[Federal Register Volume 80, Number 150 (Wednesday, August 5, 2015)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 46508-46514]
[FR Doc No: 2015-19078]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Office of the Secretary

49 CFR Part 27

RIN 2105-AD91
[Docket No. DOT-OST-2011-0182]

Nondiscrimination on the Basis of Disability in Programs or
Activities Receiving Federal Financial Assistance (U.S. Airports)

AGENCY: Office of the Secretary, Department of Transportation (DOT).

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: The Department is issuing a final rule to amend its rules
implementing section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, which
requires accessibility in airport terminal facilities that receive
Federal financial assistance. The final rule includes new provisions
related to service animal relief areas and captioning of televisions
and audio-visual displays that are similar to existing requirements
applicable to U.S. and foreign air carriers under the Department's Air
Carrier Access (ACAA) regulations. The final rule also reorganizes a
provision concerning mechanical lifts for enplaning and deplaning
passengers with mobility impairments, and amends this provision to
require airports to work not only with U.S. carriers but also foreign
air carriers to ensure that lifts are available where level entry
loading bridges are not available. This final rule applies to airport
facilities located in the United States with 10,000 or more annual
enplanements that receive Federal financial assistance.

DATES: This rule is effective October 5, 2015.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Maegan L. Johnson, Senior Trial
Attorney, Office of the Assistant General Counsel for Aviation
Enforcement and Proceedings, Department of Transportation, 1200 New
Jersey Avenue SE., Room W96-409, Washington, DC 20590,<PHONE_NUMBER>.
You may also contact Blane A. Workie, Assistant General Counsel for
Aviation Enforcement and Proceedings, Department of Transportation,
1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., Room W96-464, Washington, DC 20590, (202)
366-9342. Arrangements to receive this notice in an alternative format
may be made by contacting the above named individuals.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Background

    On November 1, 1996, the U.S. Department of Transportation amended
its regulation implementing section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of
1973 to create a new section, 49 CFR 27.72, concerning regulatory
requirements for U.S. airports to ensure the availability of lifts to
provide level-entry boarding for passengers with disabilities flying on
small aircraft.\1\ See 61 FR 56409. This requirement paralleled the
lift provisions applicable to U.S. carriers in the ACAA rule, 14 CFR
part 382. On May 13, 2008, the Department of Transportation published a
final rule that amended part 382 by making it applicable to foreign air
carriers. See 73 FR 27614. This amendment also included provisions that
require U.S. and foreign air carriers, in cooperation with airport
operators, to provide service animal relief areas for service animals
that accompany passengers departing, connecting, or arriving at U.S.
airports. See 14 CFR 382.51(a)(5). Part 382 also now requires U.S. and
foreign air carriers to enable captioning on all televisions and other
audio-visual displays that are capable of displaying captioning and
that are located in any portion of the airport terminal to which any
passengers have access. See 14 CFR 382.51(a)(6). As a result of the
2008 amendments to Part 382, the requirements in Part 27 no longer
mirrored the requirements applicable to airlines set forth in part 382
as had been intended.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ Recognizing the need for level-entry boarding for passengers
with mobility impairments on larger aircraft, the Department
extended the applicability of its 1996 rule to aircraft with a
seating capacity of 31 or more passengers in 2001. See 66 FR 22107.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    On September 21, 2011, the Department issued a notice of proposed
rulemaking (NPRM) in Docket OST 2011-0182 titled, ``Nondiscrimination
on the Basis of Disability in Programs or Activities Receiving Federal
Financial Assistance (U.S. Airports).'' See 76 FR 60426 et seq.
(September 29, 2011). The Department proposed to amend part 27 by
inserting provisions that would require airport operators to work with
carriers to establish relief areas for service animals that accompany
passengers with disabilities departing, connecting, or arriving at U.S.
airports; to enable high-contrast captioning \2\ on certain televisions
and audio-visual displays in U.S. airports; and to negotiate in good
faith with foreign air carriers to provide, operate, and maintain lifts
for boarding and deplaning where level-entry loading bridges are not
available. The Department also proposed updates in the NPRM to outdated
references that existed in 49 CFR part 27 by deleting obsolete
references to the Uniform Federal Accessibility Standards in 49 CFR
27.3(b), and changing the language ``appendix A to part 37 of this
title'' to ``appendices B and D of 36 CFR part 1191, as modified by
appendix A to part 37 of this title.''
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \2\ High-contrast captioning is defined in 14 CFR 382.3 as
``captioning that is at least as easy to read as white letters on a
consistent black background.'' As explained in the preamble to Part
382, defining ``high-contrast captioning'' in such a way not only
ensures that captioning will be effective but also allows carriers
to use existing or future technologies to achieve captioning that
are as effective as white on black or more so.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Department asked a series of questions regarding the proposed
amendments to part 27. We received 481 comments in response to the
NPRM, the majority of which were received from individual commenters.
The Department also received a number of comments from disability
organizations, airports, and airport associations. We have carefully
reviewed and considered these comments. The significant, relevant
issues raised by the public comments to the NPRM are set forth below,
as is the Department's response.

Service Animal Relief Areas

    In the NPRM, the Department sought comment on whether it should
adopt requirements regarding the design of service animal relief areas
and what, if any, provisions the rule should include concerning the
dimensions, materials used, and maintenance for service animal relief
areas. The Department explained that commenters should consider the
size and surface material of the area, maintenance, and distance to
service animal relief areas, which could vary based on the size and
configuration of the airport. The Department also sought comment on the
compliance date for these requirements.

Comments

    Commenters that indicated that they are service animal users, and
other individual commenters, favor the construction of service animal
relief areas on non-cement surfaces. These commenters also expressed a
desire to see overhangs covering service animal relief areas to protect
service animal users from the elements. Airport and airport
organization commenters, however, do not support specific mandates
regarding the design, number, or location of service animal relief
areas, and encourage the Department to adopt the general language that
appears in part

382. Airports and airport organizations explain that using broader
guidelines with respect to the design, materials and maintenance of
service animal relief areas would allow airports to try new materials
in the future as technology improves, and would allow airports to
design service animal relief areas based on that airport's unique
geographical location.
    The Department also sought comment on what would be an appropriate
number of service animal relief areas in an airport and how that number
should be determined. For example, should the number be determined by
the size or configuration of the airport (e.g., the number, location,
and design of terminals and concourses) and/or the amount of time it
would take for an individual with a disability to reach a service
animal relief area from any gate within the airport?
    The majority of individual commenters and disability organizations
favored a rule that would require at least one relief area in each
airport terminal. These commenters also suggest, however, that if the
rule were to only require one relief area per terminal, the airport
should provide either escort service or transportation to service
animal relief areas to expedite trips to service animal relief areas. A
number of individual commenters opposed using the amount of time it
would take an individual with a disability to reach a relief area from
a particular gate as a barometer for determining the number of required
service animal relief areas an airport should have, reasoning that
walking time varies depending upon the individual. Some individual
commenters, however, did suggest imposing a blanket standard of one
service animal relief area per every 15 gates or at every quarter of a
mile.
    Finally, with respect to the placement of service animal relief
areas, the Department sought comment on whether service animal relief
areas should be located inside or outside the sterile \3\ area of an
airport. The Department presented this question to the public after the
Transportation Security Administration (TSA) in May 2011 revised its
guidelines, ``Recommended Security Guidelines for Airport Planning,
Design and Construction,'' making clear that airports may provide
Service Animal Relief Areas in sterile areas of the airport. There is
overwhelming support by individual commenters and disability
organizations that at least one relief area should be located in the
sterile area of each airport terminal. Airports and airport
associations, however, advocate that the rule not specifically mandate
that service animal relief areas be located in the sterile area of an
airport. These groups argue that the determination as to whether to
place service animal relief areas in the sterile area of an airport
should be made on an airport-by-airport basis.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ The sterile area is the area between the TSA passenger
screening checkpoint and the aircraft boarding gates. See 49 CFR
1540.5.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Department also sought comment on whether the rule should
include a provision requiring airports to specify the location of
service animal relief areas on airport Web sites, maps and/or diagrams
of the airport, including whether the relief area is located inside or
outside a sterile area. Individual commenters support requiring
airports to specify relief area locations on Web sites, maps and
signage, but also suggest that airports make braille maps available to
individuals with visual impairments to locate service animal relief
areas. Some individual commenters also suggest that the Department
establish a ``universal symbol'' for service animal relief areas, which
could be used by airports throughout the country to identify service
animal relief areas. Conversely, the Airports Council International--
North America states that additional direction signage within the
terminal building could potentially overload passengers and become
counterproductive in assisting passengers with locating service animal
relief areas. The organization reasoned that because carriers provide
escorts to passengers with service animals, escorts who know the
location of the service animal relief areas should be sufficient.
    Anticipating that its final rule might include requirements with
respect to service animal relief areas that are more involved than the
requirements for U.S. and foreign carriers that exist in part 382, the
Department solicited comment in the NPRM on whether any requirement
that applies to U.S. airports should also be applied to U.S. and
foreign carriers. All commenters that addressed the Department's
inquiry agreed that any requirement that applied to U.S. airports
should also be applied to both U.S. and foreign carriers.
    Finally, the NPRM sought comment on whether the final rule
regarding establishing service animal relief areas should take effect
120 days after its publication in the Federal Register. While the
majority of individual commenters believe that 120 days is an
appropriate amount of time to comply with the requirements of the rule
regarding service animal relief areas, airports and airport
organizations generally support a longer timeframe to comply with the
requirements. These groups argue that airports need additional time to
raise revenue to implement any additional requirements with respect to
service animal relief areas that may be imposed by the rule.

DOT Response

    Having fully considered the comments, the Department has decided
that it will not adopt specific requirements with respect to the
dimensions, design, materials, and maintenance of service animal relief
areas, with the exception that such service animal relief areas be
wheelchair accessible. While the Department specifically mandates in
the final rule that service animal relief areas be wheelchair
accessible, this requirement, although new to part 27, is already a
requirement that is imposed upon U.S. airports by the Americans with
Disabilities Act. Nonetheless, the Department decided to include this
mandate in the final rule to remind U.S. airports of their obligation
to ensure that service animal relief areas are wheelchair accessible.
    This final rule, similar to part 382, also requires airports to
consult with service animal training organizations regarding the
design, dimensions, materials and maintenance of service animal relief
areas. We expect that most airports will likely choose to work with
local chapters of national service animal training organizations to
comply with this requirement as those organizations may be better
suited to make specific suggestions that are tailored to individual
airports though many service animal training organizations can
undoubtedly be a useful resource for U.S airports.
    With respect to the number of service animal relief areas required
at an airport, the Department has decided to require airports to
provide at least one service animal relief area in each airport
terminal. As proposed in the NPRM, the Department is using airport
terminals as the standard upon which airports must determine the number
of required service animal relief areas, rather than using the amount
of time it would take for an individual with a disability to reach a
service animal relief area from a particular gate. The Department notes
that while some individual commenters and disability organizations
suggest that we adopt requirements in part 27 that would require escort
service to relief areas in the event that the Department decided to
adopt the requirement for a single relief area per terminal, part 382
already requires U.S. and foreign air carriers to provide, in
cooperation with

U.S. airport operators, escorts to individuals with disabilities to
service animal relief areas upon request. See 14 CFR 382.91(c). As
such, the Department is not imposing a requirement for U.S. airports to
provide escort service to relief areas.
    This final rule does require that airports not only have at least
one relief area per terminal but also that this service animal relief
area, with limited exceptions, be located in the sterile area of each
airport terminal to ensure that individuals with service animals are
able to access service animal relief areas when traveling, particularly
during layovers. Recognizing that the TSA may prohibit a particular
airport from locating a relief area in the sterile area of a terminal,
the rule provides airports with an exception to this requirement if TSA
prohibits a particular airport from locating a relief area in the
sterile area of a terminal for security-related reasons. The Department
also realizes that, based on an airport's configuration, a relief area
in the non-sterile area of an airport may be more desirable to relief
area users. As such, the Department is allowing airports the option of
placing a relief area in a location other than the sterile area of a
terminal if a service animal training organization, the airport, and
the carriers in the terminal in which the relief area will be located
agree that a relief area would be better placed outside the terminal's
sterile area instead of inside the sterile area. The airport must,
however, document and retain a record of this agreement.
    The Department decided not to adopt a provision in the rule
requiring airports to specify the location of service animal relief
areas on airport Web sites, on any airport map intended for use by
travelers, and on signage located throughout the airport. The
Department reasoned that a regulation requiring airports, which have
already been equipped with service animal relief areas for a number of
years as a result of the requirements in Part 382, to specify the
location of service animal relief areas is unnecessary as a number of
airports already have signage indicating the location of service animal
relief areas. Airports also generally aim to provide signage in
accordance with internationally-agreed standards as set forth in ICAO
Annex 9. If the Department finds that there is confusion about the
location of service animal relief areas at U.S. airports, it will
revisit this issue.
    Finally, the Department is providing U.S. airports one year to
comply with the requirement to establish at least one service animal
relief areas per airport terminal. The Department believes this is
sufficient time for U.S. airports to raise the needed revenue \4\ and
determine the appropriate location as well as the design of the service
animal relief areas in consultation with service animal training
organizations and in cooperation with airlines.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ See NPRM wherein the Department estimates that the initial
cost to establish a relief area for each terminal is approximately
$5,000 per terminal, with low- and high-cost alternatives ranging
from $1,000 to $10,000.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Information for Passengers

    The Department sought comment in the NPRM on its proposal to
require airport operators to enable high-contrast captioning on
television and audio-visual displays in U.S. airports, which is a
requirement that is imposed upon U.S. and foreign carriers in part 382
for the portion of the terminal facilities they own, lease or control
at U.S. airports to which passengers have access. The Department also
sought comment on whether a thirty-day implementation period is
adequate.

Comments

    Airport and airport organization commenters suggest that the
Department only require those televisions and audio-visual displays
owned or controlled by airports to be subject to the captioning
requirement. Individual commenters, however, favor a blanket
requirement that captioning be enabled on all televisions throughout
the airport. Given the non-burdensome nature of this requirement, the
Department proposed a thirty-day implementation period in the NPRM. All
but one of the nine commenters that submitted comments on this subject
agree that 30 days is a sufficient implementation period for this
requirement, while one airport commenter suggests a 90 to 120 day
implementation period for larger airports with more televisions.
    The Department sought comment on whether it should require U.S.
airports to display messages and pages broadcast over public address
systems on video monitors so that persons who are deaf or hard-of-
hearing do not miss important information available to others at an
airport. The Department also sought comment on whether visual display
of information announced over the public address system is the best
means to disseminate airport-related announcements to passengers with
hearing impairments. Some airports and airport organizations commented
that while displaying messages on video monitors is one method of
providing information to passengers with a hearing impairment, the
Department should not adopt a rule specifically requiring that this
method be used. Individual commenters suggest, however, that in
addition to the use of video monitors to communicate with individuals
with a hearing impairment throughout the airport, the Department could
require airports to install hearing loops at ticket counters and in the
gate areas of airports and LED screens reserved for the display of
essential announcements.
    The Department also sought comment as to whether it should
establish a performance standard for providing information to
individuals with hearing impairments rather than require airports to
use a particular medium (e.g., video monitors, wireless pagers,
erasable boards). Some airport and airport organization commenters
support the adoption of performance standards rather than specific
requirements, in order to allow airports the flexibility to determine
the most effective way to communicate with passengers and to account
for developing technologies.
    The Department also asked interested persons to comment on whether
the Department should simply require that airports provide the text of
the announcements made over the public address system promptly or
should instead require that there be simultaneous visual transmission
of the information. While one airport organization supports providing
the text of the announcement promptly, as the display of the text
usually closely follows announcements made over public address systems,
a disability rights organization supports simultaneous transmission of
the information through public information displays.
    Finally, the Department sought comment on whether all announcements
made through the public address system should be displayed in a manner
that is accessible to deaf and hard-of-hearing travelers, or only those
announcements that are essential. The Department also sought comment on
the amount of time and the cost involved in establishing such a system.
Individual commenters support displaying all announcements in a manner
accessible to deaf and hard-of-hearing travelers, with one commenter
suggesting that essential messages should be given priority over non-
essential messages. Airports and airport associations advocate that
only essential messages be displayed in an accessible manner so as not
to overwhelm a technology system and dilute the information that
passengers need. With respect to the amount of time and cost involved
in establishing such a system, one individual commenter and one

disability organization suggest that 30 days would be a sufficient
amount of time for airports to establish the system, while an airport
commenter contends that 30 days is too short a time period to establish
such a system and suggests a two-year implementation time period.
Furthermore, one airport commenter states that it would cost $100,000
to establish such a system as long as the capability exists in the
airport's visual display software. The airport further explains that
the cost to establish such a system would be difficult to determine if
the airport didn't have software capable of displaying visual pages.

DOT's Response

    After carefully considering the comments the Department received on
this subject, we have decided to adopt the proposed language in the
NPRM, which closely follows the current requirements that apply to U.S.
and foreign carriers in part 382. As such, airport operators will be
required to enable or ensure high-contrast captioning at all times on
televisions and other audio-visual displays capable of displaying
captions located in any gate area, ticketing area, first-class or other
passenger lounge provided by a U.S. or foreign carrier, or any common
area of the terminal to which passengers have access. In the case of
televisions and other audio-visual displays located in space leased by
a shop or restaurant, the airport operator is obligated to ensure by
contract or other means that the shop or restaurant enables the
captioning feature on its televisions and other audio-visual displays
in a manner that meets this obligation.
    The Department decided to adopt the language in the NPRM reasoning
that the adoption of a rule requiring airports to enable the captioning
feature is not a costly or otherwise onerous requirement as most
televisions currently in use at U.S. airports have captioning
capabilities. Notwithstanding this, because the Department received
such a limited number of comments with respect to its questions
regarding how to best provide information to deaf and hard-of-hearing
passengers in airports, we have decided not to impose any new
requirements on this subject that exceed the requirements that
currently exist with respect to U.S. and foreign air carriers in part
382.

Boarding Lifts for Aircraft

    The Department sought comment as to whether it should require U.S.
airport operators to negotiate in good faith with foreign carriers to
ensure that ramps or mechanical lifts are available for enplaning and
deplaning passengers with disabilities.

Comments

    We received one comment from an airport organization in response to
our inquiry. This commenter supports airports negotiating with foreign
carriers to ensure the availability of lifts. The organization reasons
that this requirement would ensure that all parties would be held
accountable for providing boarding assistance to passengers.
    With respect to our last inquiry, whether the Department should
require airports to purchase additional lifts, the only comment we
received was from an airport that opposes adopting such a requirement
because of the potential financial impact it could have on airports.

DOT's Response

    The Department has considered the two comments received with
respect to the questions it posed regarding boarding lifts for
aircraft. The Department has decided to adopt the proposed language in
the NPRM, which requires airports to negotiate with foreign carriers,
in addition to U.S. carriers, to ensure the provision of lifts, ramps
and other devices used for boarding and deplaning where level-entry
boarding is not available. This requirement only imposes the same
requirement for foreign carriers that has existed for airport operators
with respect to U.S. carriers. Due to the lack of commentary from the
public, the Department has decided to refrain from imposing additional
requirements on airports to purchase additional lifts.

Regulatory Analyses and Notices

A. Executive Order 12866 (Regulatory Planning and Review), Executive
Order 13563 (Improving Regulation and Regulatory Review), and DOT
Regulatory Policies and Procedures

    This action has been determined not to be significant under
Executive Order 12866 and the Department's Regulatory Policies and
Procedures. It has not been reviewed by the Office of Management and
Budget in accordance with Executive Order 12866 and Executive Order
13563.
    Executive Order 13563 directs agencies to propose or adopt a
regulation only upon a reasoned determination that its benefits justify
its costs, tailor the regulation to impose the least burden on society
consistent with obtaining the regulatory objectives, and in choosing
among alternative regulatory approaches, select those approaches that
maximize net benefits. Executive Order 13563 recognizes that some
benefits and costs are difficult to quantify and provides that, where
appropriate and permitted by law, agencies may consider and discuss
qualitatively values that are difficult or impossible to quantify,
including equity, human dignity, fairness, and distributive impacts.
    Of the three provisions in the final rule, the only element of the
final rule that will involve a substantial cost to airports is the
requirement that service animal relief areas for service animals be
located inside the sterile area of each terminal. The relief area
requirement in the final rule promotes the aforementioned qualitative
values by ensuring equal access to air transportation by passengers
with disabilities traveling with services animals. In the Department's
view, the non-quantifiable benefits associated with requiring at least
one relief area per airport terminal and requiring this service animal
relief area be in the sterile area of the airport with limited
exceptions is wholly consistent with the ACAA's mandate to eliminate
discrimination against individuals with disabilities in air
transportation.
    The primary non-quantifiable benefit to a passenger with a
disability traveling with a service animal is that he or she does not
have to leave the sterile area of the terminal to access the airport's
relief area. While the Department does not have sufficient information
to quantify the value of time savings associated with requiring that
service animal relief areas be located in the sterile area of the
airport, a number of commenters to the NPRM commented that they were
often forced to create itineraries with longer layover times because of
the amount of time it takes for passengers with a disability to locate
service animal relief areas and the amount of time it takes to exit the
sterile area, relieve a service animal, and pass through security
again. The Department recognizes that individuals with disabilities may
be prevented from visiting service animal relief areas located outside
the sterile area of an airport during a layover. Furthermore, travelers
with disabilities that have a layover may not be able to access
landside service animal relief areas due to time constraints and
disability-related reasons. The new requirement in the rule requiring
airports to place a relief area in the sterile area of each terminal

of the airport will allow such travelers access to service animal
relief areas.\5\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ See the Transportation Security Administration's (TSA)
Recommended Security Guidelines for Airport Planning, Design and
Construction, May of 2011. http://www.tsa.gov/assets/pdf/airport_security_design_guidelines.pdf.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Other non-quantifiable benefits associated with locating service
animal relief areas in the sterile area of each airport terminal
include the ability for passengers to consider more flight options.
Those passengers previously limited to selecting itineraries with
extended layover periods may consider travel itineraries with shorter
layover times once service animal relief areas are located in the
sterile area of an airport. In addition, locating service animal relief
areas in the sterile area would promote independence among those
passengers accompanied by service animals as they may be able to
independently locate service animal relief areas without relying on the
assistance of escorts, which are now commonly used to assist passengers
traveling with service animals in traversing through the airports and
exiting and reentering the sterile area during a layover. Locating
service animal relief areas in the sterile area will also reduce the
amount of effort and discomfort experienced by individuals with
disabilities when trying to relieve their service animals during a
layover.
    The final rule also offers the benefits of improved convenience to
non-disabled persons accompanied by an animal or pet while at the
airport. Although these benefits are not encompassed by the rule's
purpose, individuals traveling with pets or security dogs trained to
detect security threats may also find it convenient to use service
animal relief areas located in the secure area of the airport.
    As stated above, the final regulatory assessment estimates that
there will be some cost for airports to implement the service animal
relief area requirements in the final rule. The Federal Aviation
Administration (FAA) lists 387 airports in the United States. Of these,
29 are large hubs, 35 are medium hubs, 74 are small hubs, and 249 are
non-hubs, which are defined as having more than 10,000 passenger
enplanements per year but less than 0.05% of the overall total
enplanements. As we explained in the NPRM, there is no consistent
method for assigning a number of terminals to an airport given the
widely divergent plans for airports. Notwithstanding, we were able to
use the airport category defined by the FAA in terms of the number of
enplanements to estimate the number of terminals in a given airport.
Based on this system, we assume that large hubs have an average of 7
terminals; medium hubs average 5 terminals, small hubs average 3
terminals, and non-hubs average 1 terminal per airport. As a result, we
estimate that 849 terminals would be affected by this service animal
relief requirement in the final rule. We do note that this is a high
estimation given that some airports may have already installed service
animal relief areas within the sterile area of the airport; however,
because most service animal relief areas currently reside outside of
the sterile area, we expect that most of these terminals would be
impacted by the requirements in the final rule.
    The final regulatory assessment estimates that the service animal
relief area requirements will cost those 387 airports affected by the
rule approximately $88.1 million over 20 years, discounted at 7%. As
explained above, the total cost of installing service animal relief
areas varies by airport as the cost incurred by an airport will depend
upon the number of terminals in the airport. This cost estimate,
however, considers the cost of construction and maintenance of service
animal relief areas and the calculation of the amount of foregone rent
that airports may forfeit by using space in an airport terminal for
service animal relief areas that, conceivably, would have been rented
out to restaurants or other vendors. We note that the cost of foregone
rent and construction materials is also dependent upon airport size as
rent space and materials appear to be more expensive at larger
airports. This cost estimate also factors in the cost incurred by
airports from consulting with service animal training organizations on
the design, dimensions, materials, maintenance, and location of service
animal relief areas.
    While the final regulatory assessment estimates that there will be
some cost for airports to implement the service animal relief area
requirements in the final rule, the boarding lift requirement and the
captioning requirement are expected to have minimal financial impact on
airports. The requirements in the final rule related to lifts will not
require airports to purchase additional lifts because the airports with
10,000 or more enplanements will already have lifts available as a
result of the existing agreements between airports and U.S. carriers
requiring the availability of lifts at those airports.
    There is, however, a cost associated with the enabling of
captioning on airport-controlled televisions. The estimated total
present value over 20 years to enable captioning on television is
$410,840, discounted at 7%. The respective annualized value is $38,780.
This figure is based on the assumption that, initially, captioning will
need to be enabled on 100% of airport-controlled televisions; in
subsequent years, captioning will only need to be reactivated on 10%
per annum of those television in which captioning was initially
activated.

B. Executive Order 13132 (Federalism)

    This final rule has been analyzed in accordance with the principles
and criteria contained in Executive Order 13132 (``Federalism''). This
final rule does not impose any regulation that: (1) Has substantial
direct effects on the States, the relationship between the national
government and the States, or the distribution of power and
responsibilities among the various levels of government; or (2) imposes
substantial direct compliance costs on States and local governments.
Therefore, the consultation and funding requirements of Executive Order
13132 do not apply.

C. Executive Order 13084

    This final rule has been analyzed in accordance with the principles
and criteria contained in Executive Order 13175 (``Consultation and
Coordination with Indian Tribal Governments''). The funding and
consultation requirements of Executive Order 13084 do not apply because
this final rule does not significantly or uniquely affect the
communities of the Indian tribal governments and does not impose
substantial direct compliance costs.

D. Regulatory Flexibility Act

    The Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq., as amended by
the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act (SBREFA) of
1996), requires an agency to review regulations to assess their impact
on small entities, including small businesses, small nonprofit
organizations and small governmental jurisdictions. Privately owned
airports with annual revenues that do not exceed $32.5 million are
considered small businesses by the size standards created by the Small
Business Administration. Furthermore, publicly owned airports are
categorized as small entities if they are owned by a jurisdiction with
fewer than 50,000 inhabitants. In light of this standard, we estimate
that approximately 55 of the 387 airports affected by the final rule
are considered small entities. Therefore, the Department has determined
that this rule will have an impact on some small entities. However, the
Department has determined that the impact on entities

affected by the rule will not be significant. We estimate that the cost
of constructing and maintaining service animal relief areas at those 55
airports, assuming that those airports contain only 1 terminal, is
approximately $4 million over 20 years at a 7% discount rate.
Considering that the combined annual revenue of small-hub and non-hub
airports in 2013 alone was $2.4 billion, the costs associated with this
rule will not be significant.

E. Paperwork Reduction Act

    Under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (PRA), a Federal agency
may not conduct or sponsor, and a person is not required to respond to,
a collection of information unless it displays a valid control number
assigned by the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) (Pub. L. 104-13,
44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.). The Department may not impose a penalty on
persons for violating information collection requirements when an
information collection required to have a current OMB control number
does not have one.
    This final rule does not adopt any new information collection
requirements subject to the Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA).

F. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act

    The Department has determined that the requirements of Title II of
the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 do not apply to this notice.

G. National Environmental Policy Act

    The Department has analyzed the environmental impacts of this
proposed action pursuant to the National Environmental Policy Act of
1969 (NEPA) (42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq.) and has determined that it is
categorically excluded pursuant to DOT Order 5610.1C, Procedures for
Considering Environmental Impacts (44 FR 56420, Oct. 1, 1979).
Categorical exclusions are actions identified in an agency's NEPA
implementing procedures that do not normally have a significant impact
on the environment and therefore do not require either an environmental
assessment (EA) or environmental impact statement (EIS). See 40 CFR
1508.4. In analyzing the applicability of a categorical exclusion, the
agency must also consider whether extraordinary circumstances are
present that would warrant the preparation of an EA or EIS. Id.
Paragraph 3.c.6.i of DOT Order 5610.1C categorically excludes
``[a]ctions relating to consumer protection, including regulations.''
The purpose of this rulemaking to amend the Department's regulations
implementing section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act to require service
animal relief areas and captioning of televisions and audio-visual
displays. The Department does not anticipate any environmental impacts,
and there are no extraordinary circumstances present in connection with
this rulemaking.

List of Subjects in 49 CFR Part 27

    Airports, Civil rights, Individuals with disabilities, Reporting
and recordkeeping requirements.

    For the reasons set forth in the preamble, the Department of
Transportation is amending 49 CFR part 27 as follows:

PART 27--NONDISCRIMINATION ON THE BASIS OF DISABILITY IN PROGRAMS
OR ACTIVITIES RECEIVING FEDERAL FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE

0
1. The authority citation for Part 27 continues to read as follows:

    Authority:  Sec. 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, as
amended (29 U.S.C. 794); sec. 16(a) and (d) of the Federal Transit
Act of 1964, as amended (49 U.S.C. 5310(a) and (f); sec. 165(b) of
the Federal-Aid Highway Act of 1973, as amended (23 U.S.C. 142 nt.).

0
2. In Sec.  27.3, paragraph (b) is revised to read as follows:

Sec.  27.3  Applicability.

* * * * *
    (b) Design, construction, or alteration of buildings or other fixed
facilities by public entities subject to part 37 of this title shall be
in conformance with appendices B and D of 36 CFR part 1191, as modified
by appendix A to part 37 of this title. All other entities subject to
section 504 shall design, construct, or alter buildings, or other fixed
facilities, in conformance with appendices B and D of 36 CFR part 1191,
as modified by appendix A to part 37 of this title.

0
3. In Sec.  27.71, paragraphs (h) and (i) are added to read as follows:

Sec.  27.71  Airport facilities.

* * * * *
    (h) Service animal relief areas. Each airport with 10,000 or more
annual enplanements shall cooperate with airlines that own, lease, or
control terminal facilities at that airport to provide wheelchair
accessible animal relief areas for service animals that accompany
passengers departing, connecting, or arriving at the airport subject to
the following requirements:
    (1) Airports must consult with one or more service animal training
organizations regarding the design, dimensions, materials and
maintenance of service animal relief areas;
    (2) Airports must establish at least one relief area in each
airport terminal;
    (3) Airports must establish the relief area required by paragrah
(h)(2) of this section in the sterile area of each airport terminal
unless:
    (i) The Transportation Security Administration prohibits the
airport from locating a relief area in the sterile area, or
    (ii) A service animal training organization, the airport, and the
carriers in the terminal in which the relief area will be located agree
that a relief area would be better placed outside the terminal's
sterile area. In that event, the airport must retain documentation
evidencing the recommendation that the relief area be located outside
of the sterile area; and
    (4) To the extent airports have established service animal relief
areas prior to the effective date of this paragraph:
    (i) Airports that have not consulted with a service animal training
organization shall consult with one or more such organizations
regarding the sufficiency of all existing service animal relief areas,
    (ii) Airports shall meet the requirements of this section August 4,
2016.
    (i) High-contrast captioning (captioning that is at least as easy
to read as white letters on a consistent black background) on
television and audio-visual displays. This paragraph applies to
airports with 10,000 or more annual enplanements.
    (1) Airport operators must enable or ensure high-contrast
captioning at all times on all televisions and other audio-visual
displays that are capable of displaying captions and that are located
in any gate area, ticketing area, first-class or other passenger lounge
provided by a U.S. or foreign carrier, or any common area of the
terminal to which any passengers have access and that are owned,
leased, or controlled by the airport.
    (2) With respect to any televisions and other audio-visual displays
located in any gate area, ticketing area, first-class or other
passenger lounge provided by a U.S. or foreign carrier, or any common
area of the terminal to which any passengers have access that provide
passengers with safety briefings, information, or entertainment that do
not have high-contrast captioning capability, an airport operator must
replace or ensure the replacement of these devices with equipment that
does have such capability whenever such equipment is replaced in the
normal course of operations and/or whenever areas of the terminal in
which such

equipment is located undergo substantial renovation or expansion.
    (3) If an airport installs new televisions and other audio-visual
displays for passenger safety briefings, information, or entertainment
on or after October 5, 2015, such equipment must have high-contrast
captioning capability.
* * * * *

0
4. Revise Sec.  27.72 to read as follows:

Sec.  27.72  Boarding assistance for aircraft.

    (a) This section applies to airports with 10,000 or more annual
enplanements.
    (b) Airports shall, in cooperation with carriers serving the
airports, provide boarding assistance to individuals with disabilities
using mechanical lifts, ramps, or other devices that do not require
employees to lift or carry passengers up stairs. This section applies
to all aircraft with a passenger capacity of 19 or more passenger
seats, except as provided in paragraph (e) of this section. Paragraph
(c) of this section applies to U.S. carriers and paragraph (d) of this
section applies to foreign carriers.
    (c) Each airport operator shall negotiate in good faith with each
U.S. carrier serving the airport concerning the acquisition and use of
boarding assistance devices to ensure the provision of mechanical
lifts, ramps, or other devices for boarding and deplaning where level-
entry loading bridges are not available. The airport operator must have
a written, signed agreement with each U.S. carrier allocating
responsibility for meeting the boarding and deplaning assistance
requirements of this section between or among the parties. The
agreement shall be made available, on request, to representatives of
the Department of Transportation.
    (1) All airport operators and U.S. carriers involved are jointly
and severally responsible for the timely and complete implementation of
the agreement.
    (2) The agreement shall ensure that all lifts and other
accessibility equipment are maintained in proper working condition.
    (d) Each airport operator shall negotiate in good faith with each
foreign carrier serving the airport concerning the acquisition and use
of boarding assistance devices to ensure the provision of mechanical
lifts, ramps, or other devices for boarding and deplaning where level-
entry loading bridges are not available. The airport operator shall, by
no later than November 3, 2015, sign a written agreement with the
foreign carrier allocating responsibility for meeting the boarding and
deplaning assistance requirements of this section between or among the
parties. The agreement shall be made available, on request, to
representatives of the Department of Transportation.
    (1) The agreement shall provide that all actions necessary to
ensure accessible boarding and deplaning for passengers with
disabilities are completed as soon as practicable, but no later than
December 3, 2015.
    (2) All airport operators and foreign carriers involved are jointly
and severally responsible for the timely and complete implementation of
the agreement.
    (3) The agreement shall ensure that all lifts and other
accessibility equipment are maintained in proper working condition.
    (e) Boarding assistance agreements required in paragraphs (c) and
(d) of this section are not required to apply to the following
situations:
    (1) Access to float planes;
    (2) Access to the following 19-seat capacity aircraft models: The
Fairchild Metro, the Jetstream 31 and 32, the Beech 1900 (C and D
models), and the Embraer EMB-120;
    (3) Access to any other aircraft model determined by the Department
of Transportation to be unsuitable for boarding and deplaning
assistance by lift, ramp, or other suitable device. The Department will
make such a determination if it concludes that--
    (i) No existing boarding and deplaning assistance device on the
market will accommodate the aircraft without significant risk of
serious damage to the aircraft or injury to passengers or employees, or
    (ii) Internal barriers are present in the aircraft that would
preclude passengers who use a boarding or aisle chair from reaching a
non-exit row seat.
    (f) When level-entry boarding and deplaning assistance is not
required to be provided under paragraph (e) of this section, or cannot
be provided as required by paragraphs (b), (c), and (d) of this section
(e.g., because of mechanical problems with a lift), boarding assistance
shall be provided by any available means to which the passenger
consents. However, hand-carrying (i.e., directly picking up the
passenger's body in the arms of one or more carrier personnel to effect
a level change the passenger needs to enter or leave the aircraft) must
never be used, even if the passenger consents, unless this is the only
way of evacuating the individual in the event of an emergency.
    (g) In the event that airport personnel are involved in providing
boarding assistance, the airport shall ensure that they are trained to
proficiency in the use of the boarding assistance equipment used at the
airport and appropriate boarding assistance procedures that safeguard
the safety and dignity of passengers.

    Issued this day of July 29, 2015, in Washington, DC.
Anthony R. Foxx,
Secretary of Transportation.
[FR Doc. 2015-19078 Filed 8-4-15; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 4910-9X-P


[Federal Register Volume 78, Number 205 (Wednesday, October 23, 2013)]
[Notices]
[Pages 63172-63174]
[FR Doc No: 2013-24827]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Docket No. IC13-22-000]

Commission Information Collection Activities (FERC-733); Comment
Request

AGENCY: Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, DOE.

ACTION: Notice of information collection and request for comments.

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

SUMMARY: In compliance with the requirements of the Paperwork Reduction
Act of 1995, 44 U.S.C. 3506(c)(2)(A), the Federal Energy Regulatory
Commission (Commission or FERC) is soliciting public comment on the
proposed information collection FERC-733, Demand Response/Time-Based
Rate Programs and Advanced Metering.

DATES: Comments on the collection of information are due December 23,
2013.

ADDRESSES: You may submit comments (identified by Docket No. IC13-22-
000) by either of the following methods:
     eFiling at Commission's Web site: http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/efiling.asp
     Mail/Hand Delivery/Courier: Federal Energy Regulatory
Commission, Secretary of the Commission, 888 First Street NE.,
Washington, DC 20426.
    Instructions: All submissions must be formatted and filed in
accordance with submission guidelines at: http://www.ferc.gov/help/submission-guide.asp. For user assistance contact FERC Online Support
by email at<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or by phone at:<PHONE_NUMBER>
(toll-free), or<PHONE_NUMBER> for TTY.
    Docket: Users interested in receiving automatic notification of
activity in this docket or in viewing/downloading comments and
issuances in this docket may do so at http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/docs-filing.asp.

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

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
    Title: FERC-733, Demand Response/Time-Based Rate Programs and
Advanced Metering
    OMB Control No.: To be determined
    Type of Request: Approval of a new survey of demand response and
time-based rate programs and tariffs, and advanced metering that
replaces the FERC-731 survey.
    Abstract: Section 1252(e)(3) of the Energy Policy Act of 2005,\1\
requires the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC or Commission)
to prepare and publish an annual report, by appropriate region, that
assesses demand response resources, including those available from all
consumer classes. Specifically, EPAct 2005 Section 1252(e)(3) requires
that the Commission identify and review:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ Pub. L. 109-58, Sec.  1252(e)(3), 119 Stat. 594, 966 (2005)
(EPAct 2005).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    (A) Saturation and penetration rate of advanced meters and
communications technologies, devices and systems;
    (B) Existing demand response programs and time-based rate programs;
    (C) The annual resource contribution of demand resources;
    (D) The potential for demand response as a quantifiable, reliable
resource for regional planning purposes;
    (E) Steps taken to ensure that, in regional transmission planning
and operations, demand resources are provided equitable treatment as a
quantifiable, reliable resource relative to the resource obligations of
any load-serving entity, transmission provider, or transmitting party;
and
    (F) Regulatory barriers to improved customer participation in
demand response, peak reduction and critical period pricing programs.
    In 2006 and 2008, the Commission designed and used Office of
Management and Budget (OMB) approved collections FERC-727, Demand
Response and Time Based Rate Programs Survey (OMB Control No. 1902-
0214), and FERC-728, Advanced Metering Survey (OMB Control No. 1902-
0213), to collect and convey to Congress the requested demand response
and advanced metering information. In 2010 and 2012, the Commission
designed and used OMB approved collection FERC-731, Demand Response/
Time-Based Rate Programs and Advanced Metering (OMB Control No. 1902-
0251).
    For 2014 and 2016 the Commission proposes to continue to utilize a
voluntary survey (FERC-733) that incorporates changes to the previously
approved FERC-731 to improve data quality and reduce respondent burden.
The Commission proposes to (1) align its collection of Advanced
Metering Infrastructure (AMI) installations with that of the Energy
Information Administration (EIA), (2) consolidate several questions,
(3) eliminate some of the data collected on the FERC-731, (4) include
three additional categories regarding customer's methods of accessing
data, and (5) request additional details concerning retail demand
response programs that participate in wholesale programs.\2\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \2\ The additional details of the retail demand response
programs that participate in wholesale demand response programs is
necessary to identify the potential peak reductions that are solely
wholesale in nature and not associated with specific demand response
efforts at the retail program level.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Commission proposes to revise the structure of its question on
advanced meters to comport with recent changes approved by OMB for the
EIA in Form EIA-861, Schedule 6, Part D, ``Advanced Metering and
Customer Communication.'' The Commission also proposes to eliminate
certain data elements requested by the 2012 FERC-731 including: the
respondents' number of customers by customer sector in Question 3, and
the request for the respondents' long-range (4 to 6 years) plans for
demand response programs in Question 5.
    The Commission believes that the above changes should result in a
more accurate and streamlined data collection that will reduce
respondent burden.
    The Commission investigated alternatives, including using data from
the North American Electric Reliability Corporation (NERC) and EIA, to
fielding and collecting data using a FERC designed survey. However, as
explained below, the data is not currently collected or cannot be
obtained by the Commission in time to complete the 2014 report to
Congress.
    NERC, as the Electric Reliability Organization for the United
States \3\ as certified by the Commission, has begun to collect demand
response data on dispatchable and non-dispatchable resources that it
needs to conduct its reliability work. Reporting demand response
information in the Demand Response Availability Data System (DADS) is
mandatory for all entities who are part of NERC's functional model. The
Demand Response Data Task Force at NERC developed DADS to collect
demand response program information. DADS currently collects
information on dispatchable and controllable demand response resources.
DADS does not currently collect and report information on several key
demand response program types including economic, and time-based rate
programs. Because DADS does not currently collect and report data which
is specifically required by EPAct 2005, the system cannot be relied
upon for FERC's reporting purposes. EPAct 2005 specifically requires
FERC to identify and review time-based rate programs.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ North American Electric Reliability Corp., 116 FERC ]
61,062, order on reh'g & compliance, 117 FERC ] 61,126 (2006),
appeal docketed sub nom. Alcoa, Inc. v. FERC, No. 06-1426 (D.C. Cir.
Dec. 29, 2006).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    NERC plans to require its registered entities to report information
on these other demand response program types in the future, but it is
unclear at this time when NERC may begin to collect these additional
data or whether the new data will be available or suitable for FERC
staff to use to prepare their reports to Congress.
    The EIA collects aggregated information on energy efficiency and
load management as well as advanced metering data in its EIA-861,
``Annual Electric Power Industry Report.'' The data collected in this
survey does not identify specific demand response programs or time-
based rate programs, but it does support the Commission's advanced
metering data needs. Unfortunately, the finalized advanced metering
data for 2013 will not be

available until the fourth quarter of 2014 under EIA's proposed
schedule. Therefore, the EIA data will not be available to the
Commission in time to report 2013 findings in calendar year 2014.
    Because these alternatives will not provide data or will not
provide data in a timely manner for the 2014 report, the Commission
proposes to conduct a survey (attached in the docket) with a response
deadline of May 1, 2014. This survey has been designed to be consistent
with the NERC's data collection such that, in future years, the
Commission may be able to use the NERC data when it becomes available,
phase-out the FERC demand response survey and still comply with EPAct
2005 Section 1252(e)(3).
    FERC staff has designed a survey that will impose minimal burden on
respondents by providing respondents with an easy-to-complete, fillable
form that will include such user friendly features as pre-populated
fields and drop-down menus, make use of the data that is becoming
available from reliable sources, and provide it with the information
necessary to draft and file the report that is required by Congress.
The survey can be electronically filed. A paper version of the survey
will be available for those who are unable to file electronically.
    Access to the Proposed Materials: The survey form, instructions,
and glossary are attached to this docket, but they are not being
published in the Federal Register.\4\ Interested parties can see the
materials electronically as part of this notice in FERC's eLibrary
(http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/elibrary.asp) by searching Docket No.
IC13-22-000.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ The attached form is for illustrative purposes only and does
not include all the interactive features of the actual form.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Interested parties may also request paper or electronic copies of
any of the materials by contacting FERC's Public Reference Room by
email at<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or by telephone at (202) 502-
8371
    Type of Respondents: The Commission is proposing to collect the
demand response and advanced metering information via a voluntary
survey from the nation's entities that serve wholesale and retail
customers. The information will be used to draft and file the report
that is required by Congress. Industry cooperation is important for us
to obtain as accurate and up-to-date information as possible to respond
to Congress, as well as to provide information to states and other
market participants. We, therefore, strongly encourage all potential
survey respondents to complete the survey.
    Estimate of Annual Burden: \5\ The Commission estimates the total
Public Reporting Burden for this information collection as:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ The Commission defines burden as the total time, effort, or
financial resources expended by persons to generate, maintain,
retain, or disclose or provide information to or for a Federal
agency. For further explanation of what is included in the
information collection burden, reference 5 Code of Federal
Regulations 1320.3.

                                        FERC-733--Demand Response/Time-Based Rate Programs and Advanced Metering
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                Number of                      Average  burden
                                                                        Number of      responses per   Total number of     hours per     Estimated total
                                                                       respondents       respondent       responses         response        burden \6\
                                                                                (A)              (B)        (A)x(B)=(C)            (D)                (C)x(D)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Entities that serve wholesale and retail customers.................           3,400                1            3,400              3.5           11,900
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The total estimated cost burden to respondents for the 2014 survey
is $669,613 (11,900 hours/year x $56.27/hour \7\ = $669,613. The
estimated cost per respondent for the survey is $196.95 (3.5 hours/
survey x $56.27/hour = $196.95.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ This collection occurs every two years and OMB approval is
typically for three years. As such, it is likely that there will be
two surveys completed during the time this form is approved. When we
submit this collection to OMB for approval (after the comment
period) we will likely calculate the total burden for three years
(two surveys) and average the total burden over those three years.
    \7\ This figure is based on the average salary plus benefits for
a management analyst (NAICS Occupation Code 13-1111). We obtained
wage and benefit information from the Bureau of Labor Statistics
(see http://bls.gov/oes/current/naics2_22.htm and http://www.bls.gov/news.release/ecec.nr0.htm).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

    Dated: September 26, 2013.
Nathaniel J. Davis, Sr.,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2013-24827 Filed 10-22-13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register: October 13, 2005 (Volume 70, Number 197)]
[Notices]
[Page 59740]
[DOCID:fr13oc05-75]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Docket No. RP05-692-000]

Dominion Transmission, Inc.; Notice of Proposed Changes in FERC
Gas Tariff

October 5, 2005.

    Take notice that on September 30, 2005, Dominion Transmission, Inc.
(DTI) tendered for filing as part of its FERC Gas Tariff, Third Revised
Volume No. 1, the following tariff sheets, to become effective November
1, 2005:

Twenty-Sixth Revised Sheet No. 31,
Second Revised Sheet No. 31A,
Twenty-Ninth Revised Sheet No. 32,
Second Revised Sheet No. 32A,
Sixteenth Revised Sheet No. 34,
First Revised Sheet No. 34A,
Twenty-Second Revised Sheet No. 35,
Second Revised Sheet No. 35A,
Fourteenth Revised Sheet No. 39,
Second Revised Sheet No. 39A.

    DTI states that the purpose of this filing is to update DTI's
effective Electric Power Cost Adjustment (EPCA), through the mechanism
described in section 17 of the general terms and conditions of DTI's
tariff.
    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 and 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 in accordance with the provisions of
Section 154.210 of the Commission's regulations (18 CFR 154.210).
Anyone filing an intervention or protest must serve a copy of that
document on the Applicant. Anyone filing an intervention or protest on
or before the intervention or protest date need not serve motions to
intervene or protests on persons other than the Applicant.
    The Commission encourages electronic submission of protests and
interventions in lieu of paper using the ``eFiling'' link at http://www.ferc.gov.
 Persons unable to file electronically should submit an

original and 14 copies of the protest or intervention to the Federal
Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street, NE., Washington, DC
20426.
    This filing is accessible on-line at http://www.ferc.gov, using the

``eLibrary'' link and is available for review in the Commission's
Public Reference Room in Washington, DC. There is an ``eSubscription''
link on the Web site that enables subscribers to receive email
notification when a document is added to a subscribed docket(s). For
assistance with any FERC Online service, please e-mail
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or call<PHONE_NUMBER> (toll free). For

TTY, call<PHONE_NUMBER>.

Magalie R. Salas,
Secretary.
 [FR Doc. E5-5642 Filed 10-12-05; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6717-01-P