule that
receive revenue from pilotage services. These are the three pilot
associations that provide and manage pilotage services within the Great
Lakes districts. Two of the associations operate as partnerships and
one operates as a corporation. These associations are designated with
the same NAICS industry classification and small-entity size standards
described above, but they have fewer than 500 employees; combined, they
have approximately 65 total employees. We expect no adverse effect to
these entities from this proposed rule because all associations receive
enough revenue to balance the projected expenses associated with the
projected number of bridge hours and pilots.
    Therefore, the Coast Guard certifies under 5 U.S.C. 605(b) that
this proposed rule would not have a significant economic effect on a
substantial number of small entities. If you think that your business,
organization, or governmental jurisdiction qualifies as a small entity
and that this proposed rule would have a significant economic effect on
it, please submit a comment to the Docket Management Facility at the
address under ADDRESSES. In your comment, explain why you think it
qualifies, as well as how and to what degree this proposed rule would
economically affect it.

C. Assistance for Small Entities

    Under section 213(a) of the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement
Fairness Act of 1996, Public Law 104-121, we want to assist small
entities in understanding this proposed rule so that they can better
evaluate its effects on them and participate in the rulemaking. If the
proposed rule would affect your small business, organization, or
governmental jurisdiction and you have questions concerning its
provisions or options for compliance, please consult Mr. Todd Haviland,
Director, Great Lakes Pilotage, Commandant (CG-WWM-2), Coast Guard;
telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>, email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or fax 202-372-
1914. The Coast Guard will not retaliate against small entities that
question or complain about this rule or any policy or action of the
Coast Guard.
    Small businesses may send comments on the actions of Federal
employees who enforce, or otherwise determine compliance with, Federal
regulations to the Small Business and Agriculture Regulatory
Enforcement Ombudsman and the Regional Small Business Regulatory
Fairness Boards. The Ombudsman evaluates these actions annually and
rates each agency's responsiveness to small business. If you wish to
comment on actions by employees of the Coast Guard, call 1-888-REG-FAIR
(1-888-734-3247).

D. Collection of Information

    This proposed rule would call for no new collection of information
under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501-3520) but
would adjust the burden for an existing COI number 1625-0086, as
described below.
    Title: Great Lakes Pilotage.
    OMB Control Number: 1625-0086.
    Summary of the Collection of Information: The proposed rule would
require continued submission of data to an electronic collection
system, identified as the Great Lakes Pilotage Management System, which
will eventually replace the manual paper submissions currently used to
collect data on bridge hours, vessel delay, vessel detention, vessel
cancellation, vessel movage, pilot travel, revenues, pilot
availability, and related data. Further, this proposed rule will
explicitly add the requirement for the pilot associations to provide
copies of their paper source forms, or billing forms, until the
transfer to electronic submission is available later in 2016. The pilot
associations currently provide copies of their source forms, or billing

forms, to the Great Lakes Pilotage Division on a monthly basis. These
forms are generated by the pilot associations for their own billing
purposes.
    Need for Information: This information is needed in order to more
accurately set future rates.
    Proposed Use of Information: We would use this information to
comply with the statutory and regulatory requirements regarding the
ratemaking and oversight functions imposed upon the agency.
    Description of Respondents: The respondents are representatives of
the three U.S. pilotage associations on the Great Lakes authorized by
the Coast Guard to provide pilotage service, the 42 registered pilots
we project for 2016, as well as on average the six individuals that
must fill out Form CG-4509 each year to apply for certification as U.S.
registered pilots.
    Number of Respondents: The estimated number of respondents
increases with this proposed rule. We estimate the maximum number of
respondents affected by this proposed rule to increase from 9 to 51 per
year. This is the sum of three pilot association representatives, six
applicant pilots applying for registration by filling out the CG-4509
and 42 projected registered pilots.
    Frequency of Response: Frequency dictated by marine traffic levels
and association staffing.
    Burden of Response: We estimate the burden of response will vary by
type of response, from 15 minutes for a pilot to complete the source
form to one hour for the pilot association to transmit the source forms
to the Coast Guard.
    Estimate of Annual Burden: We estimate the total annual burden will
increase from 19 to 2129.5.
    As required by the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C.
3507(d)), we will submit a copy of this proposed rule to the Office of
Management and Budget (OMB) for its review of the collection of
information.
    We ask for public comment on the proposed collection of information
to help us determine how useful the information is; whether it can help
us perform our functions better; whether it is readily available
elsewhere; how accurate our estimate of the burden of collection is;
how valid our methods for determining burden are; how we can improve
the quality, usefulness, and clarity of the information; and how we can
minimize the burden of collection.
    If you submit comments on the collection of information, submit
them both to OMB and to the Docket Management Facility where indicated
under ADDRESSES, by the date under DATES.
    You need not respond to a collection of information unless it
displays a currently valid control number from OMB. Before the Coast
Guard could enforce the collection of information requirements in this
proposed rule, OMB would need to approve the Coast Guard's request to
collect this information.

E. Federalism

    A rule has implications for federalism under E.O. 13132,
Federalism, if it has 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. We have analyzed this proposed rule under that order and
have determined that it is consistent with the fundamental federalism
principles and preemption requirements described in E.O. 13132. Our
analysis is explained below.
    Congress directed the Coast Guard to establish ``rates and charges
for pilotage services.'' 46 U.S.C. 9303(f). This regulation is issued
pursuant to that statute and is preemptive of state law as specified in
46 U.S.C. 9306. Under 46 U.S.C. 9306, a ``State or political
subdivision of a State may not regulate or impose any requirement on
pilotage on the Great Lakes.'' As a result, States or local governments
are expressly prohibited from regulating within this category.
Therefore, the rule is consistent with the principles of federalism and
preemption requirements in E.O. 13132.
    While it is well settled that States may not regulate in categories
in which Congress intended the Coast Guard to be the sole source of a
vessel's obligations, the Coast Guard recognizes the key role that
State and local governments may have in making regulatory
determinations. Additionally, for rules with implications and
preemptive effect, E.O. 13132 specifically directs agencies to consult
with State and local governments during the rulemaking process. If you
believe this rule has implications for federalism under E.O. 13132,
please contact the person listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT
section of this preamble.

F. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act

    The Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995, (2 U.S.C. 1531-1538),
requires Federal agencies to assess the effects of their discretionary
regulatory actions. In particular, the Act addresses actions that may
result in the expenditure by a State, local, or Tribal Government, in
the aggregate, or by the private sector of $100,000,000 (adjusted for
inflation) or more in any one year. Though this proposed rule would not
result in such an expenditure, we discuss the effects of this proposed
rule elsewhere in this preamble.

G. Taking of Private Property

    This proposed rule would not cause a taking of private property or
otherwise have taking implications under E.O. 12630, Governmental
Actions and Interference with Constitutionally Protected Property
Rights.

H. Civil Justice Reform

    This proposed rule meets applicable standards in sections 3(a) and
3(b)(2) of E.O. 12988, Civil Justice Reform, to minimize litigation,
eliminate ambiguity, and reduce burden.

I. Protection of Children

    We have analyzed this proposed rule under E.O. 13045, Protection of
Children from Environmental Health Risks and Safety Risks. This
proposed rule is not an economically significant rule and would not
create an environmental risk to health or risk to safety that might
disproportionately affect children.

J. Indian Tribal Governments

    This proposed rule does not have tribal implications under E.O.
13175, Consultation and Coordination with Indian Tribal Governments,
because it would not have a substantial direct effect on one or more
Indian tribes, on the relationship between the Federal Government and
Indian tribes, or on the distribution of power and responsibilities
between the Federal Government and Indian tribes.

K. Energy Effects

    We have analyzed this proposed rule under E.O. 13211, Actions
Concerning Regulations That Significantly Affect Energy Supply,
Distribution, or Use. We have determined that it is not a ``significant
energy action'' under that E.O. because it is not a ``significant
regulatory action'' under E.O. 12866 and is not likely to have a
significant adverse effect on the supply, distribution, or use of
energy. The Administrator of the Office of Information and Regulatory
Affairs has not designated it as a significant energy action.
Therefore, it does not require a Statement of Energy Effects under E.O.
13211.

L. Technical Standards

    The National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act (15 U.S.C.
272,

note) directs agencies to use voluntary consensus standards in their
regulatory activities unless the agency provides Congress, through the
OMB, with an explanation of why using these standards would be
inconsistent with applicable law or otherwise impractical. Voluntary
consensus standards are technical standards (e.g., specifications of
materials, performance, design, or operation; test methods; sampling
procedures; and related management systems practices) that are
developed or adopted by voluntary consensus standards bodies. This
proposed rule does not use technical standards. Therefore, we did not
consider the use of voluntary consensus standards.

M. Environment

    We have analyzed this proposed rule under Department of Homeland
Security Management Directive 023-01 and Commandant Instruction
M16475.lD, which guide the Coast Guard in complying with the National
Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (42 U.S.C. 4321-4370f), and have made
a preliminary determination that this action is one of a category of
actions that do not individually or cumulatively have a significant
effect on the human environment. A preliminary environmental analysis
checklist supporting this determination is available in the docket
where indicated under the ``Public Participation and Request for
Comments'' section of this preamble. This proposed rule is
categorically excluded under section 2.B.2, figure 2-1, paragraph 34(a)
of the Instruction. Paragraph 34(a) pertains to minor regulatory
changes that are editorial or procedural in nature. This proposed rule
adjusts rates in accordance with applicable statutory and regulatory
mandates. We seek any comments or information that may lead to the
discovery of a significant environmental impact from this proposed
rule.

List of Subjects

46 CFR part 401

    Administrative practice and procedure, Great Lakes, Navigation
(water), Penalties, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Seamen.

46 CFR Part 403

    Great Lakes, Navigation (water), Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements, Seamen, Uniform System of Accounts.

46 CFR Part 404

    Great Lakes, Navigation (water), Seamen.
    For the reasons discussed in the preamble, the Coast Guard proposes
to amend 46 CFR parts 401, 403, and 404 as follows:

Title 46--Shipping

PART 401--GREAT LAKES PILOTAGE REGULATIONS

0
1. The authority citation for part 401 is revised to read as follows:

    Authority:  46 U.S.C. 2103, 6101, 7701, 9303, 9304; Department
of Homeland Security Delegation No. 0170.1(II)(92.a), (92.d),
(92.e), (92.f).

0
2. Revise Sec.  401.405 to read as follows:

Sec.  401.405  Pilotage rates and charges.

    (a) The hourly rate for pilotage service on:
    (1) The St. Lawrence River is $590;
    (2) Lake Ontario is $458;
    (3) Lake Erie is $508;
    (4) The navigable waters from Southeast Shoal to Port Huron, MI is
$730;
    (5) Lakes Huron, Michigan, and Superior is $351; and
    (6) The St. Mary's River is $701.
    (b) The pilotage charge is calculated by multiplying the hourly
rate by the hours or fraction thereof (rounded to the nearest 15
minutes) that the registered pilot is on the bridge or available to the
master of the vessel, multiplied by the weighting factor shown in Sec.
401.400.

Sec.  401.407  [Removed]

0
3. Remove Sec.  401.407.

Sec.  401.410  [Removed]

0
4. Remove Sec.  401.410.
0
5. Revise Sec.  401.420 to read as follows:

Sec.  401.420  Cancellation, delay, or interruption in rendition of
services.

    (a) Except as otherwise provided in this section, a vessel can be
charged as authorized in Sec.  401.405 for the waters in which the
event takes place, if:
    (1) A U.S. pilot is retained on board while a vessel's passage is
interrupted;
    (2) A U.S. pilot's departure from the vessel after the end of an
assignment is delayed, and the pilot is detained on board, for the
vessel's convenience; or
    (3) A vessel's departure or movage is delayed, for the vessel's
convenience, beyond the time that a U.S. pilot is scheduled to report
for duty, or reports for duty as ordered, whichever is later.
    (b) When an order for a U.S. pilot's service is cancelled after
that pilot has begun traveling to the designated pickup place, the
vessel can be charged for the pilot's reasonable travel expenses to and
from the pilot's base; and the vessel can be charged for the time
between the pilot's scheduled arrival, or the pilot's reporting for
duty as ordered, whichever is later, and the time of cancellation.
    (c) Between May 1 and November 30, a vessel is not liable for
charges under paragraph (a)(1) or (2) of this section, if the
interruption or detention was caused by ice, weather, or traffic.
    (d) A pilotage charge made under this section takes the place and
precludes payment of any charge that otherwise could be made under
Sec.  401.405.
0
6. Revise Sec.  401.428 to read as follows:

Sec.  401.428  Boarding or discharging a pilot other than at designated
points.

    For a situation in which a vessel boards or discharges a U.S. pilot
at a point not designated in Sec.  401.450, it could incur additional
charges as follows:
    (a) Charges for the pilot's reasonable travel expenses to or from
the pilot's base, if the situation occurs for reasons outside of the
vessel's control, for example for a reason listed in Sec.  401.420(c);
or
    (b) Charges for associated hourly charges under Sec.  401.405, as
well as the pilot's travel expenses as described in paragraph (a) of
this section, if the situation takes place for the convenience of the
vessel.
0
7. In Sec.  401.450, redesignate paragraphs (b) through (j) as (c)
through (k), and add paragraph (b) to read as follows:

Sec.  401.450   Pilot change points.

* * * * *
    (b) Iroquois Lock;
* * * * *

PART 403--GREAT LAKES PILOTAGE UNIFORM ACCOUNTING SYSTEM

0
8. The authority citation for part 403 is revised to read as follows:

    Authority:  46 U.S.C. 2103, 2104(a), 9303, 9304; Department of
Homeland Security Delegation No. 0170.1(II)(92.a), (92.d), (92.e),
(92.f).

Sec.  403.120  [Removed]

0
9. Remove Sec.  403.120.
0
10. Revise Sec.  403.300 to read as follows:

Sec.  403.300  Financial reporting requirements.

    (a) Each association must maintain records for dispatching,
billing, and invoicing, and make them available for Director
inspection, using the system currently approved by the Director.
    (b) Each association must submit the compiled financial data and
any other required statistical data, and written certification of the
data's accuracy signed by an officer of the association,

to the Director within 30 days of the end of the annual reporting
period, unless otherwise authorized by the Director.
    (c) By April 1 of each year, each association must obtain an
unqualified audit report for the preceding year, audited and prepared
in accordance with generally accepted accounting standards by an
independent certified public accountant, and electronically submit that
report with any associated settlement statements to the Director by
April 7.
0
11. Revise Sec.  403.400 to read as follows:

Sec.  403.400  Uniform pilot's source form.

    (a) Each association must record pilotage transactions using the
system currently approved by the Director.
    (b) Each pilot must complete a source form in detail as soon as
possible after completion of an assignment, with adequate support for
reimbursable travel expenses.
    (c) Upon receipt, each association must complete the source form by
inserting the rates and charges specified in 46 CFR part 401.
0
12. Revise part 404 to read as follows:

PART 404--GREAT LAKES PILOTAGE RATEMAKING

Sec.
404.1 General ratemaking provisions.
404.2 Procedure and criteria for recognizing association expenses.
404.3 through 404.99 [Reserved]
404.100 Ratemaking and annual reviews in general.
404.101 Ratemaking step 1: Recognize previous operating expenses.
404.102 Ratemaking step 2: Project operating expenses, adjusting for
inflation or deflation.
404.103 Ratemaking step 3: Determine number of pilots needed.
404.104 Ratemaking step 4: Determine target pilot compensation.
404.105 Ratemaking step 5: Project return on investment.
404.106 Ratemaking step 6: Project needed revenue.
404.107 Ratemaking step 7: Initially calculate base rates.
404.108 Ratemaking step 8: Review and finalize rates.

    Authority: 46 U.S.C. 2103, 2104(a), 9303, 9304; Department of
Homeland Security Delegation No. 0170.1(II)(92.a), (92.d), (92.e),
(92.f).

Sec.  404.1  General ratemaking provisions.

    (a) The goal of ratemaking is to promote safe, efficient, and
reliable pilotage service on the Great Lakes, by generating for each
pilotage association sufficient revenue to reimburse its necessary and
reasonable operating expenses, fairly compensate trained and rested
pilots, and provide an appropriate profit to use for improvements.
    (b) Annual reviews of pilotage association expenses and revenue
will be conducted in conjunction with an independent party, and data
from completed reviews will be used in ratemaking under this part.
    (c) Full ratemakings to establish multi-year base rates and interim
year reviews and adjustments will be conducted in accordance with Sec.
404.100.

Sec.  404.2  Procedure and criteria for recognizing association
expenses.

    (a) A pilotage association must report each expense item for which
it seeks reimbursement through the charging of pilotage rates, and make
supporting information available to the Director. The Director must
recognize the item as both necessary for providing pilotage service,
and reasonable as to its amount when compared to similar expenses paid
by others in the maritime or other comparable industry, or when
compared with Internal Revenue Service guidelines. The association will
be given an opportunity to contest any preliminary determination that a
reported item should not be recognized.
    (b) The Director applies the following criteria to recognize an
expense item as necessary and reasonable within the meaning of
paragraph (a) of this section:
    (1) Operating or capital lease costs. Conformity to market rates,
or in the absence of a comparable market, conformity to depreciation
plus an allowance for return on investment, computed as if the asset
had been purchased with equity capital.
    (2) Return-on-investment. A market equivalent return-on-investment
is allowed for the net capital invested in the association by its
members, if that investment is necessary for providing pilotage
service.
    (3) Transactions not directly related to providing pilotage
services. Revenues and expenses generated from these transactions are
included in ratemaking calculations as long as the revenues exceed the
expenses. If these transactions adversely affect providing pilotage
services, the Director may make rate adjustments or take other steps to
ensure pilotage service is provided.
    (4) Pilot benefits. Association-paid benefits, including medical
and pension benefits and profit sharing, are treated as pilot
compensation.
    (5) Profit sharing for non-pilot association employees. These
association expenses are recognizable.
    (6) Legal expenses. These association expenses are recognizable
except for any and all expenses associated with legal action against
the U.S. government or its agents.
    (c) The Director does not recognize the following expense items as
necessary and reasonable within the meaning of paragraph (a) of this
section:
    (1) Unreported or undocumented expenses, and expenses that are not
reasonable in their amounts or not reasonably related to providing
safe, efficient, and reliable pilotage service;
    (2) Revenues and expenses from Canadian pilots that are commingled
with revenues and expenses from U.S. pilots;
    (3) Lobbying expenses; or
    (4) Expenses for personal matters.

Sec. Sec.  404.3 through 404.99  [Reserved]

Sec.  404.100  Ratemaking and annual reviews in general.

    (a) The Director establishes base pilotage rates by a full
ratemaking pursuant to Sec. Sec.  404.101 through 404.108, conducted at
least once every 5 years and completed by March 1 of the first year for
which the base rates will be in effect. Base rates will be set to meet
the goal specified in Sec.  404.1(a).
    (b) In the interim years preceding the next scheduled full rate
review, the Director will review the existing rates to ensure that they
continue to meet the goal specified in Sec.  404.1(a). If interim-year
adjustments are needed, they will be set according to one of the
following procedures, selected as the Director deems best suited to
adjust the rates to meet that goal:
    (1) Automatic annual adjustments, set during the previous full rate
review in anticipation of economic trends over the term of the rates
set by that review;
    (2) Annual adjustments reflecting consumer price changes as
documented in the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics Midwest Region
Consumer Price Index (CPI-U); or
    (3) A new full ratemaking.

Sec.  404.101  Ratemaking step 1: Recognize previous operating
expenses.

    The Director uses an independent third party to review each
pilotage association's expenses, as reported and audited for the last
full year for which figures are available, and determines which expense
items to recognize for base ratemaking purposes in accordance with
Sec.  404.2.

Sec.  404.102  Ratemaking step 2: Project operating expenses, adjusting
for inflation or deflation.

    The Director projects the base year's non-compensation operating
expenses for each pilotage association, using recognized operating
expense items from Sec.  404.101. Recognized operating

expense items subject to inflation or deflation factors are adjusted
for those factors based on the subsequent year's U.S. government
consumer price index data for the Midwest, projected through the year
in which the new base rates take effect.

Sec.  404.103  Ratemaking step 3: Determine number of pilots needed.

    (a) The Director determines the base number of pilots needed by
dividing each area's peak pilotage demand data by its pilot work cycle.
The pilot work cycle standard includes any time that the Director finds
to be a necessary and reasonable component of ensuring that a pilotage
assignment is carried out safely, efficiently, and reliably for each
area. These components may include but are not limited to:
    (1) Amount of time a pilot provides pilotage service or is
available to a vessel's master to provide pilotage service;
    (2) Pilot travel time, measured from the pilot's base, to and from
an assignment's starting and ending points;
    (3) Assignment delays and detentions;
    (4) Administrative time for a pilot who serves as a pilotage
association's president;
    (5) Rest between assignments, as required by 46 CFR 401.451;
    (6) Ten days' recuperative rest per month from April 15 through
November 15 each year, provided that lesser rest allowances are
approved by the Director at the pilotage association's request, if
necessary to provide pilotage without interruption through that period;
and
    (7) Pilotage-related training.
    (b) Peak pilotage demand and the base seasonal work standard are
based on averaged available and reliable data, as so deemed by the
Director, for a multi-year base period. Normally, the multi-year period
is the five most recent full shipping seasons, and the data source is a
system approved under 46 CFR 403.300. Where such data are not available
or reliable, the Director also may use data, from additional past full
shipping seasons or other sources, that the Director determines to be
available and reliable.
    (c) The number of pilots needed in each district is calculated by
totaling the area results by district and rounding them to the nearest
whole integer. For supportable circumstances, the Director may make
reasonable and necessary adjustments to the rounded result to provide
for changes that the Director anticipates will affect the need for
pilots in the district over the period for which base rates are being
established.
    (d) The Director projects, based on the number of persons applying
under 46 CFR part 401 to become U.S. Great Lakes registered pilots, and
on information provided by the district's pilotage association, the
number of pilots expected to be fully working and compensated during
the first year of the period for which base rates are being
established.

Sec.  404.104  Ratemaking step 4: Determine target pilot compensation.

    The Director determines base individual target pilot compensation
using a compensation benchmark, set after considering the most relevant
currently available non-proprietary information. For supportable
circumstances, the Director may make necessary and reasonable
adjustments to the benchmark. The Director determines each pilotage
association's total target pilot compensation by multiplying individual
target pilot compensation by the number of pilots projected under Sec.
404.103(d).

Sec.  404.105  Ratemaking step 5: Project return on investment.

    The Director calculates each pilotage association's allowed base
return on investment by adding the projected adjusted operating
expenses from Sec.  404.102 and the total target pilot compensation
from Sec.  404.104, multiplied by the preceding year's average annual
rate of return for new issues of high grade corporate securities.

Sec.  404.106  Ratemaking step 6: Project needed revenue.

    The Director calculates each pilotage association's base projected
needed revenue by adding the projected adjusted operating expenses from
Sec.  404.102, the total target pilot compensation from Sec.  404.104,
and the projected return on investment from Sec.  404.105.

Sec.  404.107  Ratemaking step 7: Initially calculate base rates.

    (a) The Director initially calculates base hourly rates by dividing
the projected needed revenue from Sec.  404.106 by averages of past
hours worked in each district's designated and undesignated waters,
using available and reliable data for a multi-year period set in
accordance with Sec.  404.103(b).
    (b) If the result of this calculation initially shows an hourly
rate for the designated waters of a district that would exceed twice
the hourly rate for undesignated waters, the initial designated-waters
rate will be adjusted so as not to exceed twice the hourly
undesignated-waters rate. The adjustment is a reallocation only and
will not increase or decrease the amount of revenue needed in the
affected district.

Sec.  404.108  Ratemaking step 8: Review and finalize rates.

    The Director reviews the base pilotage rates initially set in Sec.
404.107 to ensure they meet the goal set in Sec.  404.1(a), and either
finalizes them or first makes necessary and reasonable adjustments to
them based on requirements of Great Lakes pilotage agreements between
the United States and Canada, or other supportable circumstances.
Adjustments will be made consistently with Sec.  404.107(b).

Gary C. Rasicot,
Director, Marine Transportation Systems, U.S. Coast Guard.
[FR Doc. 2015-22895 Filed 9-8-15; 4:15 pm]
BILLING CODE 9110-04-P


[Federal Register Volume 81, Number 50 (Tuesday, March 15, 2016)]
[Notices]
[Pages 13874-13876]
[FR Doc No: 2016-05768]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

National Highway Traffic Safety Administration

[U.S. DOT Docket Number NHTSA-2016-0027]

Reports, Forms, and Record Keeping Requirements

AGENCY: National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA),
Department of Transportation.

ACTION: Request for public comment on an extension of a currently
approved collection of information.

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

SUMMARY: Before a Federal agency can collect certain information from
the public, it must receive approval from the Office of Management and
Budget (OMB). Under procedures established by the Paperwork Reduction
Act of 1995, before seeking OMB approval, Federal agencies must solicit
public comment on proposed collections of information, including
extension and reinstatement of previously approved collections.
    This document describes one collection of information for which
NHTSA intends to seek OMB approval concerning vehicle safety features
for consumer information purposes (OMB Control number 2127-0629).

DATES: Comments must be received on or before May 16, 2016.

ADDRESSES: You may submit comments to the docket number identified in
the heading of this document by any of the following methods:
     Federal eRulemaking Portal: Go to http://www.regulations.gov. Follow the online instructions for submitting
comments.
     Mail: Docket Management Facility, M-30, U.S. Department of
Transportation, West Building, Ground Floor, Rm. W12-140, 1200 New
Jersey Avenue SE., Washington, DC 20590.
     Hand Delivery or Courier: West Building Ground Floor, Room
W12-140, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m. Eastern
Time, Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays.
     Fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    You may call the Docket Management Facility at<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    Instructions: For detailed instructions on submitting comments, see
the Public Participation heading of the Supplementary Information
section of this document. Note that all comments received will be
posted without change to http://www.regulations.gov, including any
personal information provided.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Complete copies of each request for
collection of information may be obtained at no charge from Johanna
Lowrie, U.S. Department of Transportation, NHTSA, Room W43-410, 1200
New Jersey Ave SE., Washington, DC 20590. Ms. Lowrie's telephone number
is<PHONE_NUMBER>. Please identify the relevant collection of
information by referring to its OMB Control Number.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995,
before an agency submits a proposed collection of information to OMB
for approval, it must first publish a document in the Federal Register
providing a 60-day comment period and otherwise consult with members of
the public and affected agencies concerning each proposed collection of
information. The OMB has promulgated regulations describing what must
be included in such a document. Under OMB's regulation at 5 CFR
1320.8(d), an agency must ask for public comment on the following:
    (i) 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) 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) How to enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the
information to be collected;
    (iv) How to minimize the burden of the collection of information on
those who are to respond, including the use of appropriate automated,
electronic, mechanical, or other technological collection techniques or
other forms of information technology (e.g. in submission of
responses).
    In compliance with these requirements, NHTSA asks for public
comment on the following proposed collection of information:
    Title: Vehicle Information for the General Public.

    OMB Control Number: 2127-0629.
    Affected Public: Manufacturers that sell motor vehicles that have a
Gross Vehicle Weight Rating (GVWR) of 10,000 pounds or less in the
United States.
    Abstract: NHTSA's mission is to save lives, prevent injury, and
reduce motor vehicle crashes. Consumer information programs are an
important tool for improving vehicle safety through market forces. For
over 30 years, under its New Car Assessment Program, NHTSA has been
providing consumers with vehicle safety information such as frontal and
side crash results, crash avoidance performance test results, rollover
propensity, and the availability of a wide array of safety features
provided on each vehicle model. In addition, the agency has been using
this safety feature information when responding to consumer inquiries
and analyzing rulemaking petitions that requested the agency to mandate
certain safety features.
    The information collected annually by the agency includes the
following:
     Vehicle make, model, body style, certification type,
projected sales volume, availability date, etc.,
     Crashworthiness features (i.e., adjustable upper belt
anchorages, seat belt pretensioners, load limiters, etc.),
     Crash avoidance features (i.e., lane departure warning,
forward collision warning, blind spot detection, crash imminent
braking, dynamic brake support systems, etc.),
     Automatic crash notification systems,
     Event data recorders,
     Automatic door locks (ADL),
     Anti-theft devices,
     Static Stability Factor (SSF) rating information,
     Lower Anchors and Tethers for Children (LATCH) restraint
system, and
     Side air bag information that would include whether the
side air bags meet the requirements from the Technical Working Group
(TWG) on Out-of-Position occupants.
    NHTSA has another information collection to obtain data related to
motor vehicle compliance with the agency's Federal motor vehicle safety
standards. Although the consumer information collection data is
distinct and unique from the compliance data, respondents to both
collections are the same. Thus, the consumer information collection is
closely coordinated with the compliance collection to enable responders
to assemble the data more efficiently. The burden is further made
easier by sending out electronic files to the respondents in which the
data is entered and electronically returned to the agency.
    Estimated Annual Burden: 800 hours.
    Number of Respondents: 21.
    The consumer information collected will be used on the agency's
www.safercar.gov Web site, in the ``Purchasing with Safety in Mind:
What to look for when buying a new vehicle'' and ``Buying a Safer Car
for Child Passengers'' brochures, in other consumer publications, as
well as for internal agency analyses and response to consumer
inquiries.
    Comments are invited on: (1) Whether the existing collection of
information is still necessary for the proper performance of the
functions of the Department, including whether the information will
have practical utility, (2) the accuracy of the Department's estimate
of the burden of the existing information collection, (3) ways to
enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be
collected, and (4) ways to minimize the burden of the collection of
information on respondents, including the use of automated collection
techniques or other forms of information technology.

Public Participation

How do I prepare and submit comments?

    Your comments must be written and in English. To ensure that your
comments are filed correctly in the docket, please include the docket
number of this document in your comments.
    Your comments must not be more than 15 pages long (49 CFR 553.21).
NHTSA established this limit to encourage you to write your primary
comments in a concise fashion. However, you may attach necessary
additional documents to your comments. There is no limit on the length
of the attachments.
    If you are submitting comments electronically as a PDF (Adobe)
file, NHTSA asks that the documents submitted be scanned using an
Optical Character Recognition (OCR) process, thus allowing the agency
to search and copy certain portions of your submissions. OCR is the
process of converting an image of text, such as a scanned paper
document or electronic fax file, into computer-editable text.
    Please note that pursuant to the Data Quality Act, in order for
substantive data to be relied upon and used by the agency, it must meet
the information quality standards set forth in the OMB and DOT Data
Quality Act guidelines. Accordingly, we encourage you to consult the
guidelines in preparing your comments. OMB's guidelines may be accessed
at: http://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/fedreg/reproducible.html. DOT's
guidelines may be accessed at: http://dmses.dot.gov/submit/DataQualityGuidelines.pdf.

How can I be sure that my comments were received?

    If you submit your comments by mail and wish Docket Management to
notify you upon its receipt of your comments, you may enclose a self-
addressed, stamped postcard in the envelope containing your comments.
Upon receiving your comments, Docket Management will return the
postcard by mail.

How do I submit confidential business information?

    If you wish to submit any information under a claim of
confidentiality, you should submit three copies of your complete
submission, including the information you claim to be confidential
business information, to the Office of the Chief Counsel, NHTSA, at the
address given above under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT. When you
send a comment containing information claimed to be confidential
business information, you should include a cover letter setting forth
the information specified in our confidential business information
regulation. (49 CFR part 512).
    In addition, you may submit a copy (two copies if submitting by
mail or hand delivery), from which you have deleted the claimed
confidential business information, to the docket by one of the methods
given above under ADDRESSES.

Will the agency consider late comments?

    NHTSA will consider all comments received before the close of
business on the comment closing date indicated above under DATES. To
the extent possible, the agency will also consider comments received
after that date.

How can I read the comments submitted by other people?

    You may read the materials placed in the Docket for this document
(e.g., the comments submitted in response to this document by other
interested persons) at any time by going to http://www.regulations.gov.
Follow the online instructions for accessing the dockets. You may also
read the materials at the Docket Management Facility by going to the
street address given above under ADDRESSES. The Docket Management
Facility is open between 9 a.m. and 5

p.m. Eastern Time, Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays.

    Authority:  44 U.S.C. 3506(c); delegation of authority at 49 CFR
1.50.

    Issued on: March 8, 2016.
Raymond R. Posten,
Associate Administrator for Rulemaking.
[FR Doc. 2016-05768 Filed 3-14-16; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 4910-59-P