[Federal Register Volume 83, Number 10 (Tuesday, January 16, 2018)]
[Notices]
[Pages 2244-2246]
[FR Doc No: 2018-00534]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-82477; File No. SR-CboeBYX-2017-005]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; Cboe BYX Exchange, Inc.; Notice of
Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of a Proposed Rule Change Related to
Transaction Fees

January 9, 2018.
    Pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934
(the ``Act''),\1\ and Rule 19b-4 thereunder,\2\ notice is hereby given
that on December 27, 2017, Cboe BYX Exchange, Inc. (the ``Exchange'' or
``BYX'') filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission
(``Commission'') the proposed rule change as described in Items I, II
and III below, which Items have been prepared by the Exchange. The
Exchange has designated the proposed rule change as one establishing or
changing a member due, fee, or other charge imposed by the Exchange
under Section 19(b)(3)(A)(ii) of the Act \3\ and Rule 19b-4(f)(2)
thereunder,\4\ which renders the proposed rule change effective upon
filing with the Commission. The Commission is publishing this notice to
solicit comments on the proposed rule change from interested persons.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1).
    \2\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4.
    \3\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A)(ii).
    \4\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(2).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

    The Exchange filed a proposal to amend the fee schedule applicable
to Members \5\ and non-Members of the Exchange pursuant to BYX Rules
15.1(a) and (c).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ The term ``Member'' is defined as ``any registered broker or
dealer that has been admitted to membership in the Exchange.'' See
Exchange Rule 1.5(n).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The text of the proposed rule change is available at the Exchange's
website at www.markets.cboe.com, at the principal office of the
Exchange, and at the Commission's Public Reference Room.

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

    In its filing with the Commission, the Exchange included statements
concerning the purpose of and basis for the proposed rule change and
discussed any comments it received on the proposed rule change. The
text of these statements may be examined at the places specified in
Item IV below. The Exchange has prepared summaries, set forth in
Sections A, B, and C below, of the most significant parts of such
statements.

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

1. Purpose
    As further described below, the Exchange proposes to amend its fee
schedule to: (i) Modify its standard rebate to remove liquidity
yielding fee codes BB,\6\ N,\7\ and W; \8\ (ii) modify its standard fee
to add liquidity yielding fee codes B,\9\ V \10\ and Y; \11\ and (iii)
adopt a new tier under footnote 1, Add/Remove Volume Tiers.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ Fee code BB is appended to orders that remove liquidity from
BYX (Tape B). See the Exchange's fee schedule available at http://markets.cboe.com/us/equities/membership/fee_schedule/byx/.
    \7\ Fee code N is appended to orders that remove liquidity from
BYX (Tape C). Id.
    \8\ Fee code W is appended to orders that remove liquidity from
BYX (Tape A). Id.
    \9\ Fee code B is appended to displayed orders that add
liquidity to BYX (Tape B). Id.
    \10\ Fee code V is appended to displayed orders that add
liquidity to BYX (Tape A). Id.
    \11\ Fee code Y is appended to displayed orders that add
liquidity to BYX (Tape C). Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Standard Rebates to Remove Liquidity
    The Exchange currently provides a standard rebate of $0.0008 per
share for orders that remove liquidity from the Exchange in securities
priced at or above $1.00. The Exchange appends fee codes W, BB and N
for orders removing liquidity in Tape A, Tape B, and Tape C securities,
respectively. The Exchange proposes to reduce the standard rebate
provided for orders yielding these fee codes to a rebate of $0.0005 per
share. In connection with this change, the Exchange proposes to modify
the Standard Rates chart contained on the fee schedule to reflect the
new standard rebate of $0.0005 per share to remove liquidity.
Standard Fee To Add Liquidity
    The Exchange currently charges a standard fee of $0.0018 per share
for orders that add liquidity to the Exchange in securities priced at
or above $1.00. The Exchange appends fee codes V, B, and Y for orders
adding liquidity in Tape A, Tape B, and Tape C securities,
respectively. The Exchange proposes to increase the standard fee
charged for orders yielding these fee codes to a fee of $0.0019 per
share. In connection with this change, the Exchange proposes to modify
the Standard Rates chart contained on the fee schedule to reflect the
new standard fee of $0.0019 per share to add liquidity.
New Remove Volume Tier
    The Exchange currently offers six [sic] tiers under footnote 1 that
offer reduced fees for displayed orders that add liquidity yielding fee
codes B, V and Y, and an enhanced rebate for orders that remove
liquidity yielding fee codes BB, N and W, as described above. The
Exchange proposes to add a new tier under footnote 1, to be known as
Tier 9, under which a Member would receive an enhanced rebate of
$0.0017 per share on orders that yield fee codes BB, N and W, where a
Member has: (i) A Step-Up Remove TCV\12\ from December 2017 equal to or
greater than 0.075%; and (ii) an ADAV \13\ equal to or greater than
0.10% of the TCV.\14\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \12\ ``Step-Up Remove TCV'' means remove ADV as a percentage of
TCV in the relevant baseline month subtracted from current remove
ADV as a percentage of TCV. See the Exchange's fee schedule
available at http://markets.cboe.com/us/equities/membership/fee_schedule/byx/.
    \13\ ``ADAV'' means average daily volume calculated as the
number of shares added per day and ``ADV'' means average daily
volume calculated as the number of shares added or removed,
combined, per day. ADAV and ADV are calculated on a monthly basis.
Id.
    \14\ ``TCV'' means total consolidated volume calculated as the
volume reported by all exchanges and trade reporting facilities to a
consolidated transaction reporting plan for the month for which the
fees apply. Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Implementation Date
    The Exchange proposes to implement the above changes to its fee
schedule on January 2, 2018.
2. Statutory Basis
    The Exchange believes that the proposed rule change is consistent
with the objectives of Section 6 of the Act,\15\ in general, and
furthers the objectives of Section 6(b)(4),\16\ in particular, as it is
designed to provide for the equitable allocation of reasonable dues,
fees and other charges among its Members and other persons using its
facilities.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \15\ 15 U.S.C. 78f.
    \16\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(4).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange believes that proposed changes to fee codes BB, N, and
W represent an equitable allocation of reasonable dues, fees, and other
charges because the Exchange's standard rebate for removing liquidity
continues to be higher than that provided by other exchanges. For
example, Nasdaq BX, Inc. (``Nasdaq BX'') provides a standard rebate of
$0.0001 per share for orders that remove liquidity.\17\ The Exchange
further believes that the standard rebate for fee codes BB, N, and W
remains equitably allocated and not unreasonably discriminatory because
such rebate is provided to all Members unless they qualify for enhanced
rebates based on other factors.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \17\ See the Nasdaq BX fee schedule available at http://www.nasdaqtrader.com/Trader.aspx?id=bx_pricing.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange believes that proposed changes to fee codes B, V, and
Y represent an equitable allocation of reasonable dues, fees, and other
charges because the Exchange's standard fee for adding liquidity
continues to be lower than that provided by other exchanges. For
example, Nasdaq BX charges a standard fee of $0.0020 per share for
orders that remove liquidity.\18\ The Exchange further believes that
the standard fee for fee codes B, V, and Y remains equitably allocated
and not unreasonably discriminatory because such fee is provided to all
Members unless they qualify for reduced fees based on other factors.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \18\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange believes that the proposed Tier 9 to be added to
footnote 1 is equitably allocated and reasonable because it will reward
a Member's growth pattern on the Exchange and such increased volume
will allow the Exchange to continue to provide and potentially expand
its incentive programs. The Exchange further believes that the proposed
tier is reasonable, fair and equitable because the liquidity from the
proposed change would benefit all investors by deepening the Exchange's
liquidity pool, offering additional flexibility for all investors to
enjoy cost savings, supporting the quality of price discovery,
promoting market transparency and improving investor protection. The
Exchange also believes the proposed rebate of $0.0017 per share for
Tier 9 is reasonable in that it is equivalent to the top tier rebate to
remove liquidity provided by Nasdaq BX.\19\ The proposed pricing
structure is also not unfairly discriminatory in that it is available
to all Members.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \19\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In addition, volume-based fees such as that proposed herein have
been widely adopted by exchanges and are equitable because they are
open to all Members on an equal basis and provide

additional benefits or discounts that are reasonably related to: (i)
The value to an exchange's market quality; (ii) associated higher
levels of market activity, such as higher levels of liquidity provision
and/or growth patterns; and (iii) the introduction of higher volumes of
orders into the price and volume discovery processes. The Exchange
believes that the proposed tier is a reasonable, fair and equitable,
and not an unfairly discriminatory allocation of fees and rebates,
because it will provide Members with an additional incentive to reach
certain thresholds on the Exchange.

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

    The Exchange does not believe that the proposed rule change will
impose any burden on competition not necessary or appropriate in
furtherance of the purposes of the Act. The Exchange does not believe
that this change represents a significant departure from previous
pricing offered by the Exchange or from pricing offered by the
Exchange's competitors. The proposed rates would apply uniformly to all
Members, and Members may opt to disfavor the Exchange's pricing if they
believe that alternatives offer them better value. Accordingly, the
Exchange does not believe that the proposed changes will impair the
ability of Members or competing venues to maintain their competitive
standing in the financial markets. Further, excessive fees would serve
to impair an exchange's ability to compete for order flow and members
rather than burdening competition. The Exchange believes that its
proposal would not burden intramarket competition because the proposed
rate would apply uniformly to all Members.

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

    The Exchange has not solicited, and does not intend to solicit,
comments on this proposed rule change. The Exchange has not received
any unsolicited written comments from Members or other interested
parties.

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

    The foregoing rule change has become effective pursuant to Section
19(b)(3)(A) of the Act \20\ and paragraph (f) of Rule 19b-4
thereunder.\21\ At any time within 60 days of the filing of the
proposed rule change, the Commission summarily may temporarily suspend
such rule change if it appears to the Commission that such action is
necessary or appropriate in the public interest, for the protection of
investors, or otherwise in furtherance of the purposes of the Act.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \20\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A).
    \21\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

IV. Solicitation of Comments

    Interested persons are invited to submit written data, views, and
arguments concerning the foregoing, including whether the proposed rule
change is consistent with the Act. Comments may be submitted by any of
the following methods:

Electronic Comments

     Use the Commission's internet comment form (http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml); or
     Send an email to [email protected]. Please include
File Number SR-CboeBYX-2017-005 on the subject line.

Paper Comments

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

All submissions should refer to File Number SR-CboeBYX-2017-005. This
file number should be included on the subject line if email is used. To
help the Commission process and review your comments more efficiently,
please use only one method. The Commission will post all comments on
the Commission's internet website (http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml).
Copies of the submission, all subsequent amendments, all written
statements with respect to the proposed rule change that are filed with
the Commission, and all written communications relating to the proposed
rule change between the Commission and any person, other than those
that may be withheld from the public in accordance with the provisions
of 5 U.S.C. 552, will be available for website viewing and printing in
the Commission's Public Reference Room, 100 F Street NE, Washington, DC
20549, on official business days between the hours of 10:00 a.m. and
3:00 p.m. Copies of the filing also will be available for inspection
and copying at the principal office of the Exchange. All comments
received will be posted without change. Persons submitting comments are
cautioned that we do not redact or edit personal identifying
information from comment submissions. You should submit only
information that you wish to make available publicly. All submissions
should refer to File Number SR-CboeBYX-2017-005 and should be submitted
on or before February 6, 2018.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \22\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12).

    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets,
pursuant to delegated authority.\22\
Eduardo A. Aleman,
Assistant Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2018-00534 Filed 1-12-18; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


[Federal Register: May 20, 2008 (Volume 73, Number 98)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Page 29089-29091]
[DOCID:fr20my08-15]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. FAA-2008-0558; Directorate Identifier 2007-NM-365-AD]
RIN 2120-AA64

Airworthiness Directives; Airbus Model A318, A319, A320, and A321
Airplanes

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM).

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

SUMMARY: We propose to adopt a new airworthiness directive (AD) for the
products listed above. This proposed AD results from mandatory
continuing airworthiness information (MCAI) originated by an aviation
authority of another country to identify and correct an unsafe
condition on an aviation product. The MCAI describes the unsafe
condition as:

    Some operators have reported occurrences of loss of the AC BUS 1
with subsequent loss of the AC ESS BUS and DC ESS BUS, resulting in
the loss of 5 upper Display Units and the loss of integral lighting.
In this situation, flight crew[s] have reported concerns in reading
the standby instruments when the DOME lights were selected to OFF.
    This situation, if not corrected, could increase the workload of
the flight crew * * *.

* * * * *
    The unsafe condition is reduced ability of the flightcrew to
maintain the safe flight and landing of the airplane in adverse
operating conditions. The proposed AD would require actions that are
intended to address the unsafe condition described in the MCAI.

DATES: We must receive comments on this proposed AD by June 19, 2008.

ADDRESSES: You may send comments by any of the following methods:
     Federal eRulemaking Portal: Go to http://
www.regulations.gov. Follow the instructions for submitting comments.
     Fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>.
     Mail: U.S. Department of Transportation, Docket
Operations, M-30, West Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140, 1200 New
Jersey Avenue, SE., Washington, DC 20590.
     Hand Delivery: U.S. Department of Transportation, Docket
Operations, M-30, West Building Ground Floor, Room W12-40, 1200 New
Jersey Avenue, SE., Washington, DC, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday
through Friday, except Federal holidays.

Examining the AD Docket

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

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Tim Dulin, Aerospace Engineer,
International Branch, ANM-116, Transport Airplane Directorate, FAA,
1601 Lind Avenue, SW., Renton, Washington 98057-3356; telephone (425)
227-2141; fax<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Comments Invited

    We invite you to send any written relevant data, views, or
arguments about this proposed AD. Send your comments to an address
listed under the ADDRESSES section. Include ``Docket No. FAA-2008-0558;
Directorate Identifier 2007-NM-365-AD'' at the beginning of your
comments. We specifically invite comments on the overall regulatory,
economic, environmental, and energy aspects of this proposed AD. We
will consider all comments received by the closing date and may amend
this proposed AD based on those comments.
    We will post all comments we receive, without change, to http://
www.regulations.gov, including any personal information you provide. We
will also post a report summarizing each substantive verbal contact we
receive about this proposed AD.

Discussion

    The European Aviation Safety Agency (EASA), which is the Technical
Agent for the Member States of the European Community, has issued
Airworthiness Directive 2007-0286, dated November 14, 2007 (referred to
after this as ``the MCAI''), to correct an unsafe condition for the
specified products. The MCAI states:

    Some operators have reported occurrences of loss of the AC BUS 1
with subsequent loss of the AC ESS BUS and DC ESS BUS, resulting in
the loss of 5 upper Display Units and the loss of integral lighting.
In this situation, flight crews[s] have reported concerns in reading
the standby instruments when the DOME lights were selected to OFF.
    This situation, if not corrected, could increase the workload of
the flight crew * * *.
    This Airworthiness Directive (AD) mandates the modification of
the electrical supply logic by adding a back-up supply on the
battery hot bus for the under glare shield flood lighting.

The unsafe condition is reduced ability of the flightcrew to maintain
the safe flight and landing of the airplane in adverse operating
conditions. You may obtain further information by examining the MCAI in
the AD docket.

Relevant Service Information

    Airbus has issued Service Bulletin A320-33-1057, dated May 11,
2007. The actions described in this service information are intended to
correct the unsafe condition identified in the MCAI.

FAA's Determination and Requirements of This Proposed AD

    This product has been approved by the aviation authority of another
country, and is approved for operation in the United States. Pursuant
to our bilateral agreement with the State of Design Authority, we have
been notified of the unsafe condition described in the MCAI and service
information referenced above. We are proposing this AD because we
evaluated all pertinent information and determined an unsafe condition
exists and is likely to exist or develop on other products of the same
type design.

Differences Between This AD and the MCAI or Service Information

    We have reviewed the MCAI and related service information and, in
general, agree with their substance. But we might have found it
necessary to use different words from those in the MCAI to ensure the
AD is clear for U.S. operators and is enforceable. In making these
changes, we do not intend to differ substantively from the information
provided in the MCAI and related service information.
    We might also have proposed different actions in this AD from those
in the MCAI in order to follow FAA policies. Any such differences are
highlighted in a NOTE within the proposed AD.

Costs of Compliance

    Based on the service information, we estimate that this proposed AD
would affect about 550 products of U.S. registry. We also estimate that
it would take about 30 work-hours per product to comply with the basic
requirements of this proposed AD. The average labor rate is $80 per
work-hour. Required parts would cost about $0 per product. Where the
service information lists required parts costs that are covered under
warranty, we have assumed that there will be no charge for these costs.
As we do not control warranty coverage for affected parties, some
parties may incur costs higher than estimated here. Based on these
figures, we estimate the cost of the proposed AD on U.S. operators to
be $1,320,000, or $2,400 per product.

Authority for This Rulemaking

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

Regulatory Findings

    We determined that this proposed AD would not have federalism
implications under Executive Order 13132. This proposed AD would not
have a substantial direct effect on the States, on the relationship
between the national Government and the States, or on the distribution
of power and responsibilities among the various levels of government.
    For the reasons discussed above, I certify this proposed
regulation:
    1. Is not a ``significant regulatory action'' under Executive Order
12866;
    2. Is not a ``significant rule'' under the DOT Regulatory Policies
and Procedures (44 FR 11034, February 26, 1979); and
    3. Will not have a significant economic impact, positive or
negative, on a substantial number of small entities under the criteria
of the Regulatory Flexibility Act.
    We prepared a regulatory evaluation of the estimated costs to
comply with this proposed AD and placed it in the AD docket.

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39

    Air transportation, Aircraft, Aviation safety, Safety.

The Proposed Amendment

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

PART 39--AIRWORTHINESS DIRECTIVES

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

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

Sec.  39.13  [Amended]

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

Airbus: Docket No. FAA-2008-0558; Directorate Identifier 2007-NM-
365-AD.

Comments Due Date

    (a) We must receive comments by June 19, 2008.

Affected ADs

    (b) None.

Applicability

    (c) This AD applies to Airbus Model A318, A319, A320, and A321
airplanes, certificated in any category; all certified models; all
serial numbers; on which classical standby instruments have been
installed per AIRBUS Modification 20011 or 21999 in production, or
per Airbus Service Bulletin A320-34-1280 in service; excluding
airplanes identified in paragraphs (c)(1) or (c)(2) of this AD.
    (1) Airplanes on which ISIS equipment was installed per AIRBUS
Modification 27620 in production or per Airbus Service Bulletin
A320-34-1261 or Airbus Service Bulletin A320-34-1372 in service.
    (2) Airplanes on which AIRBUS Modification 37329 or 37330 was
installed in production or per Airbus Service Bulletin A320-33-1057
in service.

Subject

    (d) Air Transport Association (ATA) of America Code 33: Lights.

Reason

    (e) The mandatory continuing airworthiness information (MCAI)
states:
    Some operators have reported occurrences of loss of the AC BUS 1
with subsequent loss of the AC ESS BUS and DC ESS BUS, resulting in
the loss of 5 upper Display Units and the loss of integral lighting.
In this situation, flight crews[s] have reported concerns in reading
the standby instruments when the DOME lights were selected to OFF.
    This situation, if not corrected, could increase the workload of
the flight crew * * *.
    This Airworthiness Directive (AD) mandates the modification of
the electrical supply logic by adding a back-up supply on the
battery hot bus for the under glare shield flood lighting.
    The unsafe condition is reduced ability of the flightcrew to
maintain the safe flight and landing of the airplane in adverse
operating conditions.

Actions and Compliance

    (f) Within 42 months after the effective date of this AD, unless
already done: Modify the electrical supply logic of the under glare
shield flood lighting in accordance with the instructions given in
Airbus Service Bulletin A320-33-1057, dated May 11, 2007.

FAA AD Differences

    Note: This AD differs from the MCAI and/or service information
as follows: No differences.

Other FAA AD Provisions

    (g) The following provisions also apply to this AD:
    (1) Alternative Methods of Compliance (AMOCs): The Manager,
International Branch, ANM-116, FAA, has the authority to approve
AMOCs for this AD, if requested using the procedures found in 14 CFR
39.19. Send information to ATTN: Tim Dulin, Aerospace Engineer,
International Branch, ANM-116, Transport Airplane Directorate, FAA,
1601 Lind Avenue, SW., Renton, Washington 98057-3356; telephone
(425) 227-2141; fax<PHONE_NUMBER>. Before using any approved AMOC
on any airplane to which the AMOC applies, notify your appropriate
principal inspector (PI) in the FAA Flight Standards District Office
(FSDO), or lacking a PI, your local FSDO.
    (2) Airworthy Product: For any requirement in this AD to obtain
corrective actions from a manufacturer or other source, use these
actions if they are FAA-approved. Corrective actions are considered
FAA-approved if they are approved by the State of Design Authority
(or their delegated agent). You are required to assure the product
is airworthy before it is returned to service.

    (3) Reporting Requirements: For any reporting requirement in
this AD, under the provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act, the
Office of Management and Budget (OMB) has approved the information
collection requirements and has assigned OMB Control Number 2120-
0056.

Related Information

    (h) Refer to MCAI European Aviation Safety Agency Airworthiness
Directive 2007-0286, dated November 14, 2007, and Airbus Service
Bulletin A320-33-1057, dated May 11, 2007, for related information.

    Issued in Renton, Washington, on May 9, 2008.
Michael J. Kaszycki,
Acting Manager, Transport Airplane Directorate, Aircraft Certification
Service.
 [FR Doc. E8-11284 Filed 5-19-08; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


[Federal Register Volume 77, Number 156 (Monday, August 13, 2012)]
[Notices]
[Pages 48166-48167]
[FR Doc No: 2012-19714]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Federal Emergency Management Agency

[Internal Agency Docket No. FEMA-4067-DR; Docket ID FEMA-2012-0002]

Colorado; Amendment No. 2 to Notice of a Major Disaster
Declaration

AGENCY: Federal Emergency Management Agency, DHS.

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: This notice amends the notice of a major disaster declaration
for the State of Colorado (FEMA-4067-DR), dated June 28, 2012, and
related determinations.

DATES: Effective Date: August 6, 2012.

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

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The notice of a major disaster declaration
for the State of Colorado is hereby amended to include the Hazard
Mitigation Grant Program for the following areas among those areas
determined to have been adversely affected by the event declared a
major disaster by the President in his declaration of June 28, 2012.

    All counties in the State of Colorado are eligible to apply for
assistance under the Hazard Mitigation Grant Program.

(The following Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance Numbers (CFDA)
are to be used for reporting and drawing funds: 97.030, Community
Disaster Loans; 97.031, Cora

Brown Fund; 97.032, Crisis Counseling; 97.033, Disaster Legal
Services; 97.034, Disaster Unemployment Assistance (DUA); 97.046,
Fire Management Assistance Grant; 97.048, Disaster Housing
Assistance to Individuals and Households In Presidentially Declared
Disaster Areas; 97.049, Presidentially Declared Disaster
Assistance--Disaster Housing Operations for Individuals and
Households; 97.050, Presidentially Declared Disaster Assistance to
Individuals and Households--Other Needs; 97.036, Disaster Grants--
Public Assistance (Presidentially Declared Disasters); 97.039,
Hazard Mitigation Grant.)

W. Craig Fugate,
Administrator, Federal Emergency Management Agency.
[FR Doc. 2012-19714 Filed 8-10-12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 9111-23-P


[Federal Register Volume 87, Number 130 (Friday, July 8, 2022)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 40755-40759]
[FR Doc No: 2022-14428]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. FAA-2022-0813; Project Identifier MCAI-2021-01316-A]
RIN 2120-AA64

Airworthiness Directives; Vulcanair S.p.A. Airplanes

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM).

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

SUMMARY: The FAA proposes to adopt a new airworthiness directive (AD)
for all Vulcanair S.p.A. Model P.68, P.68B, P.68C, P.68C-TC, P.68
``Observer,'' P.68TC ``Observer,'' P.68 ``Observer 2,'' and P.68R
airplanes. This proposed AD results from mandatory continuing
airworthiness information (MCAI) originated by an aviation authority of
another country to identify and correct an unsafe condition on an
aviation product. The MCAI identifies the unsafe condition as corrosion
causing failure of the upper rudder hinge. This proposed AD would
require repetitively inspecting the upper and lower rudder hinges for
corrosion, cracking, or damage, and depending on the inspection
results, taking corrective action. The FAA is proposing this AD to
address the unsafe condition on these products.

DATES: The FAA must receive comments on this proposed AD by August 22,
2022.

ADDRESSES: You may send comments, using the procedures found in 14 CFR
11.43 and 11.45, by any of the following methods:
     Federal eRulemaking Portal: Go to https://www.regulations.gov. Follow the instructions for submitting comments.
     Fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>.
     Mail: U.S. Department of Transportation, Docket
Operations, M-30, West Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140, 1200 New
Jersey Avenue SE, Washington, DC 20590.
     Hand Delivery: Deliver to Mail address above between 9
a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays.
    For service information identified in this NPRM, contact Vulcanair
S.p.A., Fulvio Oloferni, via Giovanni Pascoli, 7, 80026 Naples, Italy;
phone: +39 081 5918 135; email: [email protected]; website:
https://www.vulcanair.com. You may view this service information at the
FAA, Airworthiness Products Section, Operational Safety Branch, 901
Locust, Kansas City, MO 64106. For information on the availability of
this material at the FAA, call<PHONE_NUMBER>.

Examining the AD Docket

    You may examine the AD docket at https://www.regulations.gov by
searching for and locating Docket No. FAA-2022-0813; or in person at
Docket Operations between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday,
except Federal holidays. The AD docket contains this NPRM, the MCAI,
any comments received, and other information. The street address for
Docket Operations is listed above.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: John DeLuca, Aviation Safety Engineer,
General Aviation & Rotorcraft Section, International Validation Branch,
FAA, 1600 Stewart Avenue, Suite 410, Westbury, NY 11590; phone: (516)
228-7369; email: [email protected].

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Comments Invited

    The FAA invites you to send any written relevant data, views, or
arguments about this proposal. Send your comments to an address listed
under the ADDRESSES section. Include ``Docket No. FAA-2022-0813;
Project Identifier MCAI-2021-01316-A'' at the beginning of your
comments. The most helpful comments reference a specific portion of the
proposal, explain the reason for any recommended change, and include
supporting data. The FAA will consider all comments received by the
closing date and may amend this proposal because of those comments.
    Except for Confidential Business Information (CBI) as described in
the following paragraph, and other information as described in 14 CFR
11.35, the FAA will post all comments received, without change, to
https://www.regulations.gov, including any personal information you
provide. The agency will also post a report summarizing each
substantive verbal contact received about this NPRM.

Confidential Business Information

    CBI is commercial or financial information that is both customarily
and actually treated as private by its owner. Under the Freedom of
Information Act (FOIA) (5 U.S.C. 552), CBI is exempt

from public disclosure. If your comments responsive to this NPRM
contain commercial or financial information that is customarily treated
as private, that you actually treat as private, and that is relevant or
responsive to this NPRM, it is important that you clearly designate the
submitted comments as CBI. Please mark each page of your submission
containing CBI as ``PROPIN.'' The FAA will treat such marked
submissions as confidential under the FOIA, and they will not be placed
in the public docket of this AD. Submissions containing CBI should be
sent to John DeLuca, Aviation Safety Engineer, General Aviation &
Rotorcraft Section, International Validation Branch, FAA, 1600 Stewart
Avenue, Suite 410, Westbury, NY 11590. Any commentary that the FAA
receives which is not specifically designated as CBI will be placed in
the public docket for this rulemaking.

Background

    The European Union Aviation Safety Agency (EASA), which is the
Technical Agent for the Member States of the European Union, has issued
EASA AD 2021-0267, dated November 24, 2021 (referred to after this as
``the MCAI''), to address an unsafe condition on Vulcanair S.p.A.
(Vulcanair) (formerly Partenavia Costruzioni Aeronautiche S.p.A.) Model
P.68 ``Victor,'' P.68B ``Victor,'' P.68R ``Victor,'' P.68C, P.68C-TC,
P.68 ``Observer,'' P.68 ``Observer 2,'' and P.68TC ``Observer''
airplanes, all serial numbers. The MCAI states:

    Occurrences were reported of failures of the upper rudder hinge
on P.68 aeroplanes due to corrosion, which can occur if the
aeroplane is operated in an environment which may favour the
formation of corrosion.
    This condition, if not detected and corrected, could interfere
with rudder movement and ultimately lead to failure, possibly
resulting in loss of control of the aeroplane.
    To address this potential unsafe condition, Vulcanair issued the
SL [Vulcanair Aircraft Alert Service Letter No. 23, Revision 2,
dated September 29, 2021] and updated the applicable AMM [Aircraft
Maintenance Manual], as defined in this [EASA] AD, to provide
inspection instructions.
    For the reason described above, this [EASA] AD requires
repetitive inspections of the upper and lower rudder hinges and,
depending on findings, accomplishment of applicable corrective
action(s).

    You may examine the MCAI in the AD docket at https://www.regulations.gov by searching for and locating Docket No. FAA-2022-
0813.

Related Service Information Under 1 CFR Part 51

    The FAA reviewed Vulcanair Aircraft Alert Service Letter No. 23,
Revision 2, dated September 29, 2021, which specifies procedures for
inspecting the upper and lower rudder hinges for corrosion, cracking,
and damage, and specifies contacting Vulcanair for instructions to
repair an affected rudder hinge. This service information also refers
to the applicable aircraft maintenance manuals for additional
inspection procedures.
    The FAA also reviewed the following service information, which
specifies procedures for maintaining various structural parts. These
documents are distinct since they apply to different airplane models.
     Section 6, Structures, of the Vulcanair Aircraft P.68C &
P.68C-TC Maintenance Manual, AMM10.702-1, Revision 7, dated May 11,
2021.
     Section 6, Structures, of the Vulcanair Aircraft P.68
Observer 2 & P.68TC Observer Maintenance Manual, AMM10.702-2, Revision
8, dated November 11, 2021.
     Section 6, Structures, of the Vulcanair Aircraft P.68R
Maintenance Manual, AMM10.702-3, Revision 12, dated December 12, 2019.
     Section C, Airframe, of the Vulcanair Aircraft P68C
Maintenance Manual, NOR10.709-1B, Revision 9, dated August 30, 2017.
     Section C, Airframe, of the Vulcanair Aircraft P68-TC
Observer Maintenance Manual, NOR10.709-4A, Revision 4, dated March 15,
2018.
     Section B, Structure, of the Vulcanair Aircraft A/C P68B
Victor Maintenance Manual, NOR.10.709-9, Revision 16, dated September
22, 2017.
     Section C, Airframe, of the Vulcanair Aircraft P68
Observer 2 Maintenance Manual, NOR10.709-10, Revision 5, dated October
23, 2017.
    This service information is reasonably available because the
interested parties have access to it through their normal course of
business or by the means identified in the ADDRESSES section.

FAA's Determination

    This product has been approved by the aviation authority of another
country and is approved for operation in the United States. Pursuant to
the FAA's bilateral agreement with this State of Design Authority, it
has notified the FAA of the unsafe condition described in the MCAI and
service information referenced above. The FAA is issuing this NPRM
after determining the unsafe condition described previously is likely
to exist or develop on other products of the same type design.

Proposed AD Requirements in This NPRM

    This proposed AD would require accomplishing the actions specified
in the service information already described, except as discussed under
``Differences Between this Proposed AD and the MCAI.''

Differences Between This Proposed AD and the MCAI

    The MCAI applies to Model P.68 ``Victor,'' P.68B ``Victor,'' and
P.68R ``Victor'' airplanes, which are identified on the FAA type
certificate as Model P.68, P.68B, and P.68R airplanes, respectively.
    The MCAI requires contacting Vulcanair for approved repair
instructions, while this proposed AD does not.

Costs of Compliance

    The FAA estimates that this AD, if adopted as proposed, would
affect 14 airplanes of U.S. registry.
    The FAA estimates the following costs to comply with this proposed
AD:

                                                 Estimated Costs
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                Cost on U.S.
             Action                   Labor cost          Parts cost      Cost per  airplane       operators
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Visual inspection of upper and    2 work-hours x $85  Not applicable....  $170 per            $2,380 per
 lower rudder hinges.              per hour = $170.                        inspection cycle.   inspection cycle.
Disassembly for dye inspection    7 work-hours x $85  Not applicable....  $595 per            $8,330 per
 of the top rudder hinge           per hour = $595.                        inspection cycle.   inspection cycle.
 (bracket).
Disassembly for dye inspection    8 work-hours x $85  Not applicable....  $680 per            $9,520 per
 for the lower rudder hinge        per hour = $680.                        inspection cycle.   inspection cycle.
 (control tube).
Dye inspection of upper and       2 work-hours x $85  Not applicable....  $170 per            $2,380 per
 lower rudder hinges (post         per hour = $170.                        inspection cycle.   inspection cycle.
 disassembly).
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

                                               On-Condition Costs
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                Cost per
                    Action                                 Labor cost               Parts cost       airplane
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Replacement of the top rudder hinge (bracket).  7 work-hours x $85 per hour =               $320            $915
                                                 $595.
Replacement of the lower rudder hinge (control  8 work-hours x $85 per hour =              1,020           1,700
 tube).                                          $680.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Authority for This Rulemaking

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

Regulatory Findings

    The FAA determined that this proposed AD would not have federalism
implications under Executive Order 13132. This proposed AD would not
have a substantial direct effect on the States, on the relationship
between the national Government and the States, or on the distribution
of power and responsibilities among the various levels of government.
    For the reasons discussed above, I certify this proposed
regulation:
    (1) Is not be a ``significant regulatory action'' under Executive
Order 12866,
    (2) Would not affect intrastate aviation in Alaska, and
    (3) Would not have a significant economic impact, positive or
negative, on a substantial number of small entities under the criteria
of the Regulatory Flexibility Act.

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39

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

The Proposed Amendment

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

PART 39--AIRWORTHINESS DIRECTIVES

0
1. The authority citation for part 39 continues to read as follows:

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

Sec.  39.13  [Amended]

0
2. The FAA amends Sec.  39.13 by adding the following new airworthiness
directive:

Vulcanair S.p.A.: Docket No. FAA-2022-0813; Project Identifier MCAI-
2021-01316-A.

(a) Comments Due Date

    The FAA must receive comments on this airworthiness directive
(AD) by August 22, 2022.

(b) Affected ADs

    None.

(c) Applicability

    This AD applies to Vulcanair S.p.A. Model P.68, P.68B, P.68C,
P.68C-TC, P.68 ``Observer,'' P.68TC ``Observer,'' P.68 ``Observer
2,'' and P.68R airplanes, all serial numbers (S/Ns), certificated in
any category.

(d) Subject

    Joint Aircraft System Component (JASC) Code 5540, Rudder
Structure.

(e) Unsafe Condition

    This AD was prompted by mandatory continuing airworthiness
information (MCAI) originated by an aviation authority of another
country to identify and correct an unsafe condition on an aviation
product. The MCAI identifies the unsafe condition as corrosion
causing failure of the upper rudder hinge. The FAA is issuing this
AD to address damage of the upper and lower rudder hinges. This
condition, if not addressed, could result in interference with the
rudder movement and lead to failure of the rudder, which could
result in loss of control of the airplane.

(f) Compliance

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

(g) Required Actions

    Within 200 hours time-in-service (TIS) after the effective date
of this AD or within 12 months after the effective date of this AD,
whichever occurs first, and thereafter at intervals not to exceed
200 hours TIS or 12 months, whichever occurs first, inspect the
upper and lower rudder hinges for looseness, corrosion, cracking,
and damage in accordance with steps 1 through 4 of Vulcanair
Aircraft Alert Service Letter No. 23, Revision 2, dated September
29, 2021 (Vulcanair SL No. 23R2).
    (1) If there is no looseness, no corrosion, no cracking, and no
damage, do the actions in paragraphs (g)(1)(i) and (ii) of this AD.
    (i) Remove the rudder by following the removal procedure for
your airplane identified in figure 1 to paragraph (g)(1) of this AD.
    (ii) Perform a dye penetrant inspection of the hinges, paying
particular attention to the pivot/attachment holes, using a dye
penetrant solution for manual non-destructive testing using the
following:
    (A) Penetrant System: TYPE II (Visible Dye);
    (B) METHOD C (Solvent Removable);
    (C) Developer: FORM D (Non-aqueous); or
    (D) Solvent Remover: CLASS 1 (Halogenated).
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP08JY22.002

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP08JY22.003

    (2) If there is any looseness, corrosion, cracking, or damage,
replace the hinge before further flight.

(h) Special Flight Permit

    Special flight permits are prohibited.

(i) Alternative Methods of Compliance (AMOCs)

    (1) The Manager, International Validation Branch, FAA, has the
authority to approve AMOCs for this AD, if requested using the
procedures found in 14 CFR 39.19. In accordance with 14 CFR 39.19,
send your request to your principal inspector or local Flight
Standards District Office, as appropriate. If sending information
directly to the manager of the certification office, send it to the
attention of the person identified in paragraph (j)(1) of this AD
and email to: [email protected].
    (2) Before using any approved AMOC, notify your appropriate
principal inspector, or lacking a principal inspector, the manager
of the local flight standards district office/certificate holding
district office.

(j) Related Information

    (1) For more information about this AD, contact John DeLuca,
Aviation Safety Engineer, General Aviation & Rotorcraft Section,
International Validation Branch, FAA, 1600 Stewart Avenue, Suite
410, Westbury, NY 11590; phone:<PHONE_NUMBER>; email:
[email protected].
    (2) Refer to European Union Aviation Safety Agency (EASA) AD
2021-0267, dated November 24, 2021, for more information. You may
view the EASA AD at https://www.regulations.gov in Docket No. FAA-
2022-0813.
    (3) For service information identified in this AD, contact
Vulcanair S.p.A., Fulvio Oloferni, via Giovanni Pascoli, 7, 80026
Naples, Italy; phone: +39 081 5918 135; email:
[email protected]; website: https://www.vulcanair.com. You
may review this referenced service information at the FAA,
Airworthiness Products Section, Operational Safety Branch, 901
Locust, Kansas City, MO 64106. For information on the availability
of this material at the FAA, call<PHONE_NUMBER>.

    Issued on June 30, 2022.
Christina Underwood,
Acting Director, Compliance & Airworthiness Division, Aircraft
Certification Service.
[FR Doc. 2022-14428 Filed 7-7-22; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-C


[Federal Register: September 11, 2006 (Volume 71, Number 175)]
[Notices]
[Page 53430]
[DOCID:fr11se06-53]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Docket No. ER06-1230-000; Docket No. ER06-1231-000; Docket Nos. ER06-
1232-000 and ER06-1232-001; Docket No. ER06-1233-000]

EPIC Merchant Energy NE, L.P.; EPIC Merchant Energy NY, L.P.;
EPIC NJ/PA, L.P.; EPIC Merchant Energy Midwest, L.P.; Notice of
Issuance of Order

September 5, 2006.
    EPIC Merchant Energy NE, L.P., EPIC Merchant Energy NY, L.P., EPIC
NJ/PA, L.P. and EPIC Merchant Energy Midwest, L.P. (EPIC Applicants)
filed an application for market-based rate authority, with accompanying
rate schedules. The proposed market-based rate schedules provide for
the sale of energy, capacity and ancillary services at market-based
rates. EPIC Applicants also requested waivers of various Commission
regulations. In particular, EPIC Applicants requested that the
Commission grant blanket approval under 18 CFR part 34 of all future
issuances of securities and assumptions of liability by EPIC
Applicants.
    On August 23, 2006, pursuant to delegated authority, the Director,
Division of Tariffs and Market Development--West, granted the requests
for blanket approval under part 34. The Director's order also stated
that the Commission would publish a separate notice in the Federal
Register establishing a period of time for the filing of protests.
Accordingly, any person desiring to be heard or to protest the blanket
approvals of issuances of securities or assumptions of liability by
EPIC Applicants should file a motion to intervene or protest with the
Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street, NE.,
Washington, DC 20426, in accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of the
Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedure. 18 CFR 385.211, 385.214
(2004).
    Notice is hereby given that the deadline for filing motions to
intervene or protest is September 22, 2006.
    Absent a request to be heard in opposition by the deadline above,
EPIC Applicants are authorized to issue securities and assume
obligations or liabilities as a guarantor, indorser, surety, or
otherwise in respect of any security of another person; provided that
such issuance or assumption is for some lawful object within the
corporate purposes of EPIC Applicants, compatible with the public
interest, and is reasonably necessary or appropriate for such purposes.
    The Commission reserves the right to require a further showing that
neither public nor private interests will be adversely affected by
continued approvals of EPIC Applicants' issuances of securities or
assumptions of liability.
    Copies of the full text of the Director's Order are available from
the Commission's Public Reference Room, 888 First Street, NE.,
Washington, DC 20426. The Order may also be viewed on the Commission's
Web site at http://www.ferc.gov, using the eLibrary link. Enter the

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

Magalie R. Salas,
Secretary.
 [FR Doc. E6-14965 Filed 9-8-06; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register: December 31, 2008 (Volume 73, Number 251)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Page 80299]
[DOCID:fr31de08-5]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Coast Guard

33 CFR Part 117

[USCG-2008-1187]
RIN 1625-AA09

Drawbridge Operation Regulations; Curtis Creek in Baltimore, MD,
Maintenance

AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS.

ACTION: Notice of temporary deviation from regulations.

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

SUMMARY: The Commander, Fifth Coast Guard District, has approved a
temporary deviation from the regulations governing the operation of the
Pennington Avenue Bridge, at mile 0.9, across Curtis Creek in
Baltimore, MD. Under this temporary deviation, the drawbridge may
remain in the closed position on specific dates and times to facilitate
electrical repairs.

DATES: This deviation is effective from 6 a.m. on January 21, 2009, to
11:59 p.m. on January 27, 2009.

ADDRESSES: Documents indicated in this preamble as being available in
the docket are part of docket USCG-2008-1187 and are available online
at http://www.regulations.gov. They are also available for inspection
or copying at two locations: The Docket Management Facility (M-30),
U.S. Department of Transportation, West Building Ground Floor, Room
W12-140, 1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE., Washington, DC 20590, between 9
a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays, and
the Commander (dpb), Fifth Coast Guard District, Federal Building, 1st
Floor, 431 Crawford Street, Portsmouth, VA 23704-5004 between 8 a.m.
and 4 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr. Bill H. Brazier, Bridge Management
Specialist, Fifth Coast Guard District, at<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The Maryland State Highway Administration,
who owns and operates this double-leaf bascule drawbridge, has
requested a temporary deviation from the current operating regulations
set out in 33 CFR 117.5 that requires the bridge to open promptly and
fully for the passage of vessels when a request to open is given to
facilitate electrical repairs.
    The Pennington Avenue Bridge, a double-leaf bascule, has a vertical
clearance in the closed position to vessels of 38 feet, above mean high
water.
    To facilitate installation of submarine cables and electrical
repairs, the drawbridge will be maintained in the closed-to-navigation
position from 6 a.m. on January 21, 2009, until and including 11:59
p.m. on January 27, 2009.
    The Coast Guard will inform the users of the waterway through our
Local and Broadcast Notices to Mariners of the opening restrictions of
the draw span to minimize transiting delays caused by the temporary
deviation.
    In accordance with 33 CFR 117.35(e), the drawbridge must return to
its regular operating schedule immediately at the end of the designated
time period. This deviation from the operating regulations is
authorized under 33 CFR 117.35.

    Dated: December 15, 2008.
Waverly W. Gregory, Jr.,
Chief, Bridge Administration, Branch Fifth Coast Guard District.
 [FR Doc. E8-31073 Filed 12-30-08; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4910-15-P


SUPPORTING STATEMENT

                                      ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

NESHAP for Refractory Products Manufacturing (40 CFR Part 63, Subpart
SSSSS)

1.  Identification of the Information Collection

	1(a)  Title of the Information Collection

NESHAP for Refractory Products Manufacturing (40 CFR Part 63, Subpart
SSSSS) (Renewal), EPA ICR Number 2040.04, OMB Control Number 2060-0515

	1(b)  Short Characterization/Abstract

The National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants (NESHAP),
for Refractory Products Manufacturing were proposed on June 20, 2002 (67
FR 42107), and promulgated on April 16, 2003 (68 FR 18729).  These
regulations apply to each existing refractory products manufacturing
which produces refractory bricks, refractory shapes, kiln furniture,
crucibles, and other materials used as linings for boilers, kilns, and
other processing units and equipment where extremes of temperature,
corrosions, and abrasion would destroy other materials.  The rule
applies to facilities that manufacture refractory products and use
organic hazardous air pollutant (HAP), chromium refractory, and clay
refractory products.  The new or reconstructed affected sources are
shape dryers, curing ovens, and kilns that are used to manufacture
refractory products that use organic HAP; shape preheaters, pitch
working tanks, defumers, and coking ovens used to produce
pitch-impregnated refractory products; kilns that are used to
manufacture chromium refractory products; and kilns that are used to
manufacture clay refractory products.  This ICR is for Hazardous Air
Pollutant (HAP) emission major sources in the refractory products
manufacturing source category.

	In general, all NESHAP standards require initial notifications,
compliance status report, and performance tests by the owners/operators
of the affected facilities.  They are also required to maintain records
of the occurrence and duration of any startup, shutdown, or malfunction
(SSM) in the operation of an affected facility, or any period during
which the monitoring system is inoperative.  These notifications,
reports, and records are essential in determining compliance, and are
required of all affected facilities subject to NESHAP.  Semiannual
summary reports are also required.

	Any owner/operator subject to the provisions of this part shall
maintain a file of these measurements, and retain the file for at least
five years following the date of such measurements, maintenance reports,
and records.  All reports are sent to the delegated state or local
authority.  In the event that there is no such delegated authority, the
reports are sent directly to the United States Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA) regional office.

	Based on our consultations with industry representatives, there is an
average of one affected facility at each plant site and that each plant
site has only one respondent (i.e., the owner/operator of the plant
site).

	An average of eight respondents will be subject to the regulation over
the period covered

by this ICR, and it is estimated that no additional respondents will
become subject to the regulation in the next three years.

The Office of Management and Budget (OMB) approved the current
Information Collection Request (ICR) without any “Terms of
Clearance.”

The burden to the “Affected Public” may be found in Table 1: Annual
Respondent Burden and Cost – NESHAP for Refractory Products
Manufacturing (40 CFR Part 63, Subpart SSSSS) (Renewal), attached below.
 The burden to the “Federal Government” is attributed entirely to
work performed by federal employees or government contractors; this
burden may be found in Table 2: Average Annual EPA Burden - NESHAP for
Refractory Products Manufacturing (40 CFR Part 63, Subpart SSSSS)
(Renewal), attached below.

2.  Need for and Use of the Collection

	2(a)  Need/Authority for the Collection

The EPA is charged under Section 112 of the Clean Air Act, as amended,
to establish standards of performance for each category or subcategory
of major sources and area sources of hazardous air pollutants.  These
standards are applicable to new or existing sources of hazardous air
pollutants and shall require the maximum degree of emission reduction.
In addition, section 114(a) states that the Administrator may require
any owner/operator subject to any requirement of this Act to:

(A) Establish and maintain such records; (B) make such reports;   (C)
install, use, and maintain such monitoring equipment, and use such audit
procedures, or methods; (D) sample such emissions (in accordance with
such procedures or methods, at such locations, at such intervals, during
such periods, and in such manner as the Administrator shall prescribe);
(E) keep records on control equipment parameters, production variables
or other indirect data when direct monitoring of emissions is
impractical; (F) submit compliance certifications in accordance with
Section 114(a)(3);    and (G) provide such other information as the
Administrator may reasonably require.

In the Administrator's judgment, particulate matter emissions from
facilities in refractory products manufacturing cause or contribute to
air pollution that may reasonably be anticipated to endanger public
health or welfare.  Therefore, the NESHAP were promulgated for the
source category at 40 CFR part 63, subpart SSSSS.

	2(b)  Practical Utility/Users of the Data

	The recordkeeping and reporting requirements in the standard ensure
compliance with the applicable regulations which were promulgated in
accordance with the Clean Air Act.  The

collected information is also used for targeting inspections and as
evidence in legal proceedings.

Performance tests are required in order to determine an affected
facility’s initial capability to comply with the emission standard.
Continuous emission monitors are used to ensure compliance with the
standard at all times.  During the performance test a record of the
operating parameters under which compliance was achieved may be recorded
and used to determine compliance in place of a continuous emission
monitor.

	The notifications required in the standard are used to inform either
the Agency or its delegated authority when a source becomes subject to
the requirements of the regulations.         The reviewing authority may
then inspect the source to check if the pollution control devices are
properly installed and operated, that leaks are being detected and
repaired, and that the standards are being met.  The performance test
may also be observed.

	The required semiannual reports are used to determine periods of excess
emissions, identify problems at the facility, verify
operation/maintenance procedures and for compliance determinations.

3.  Non-duplication, Consultations, and Other Collection Criteria

	The requested recordkeeping and reporting are required under 40 CFR
part 63, subpart SSSSS.

	3(a)  Non-duplication

	If the subject standards have not been delegated, the information is
sent directly to the appropriate EPA regional office.  Otherwise, the
information is sent directly to the delegated state or local agency.  If
a state or local agency has adopted its own similar standards to
implement the Federal standards, a copy of the report submitted to the
state or local agency can be sent to the Administrator in lieu of the
report required by the Federal standards.  Therefore, no duplication
exists.

	3(b)  Public Notice Required Prior to ICR Submission to OMB

An announcement of a public comment period for the renewal of this ICR
was published in the Federal Register (73 FR 31088) on May 30, 2008.  No
comments were received on the burden published in the Federal Register.

	3(c)  Consultations

	Consultation with an industry representative (i.e., respondent) was
previously conducted to determine if there is anyway for EPA to reduce
the recordkeeping and reporting burden or improve the language in the
standard to make it easier to comply; additionally, the most recent ICR
was referenced, the preparer of the active ICR consulted, and other
references were used to obtain the most recent data available.

It is our policy to respond after a thorough review of comments received
since the last ICR renewal as well as those submitted in response to the
First Federal Register Notice.  In this case, no comments were received.

3(d)  Effects of Less Frequent Collection

	Less frequent information collection would decrease the margin of
assurance that facilities are continuing to meet the standards.
Requirements for information gathering and recordkeeping are useful
techniques to ensure that good operation and maintenance practices are
applied and that emission limitations are met.  If the information
required by these standards was collected less frequently, the
likelihood of detecting poor operation and maintenance of control
equipment and noncompliance would decrease.

	3(e)  General Guidelines

	None of these reporting or recordkeeping requirements violate any of
the regulations established by OMB at 5 CFR part 1320, section 1320.5.

	These standards require the respondents to maintain all records,
including reports and notifications for at least five years.  This is
consistent with the General Provisions as applied to the standards.  EPA
believes that the five-year records retention requirement is consistent
with the Part 70 permit program and the five-year statute of limitations
on which the permit program is based.  Also, the retention of records
for five years would allow EPA to establish the compliance history of a
source and any pattern of compliance for purposes of determining the
appropriate level of enforcement action.  Historically, EPA has found
that the most flagrant violators frequently have violations extending
beyond the five years.  If records were retained for less than five
years, EPA would be prevented from pursuing the worst violators due to
the destruction or nonexistence of records.

	3(f)  Confidentiality

	Any information submitted to the Agency for which a claim of
confidentiality is made will be safeguarded according to the Agency
policies set forth in Title 40, Chapter 1, part 2, subpart B -
Confidentiality of Business Information  (CBI) (see 40 CFR 2; 41 FR
36902, September 1, 1976; amended by 43 FR 40000, September 8, 1978; 43
FR 42251, September 20, 1978; 44 FR 17674, March 23, 1979).

	3(g)  Sensitive Questions

	None of the reporting or recordkeeping requirements contain sensitive
questions.

4.  The Respondents and the Information Requested

	4(a)  Respondents/SIC Codes

The respondents to the recordkeeping and reporting requirements are
refractory products manufacturing.  The United States Standard
Industrial Classification (SIC) codes for the

respondents affected by the standards, which corresponds to the North
American Industry Classification System (NAICS) codes, are listed below
for source category descriptions.

Standard (40 CFR Part 63, Subpart JJJJ)	SIC Codes	NAICS Codes

Clay refractory manufacturing	3255	327124

Nonclay refractory manufacturing	3297	327125

	4(b)  Information Requested

	None of these reporting or recordkeeping requirements violate any of
the regulations established by OMB at 5 CFR part 1320, section 1320.5.

		(i)  Data Items

All data in this ICR that are recorded and/or reported are required by
NESHAP for Refractory Products Manufacturing (40 CFR part 63, subpart
SSSSS).

	A source must make the following reports:

Notifications	Standard Citation by Sections

Initial notification	63.9(b)(2) and (3), 63.5, 63.9812(b)-(c)

Notification of performance test	63.7(b)-(c), 63.9(e), and 63.9812(d)

Notification of compliance status	63.9(h), 63.10(d)(2), and 63.9812(e)

Notification of alternative fuel use	63.9812(f)

Startup, shutdown, malfunction	63.10(d)(5), 63.9814(c)(4)

No deviations/no continuous monitoring system (CMS) out of control
63.9814(c)(5)-(6)

Deviations/out of control CMS	63.9814(d)-(f)

Report of alternative fuel use	63.9841(g)

	A source must make the following reports:

Recordkeeping

Record of startup, shutdown, and malfunctions	63.6(e)(3), 63.10(b)(2),
63.9816(a)(2)

Records of performance tests	63.10(b)(2)(viii), 63.9816(a)(3)

Initial notification or notification of compliance status
63.10(b)(2)(xiv), 63.9816(a)(1)

Record of each CMS	63.8(d)(3), 63.8(f)(6)(i), 63.8(g),
63.10(b)(2)(vi)-(xi), and 63.9816(c)

Records are required to be retained for five years	63.10(b)(1)

Electronic Reporting

	At the present, respondents are using monitoring equipment that
automatically records parameter data.  Although personnel at the
affected facility must evaluate the data, this internal automation has
significantly reduced the burden associated with monitoring and
recordkeeping at the plant site.

	Also, regulatory agencies in cooperation with the respondents continue
to create reporting systems to transmit data electronically.  However,
electronic reporting systems are still not widely used.  At this time,
it is estimated that approximately 10 percent of the respondents use
electronic reporting.

		(ii)  Respondent Activities

Respondent Activities

Read instructions.

Perform initial performance test, Reference Methods 25A test, and repeat
performance tests if necessary.

Write the notifications and reports listed above.

Enter information required to be recorded above.

Submit the required reports developing, acquiring, installing, and
utilizing technology and systems for the purpose of collecting,
validating, and verifying information.

Develop, acquire, install, and utilize technology and systems for the
purpose of processing and maintaining information.

Develop, acquire, install, and utilize technology and systems for the
purpose of disclosing and providing information.

Train personnel to be able to respond to a collection of information.

Transmit, or otherwise disclose the information.

	Currently, sources are using automated monitoring equipment that
provides parameter data.  Although personnel at the sources still need
to evaluate the data, this type of monitoring equipment has
significantly reduced the burden associated with monitoring and
recordkeeping.

5.  The Information Collected: Agency Activities, Collection
Methodology, and Information Management

	5(a)  Agency Activities

	EPA conducts the following activities in connection with the
acquisition, analysis, storage, and distribution of the required
information.

Agency Activities

Observe initial performance tests and repeat performance tests if
necessary.

Review notifications and reports, including performance test reports,
and excess emissions reports, required to be submitted by industry.

Audit facility records.

Input, analyze, and maintain data in the AIRS Facility Subsystem (AFS).

	5(b)  Collection Methodology and Management

	Following notification of startup, the reviewing authority might
inspect the source to determine whether the pollution control devices
are properly installed and operated.  Performance test reports are used
by the Agency to discern a source’s initial capability to comply with
the emission standard.  Data and records maintained by the respondents
are tabulated and published for use in compliance and enforcement
programs.

	Information contained in the reports is entered into the AFS which is
operated and maintained by EPA's Office of Compliance.  AFS is EPA’s
database for the collection, maintenance, and retrieval of compliance
data for approximately 125,000 industrial and government-owned
facilities.  EPA uses the AFS for tracking air pollution compliance and
enforcement by local and state regulatory agencies, EPA regional offices
and EPA headquarters.  Both the EPA and its delegated Authorities can
edit, store, retrieve and analyze this data.

	The records required by this regulation must be retained by the
owner/operator for five years.

	5(c)  Small Entity Flexibility

A majority of the respondents are large entities (i.e., large
businesses).  However, the impact on small entities (i.e., small
businesses) was taken into consideration during the development of the
regulation.  The number of small entities affected by this rule could
not be determined, based on review of the following sources: the
promulgated rule notice in the Federal Register; the Economic Impact
Analysis of the Refractory Product Manufacturing NESHAP: Final Report
(2001); and a search of publicly available current data sources.  The
Economic Impact Analysis document states: “The Agency conducted a
screening analysis to assess the impacts of the proposed rule on small
businesses and to compare the impacts on small businesses with the
impacts on large businesses.”  Of 80 total companies analyzed, 58
(72.5%) were considered small businesses.

Due to technical considerations involving the process operations and the
types of control equipment employed, the recordkeeping and reporting
requirements are the same for both small and large entities.  The Agency
considers these requirements the minimum needed to ensure compliance
and, therefore, cannot reduce them further for small entities.  To the
extent that larger businesses can use economies of scale to reduce their
burden, the overall burden will be reduced.

	5(d)  Collection Schedule

The specific frequency for each information collection activity within
this request is shown in Table 1: Annual Industry Burden for NESHAP for
Refractory Products Manufacturing (40 CFR part 63, subpart SSSSS)
(Renewal), attached below.

6.  Estimating the Burden and Cost of the Collection

	Table 1 documents the computation of individual burdens for the
recordkeeping and the

reporting requirements applicable to the industry for the subpart
included in this ICR.  The individual burdens are expressed under
standardized headings believed to be consistent with the concept of
burden under the Paperwork Reduction Act.  Where appropriate, specific
tasks and major assumptions have been identified.  Responses to this
information collection are mandatory.  The Agency may not conduct or
sponsor, and a person is not required to respond to, a collection of
information unless it displays a currently valid OMB Control Number.

	6(a)  Estimating Respondent Burden

	The average annual burden to industry over the next three years from
these recordkeeping and reporting requirements is estimated to be 338
(Total Labor Hours from Table 1).  These hours are based on Agency
studies and background documents from the development of this
regulation, Agency knowledge and experience with the NESHAP program, the
previously approved ICR, and any comments received.

	6(b)  Estimating Respondent Costs

		(i)  Estimating Labor Costs

	This ICR uses the following labor rates:

		Managerial	$97.46   ($46.41 + 110%)

		Technical	$83.71   ($39.86 + 110%)

		Clerical	$42.55   ($20.26 + 110%)

	These rates are from the United States Department of Labor, Bureau of
Labor Statistics, March 19, 2005, “Table 2: Civilian Workers, by
Occupational and Industry group.”  The rates are from column 1,
“Total Compensation.”  The rates have been increased by 110 percent
to account for the benefit packages available to those employed by
private industry.

                        (ii)  Estimating Capital/Startup and Operation
and Maintenance Costs

	The type of industry costs associated with the information collection
activities in the subject standard are labor costs which are addressed
elsewhere in this ICR and the costs associated with continuous
monitoring.  The capital/startup costs are one time costs when a
facility becomes subject to the regulation.  The annual operation and
maintenance costs (O&M) are the ongoing costs to maintain the monitor
and other costs such as photocopying and postage.

(iii)  Capital/Startup vs. Operation and Maintenance (O&M) Costs

Capital/Startup vs. Operation and Maintenance (O&M) Costs

(A)

Continuous Monitoring Device	(B)

Capital/Startup Cost for One Respondent	(C)

Number of New Respondents 	(D)

Total Capital/Startup Cost,

(B X C)	(E)

Annual O&M Costs for One Respondent	(F)

Number of Respondents with O&M	(G)

Total O&M,

(E X F)

Continuous parameter monitoring system	$16,820	0	$0	$380	8	$3,040

The total capital/startup costs for this ICR are zero.  This is the
total of column D in the above table.

The total operation and maintenance (O&M) costs for this ICR are $3,040.
 This is the total of column G.

The total respondent costs in block 14 have been calculated as the
addition of the capital/startup costs, and the annual operation and
maintenance costs.  The average annual cost for capital/startup and
operation and maintenance costs to industry over the next three years of
the ICR is estimated to be $3,000 (rounded).

	6(c)  Estimating Agency Burden and Cost

	The only costs to the Agency are those costs associated with analysis
of the reported information.  EPA's overall compliance and enforcement
program includes activities such as the examination of records
maintained by the respondents, periodic inspection of sources of
emission, and the publication and distribution of collected information.

	The average annual Agency cost during the three years of the ICR is
estimated to be $7,273.  This cost is based on the average hourly labor
rate as follows:

		Managerial	$56.02   (GS-13, Step 5, $35.01 x 1.6)

		Technical	$41.57   (GS-12, Step 1, $25.98 x 1.6)

		Clerical	$22.50   (GS-6, Step 3, $14.06 x 1.6)

These rates are from the Office of Personnel Management (OPM) “2005
General Schedule”, which excludes locality rates of pay.  Details upon
which this estimate is based appear in Table 2: Average Annual EPA
Burden, NESHAP for Refractory Products Manufacturing (40 CFR part 63,
subpart SSSSS) (Renewal), attached below.

	6(d)  Estimating the Respondent Universe and Total Burden and Costs

	Based on our research for this ICR, on average over the next three
years, approximately eight existing respondents will be subject to the
standard.  It is estimated that no additional respondent per year will
become subject.  The overall average number of respondents, as shown in
the table below is eight per year.

	The number of respondents is calculated using the following table which
addresses the three years covered by this ICR.

Number of Respondents

	Respondents That Submit Reports	Respondents That Do Not Submit Any
Reports

	Year	(A)

Number of New Respondents	(B)

Number of Existing Respondents	(C)

Number of Existing Respondents That Keep Records but Do Not Submit
Reports	(D)

Number of Existing Respondents That Are Also New Respondents	(E)

Number of Respondents(E=A+B+C-D)

1	0	8	0	0	8

2	0	8	0	0	8

3	0	8	0	0	8

Average	0	8	0	0	8

	To avoid double-counting respondents, column D is subtracted.  As shown
above, the average Number of Respondents over the three-year period of
this ICR is eight.

	The total number of annual responses per year is calculated using the
following table:

Total Annual Responses

(A)

Information Collection Activity	(B)

Number of Respondents	(C)

Number of Responses	(D)

Number of Existing Respondents That Keep Records But Do Not Submit
Reports	(E)

Total Annual Responses

E=(BxC)+D

Notification of applicability	0	1	0	0

Notification of construction/reconstruction	0	1	0	0

Notification of anticipated startup	0	1	0	0

Notification of actual startup	0	1	0	0

Notification of performance test	0	1	0	0

Notification of compliance status	0	1	0	0

Notification of intent to use alternative fuel	3	1	0	3

Report of deviations	1	1	0	1

Report of no deviations	7	2	0	14

Startup, shutdown, malfunction report	1	1	0	1

Report of alternative fuel use	3	1	0	3

	Total	22

	The number of Total Annual Responses is 22.

	6(e)  Bottom Line Burden Hours Burden and Cost Tables

	The detailed bottom line burden hours and cost calculations for the
respondents and the Agency are shown in Tables 1 and 2, respectively,
and summarized below.

		(i) Respondent Tally

The total annual labor costs are $27,304.  Details regarding these
estimates may be found in Table 1: Annual Respondent Burden and Cost,
NESHAP for Refractory Products Manufacturing (40 CFR part 63, subpart
SSSSS) (Renewal), attached below.  Furthermore, the annual public
reporting and recordkeeping burden for this collection of information is
estimated to average 15 hours per response.

	The total annual capital/startup and O&M costs to the regulated entity
are $3,040.  The cost calculations are detailed in Section 6(b) (iii),
Capital/Startup vs. Operation and Maintenance (O&M) Costs.

		(ii) The Agency Tally

The average annual Agency burden and cost over the next three years is
estimated to be 179 labor hours at a cost of $7,273.  See Table 2:
Annual Agency Burden and Cost, NESHAP for Refractory Products
Manufacturing (40 CFR part 63, subpart SSSSS) (Renewal), attached below.

	6(f)  Reasons for Change in Burden

There is no change in the estimation methodology for labor hours or cost
to the respondents in this ICR compared to the previous ICR.  This is
due to two considerations.  First, the regulations have not changed over
the past three years and are not anticipated to change over the next
three years.  Secondly, the growth rate for respondents is very low,
negative, or non-existent.

The previous approved ICR renewal indicated 470 annual labor hours;
after review of the burden tables, we have determined that the number of
indicated hours was an error.  A decimal was misplaced in Table 1:
Subtotals Labor burden and cost (“147” in Column F should have been
“14.7”).  The slight decrease in burden is due to a correction in
the labor hours from 470 to 338 per year.

	6(g)  Burden Statement

	The annual public reporting and recordkeeping burden for this
collection of information is estimated to average 15 hours per response.
 Burden means the total time, effort, or financial resources expended by
persons to generate, maintain, retain, or disclose or provide
information to or for a Federal agency.  This includes the time needed
to: review instructions; develop, acquire, install, and utilize
technology and systems for the purposes of collecting, validating, and
verifying information, processing and maintaining information, and
disclosing and providing information; adjust the existing ways to comply
with any previously applicable instructions and requirements; train
personnel to be able to respond to a collection of information; search
data sources; complete and review the collection of information; and
transmit or otherwise disclose the information.

An agency may not conduct or sponsor, and a person is not required to
respond to, a collection of information unless it displays a valid OMB
Control Number.  The OMB Control Numbers for EPA’s regulations are
listed at 40 CFR part 9 and 48 CFR chapter 15.

To comment on the Agency's need for this information, the accuracy of
the provided burden estimates, and any suggested methods for minimizing
respondent burden, including the use of automated collection techniques,
EPA has established a public docket for this ICR under Docket ID Number
EPA-HQ-OECA-2008-0292.  An electronic version of the public docket is
available at http://www.regulations.gov/ which may be used to obtain a
copy of the draft collection of information, submit or view public
comments, access the index listing of the contents of the docket, and to
access those documents in the public docket that are available
electronically.  When in the system, select “search,” then key in
the docket ID number identified in this document.  The documents are
also available for public viewing at the Enforcement and Compliance
Docket and Information Center in the EPA Docket Center (EPA/DC), EPA
West, Room 3334, 1301 Constitution Ave., NW, Washington, DC.  The EPA
Docket Center Public Reading Room is open from 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m.,
Monday through Friday, excluding legal holidays.  The telephone number
for the Reading Room is<PHONE_NUMBER>, and the telephone number for the
docket center is<PHONE_NUMBER>.  Also, you can send comments to the
Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, Office of Management and
Budget, 725 17th Street, NW, Washington, DC 20503, Attention: Desk
Officer for EPA.  Please include the EPA Docket ID Number
EPA-HQ-OECA-2008-0292 and OMB Control Number 2060-0515 in any
correspondence.

Part B of the Supporting Statement

	This part is not applicable because no statistical methods were used in
collecting this information.

Table 1:  Annual Respondent Burden and Cost – NESHAP for Refractory
Products Manufacturing (40 CFR Part 63, Subpart SSSSS) (Renewal)

Burden item

(A)

Person-

hours per

occurrence

(B)

No.  of

occurrences

per respondent

per year

(C)

Person-

hours per

respondent

per year

(C=AxB)

(D)

Respondents

per year  a

(E)

Technical

person-

hours per

year

(E=CxD)

(F)

Management

person-hours

per year

(Ex0.05)

(G)

Clerical

person-

hours per year

(Ex0.1)

(H)

Cost, $  b

1.  Applications	N/A

	2.  Survey and Studies	N/A

	3.  Reporting Requirements

   A.  Read instructions 	0.5	1	4	0	0	0	00	$0

   B.  Required activities

        Startup, shutdown, malfunction plan	32	1	32	0	0	0	0	$0

        Operation, maintenance, monitoring         plan 	32	1	32	0	0	0	0
$0

   C.  Create information	See 3B

	   D.  Gather existing information	See 3B

	   E.   Write report

        Notification of applicability	2	1	2	0	0	0	0	$0

        Notification of construction/                     reconstruction
2	1	2	0	0	0	0	$0

        Notification of anticipated startup 	2	1	2	0	0	0	0	$0

        Notification of actual startup	2	1	2	0	0	0	0	$0

        Notification of performance test 	2	1	2	0	0	0	0	$0

        Notification of compliance status 	16	1	16	0	0	0	0	$0

        Notification of intent to use                       alternative
fuel c	2	1	2	3	6	0.3	0.6	$557.03

        Report of deviations d	16	1	16	1	16	0.8	1.6	$1,485.41

        Report of no deviations e	8	2	16	7	112	5.6	11.2	$10,397.86

        Startup, shutdown, malfunction                 report f	8	1	8	1
8	0.4	0.8	$742.70

        Report of alternative fuel use g	4	1	4	3 	12	0.6	1.2	$1,114.06

SUBTOTAL Reporting

	177.1	$14,297

4.  Recordkeeping Requirements

    A.  Read instructions h	4	1	4	8	32	1.6	3.2	$2,970.82

    B.  Plan activities	See 4E

	    C.  Implement activities 	See 4E

	    D.  Develop record system	See 4E

    E.  Time to enter information

        Records of all information required          by standards i	0.25
52	13	8	104	5.2	10.4	$9,665.15

    F.  Time to train personnel	20	1	20	0	0	0	0	$0

    G. Time to adjust existing ways to                 comply with
previously applicable            requirements	N/A

	    H. Time to transmit or disclose                      information j
0.25	2	0.5	8	4	0.2	0.4	$371.35

     I. Time for audits 	N/A

	SUBTOTAL Recordkeeping

	161	$13,007.32

Subtotals Labor Burden and cost

	294	14.7	29.4	$27,304.38

TOTAL LABOR BURDEN AND COST (rounded)

	338	$27,304

Assumptions:

a  We have assumed that the average number of respondents that will be
subject to the rule will be eight.  There will be no additional new
source per year that will become subject to the rule over the three-year
period of this ICR.

b  This ICR uses the following labor rates: $97.46 per hour for
Executive, Administrative, and Managerial labor; $83.71 per hour for
Technical labor, and $42.55 per hour for Clerical labor.  These rates
are from the United States Department of Labor, Bureau of Labor
Statistics, March 19, 2005, “Table 2: Civilian Workers, by
Occupational and Industry group.”  The rates are from column 1,
“Total Compensation.”  The rates have been increased by 110% to
account for the benefit packages available to those employed by private
industry.

c  We have assumed that three respondent will use alternative fuel once
per year and will have to submit notification of intent to use
alternative fuel.

d  We have assumed that one respondent will report deviation once a
year.

e  We have assumed that seven respondents will report no deviation on a
semiannual basis.

f  It is assumed that one respondents will have a startup, shutdown,
malfunction occur.

g  We have assumed that three respondents will report on alternative
fuel usage once a year.

h  We have assumed that it will take 4 hours for each respondent to read
instructions.

i  We have assumed that  information will be recorded once per week for
52 weeks per year.

j  We have assumed that it will take 0.25 hours for information to be
transmitted or disclosed.

Table 2:  Average Annual EPA Burden - NESHAP for Refractory Products
Manufacturing (40 CFR Part 63, Subpart SSSSS) (Renewal)

	Activity

(A)

EPA person-

hours per

occurrence

(B)

No. of

occurrences

per plant

 per year

(C)

EPA person

hours per

plant  per year

(C=AxB)

(D)

Plants per

year  a

(E)

Technical

person-hours

per year

(E=CxD)

(F)

Management

person-hours

per year

(Ex0.05)

(G)

Clerical

person-

hours per year

(Ex0.1)

(H)

Cost, $ b

Attend initial performance test	40	1	40	0	0	0	0	  $0

Attend repeat performance test

    Retesting preparation	8	1	8	0	0	0	0	$0

    Retesting	40	1	40	0	0	0	0	$0

Report Review

    Notification of applicability	2	1	2	0	0	0	0	$0

   Notification of construction/

    reconstruction	2	1	2	0	0	0	0	$0

    Notification of anticipated startup	2	1	2	0	0	0	0	$0

    Notification of actual startup	2	1	2	0	0	0	0	$0

    Notification of initial performance test	2	1	2	0	0	0	0	$0

    Notification of compliance status     	2	1	2	0	0	0	0	$0

    Notification of intent to use alternative     fuel c	2	1	2	3	6	0.3
0.6	$279.73

    Repeat performance test report 	40	1	40	0	0	0	0	$0

    Semiannual compliance reports

         Deviation d	16	1	16	1	16	0.8	1.6	$745.94

         No Deviation e	8	2	16	7	112	5.6	11.2	$5,221.55

    Startup, shutdown, malfunction report f	16	1	16	1	16	0.8	1.6	$745.94

    Notification of alternative fuel use g	2	1	2	3	6	0.3	0.6	$279.73

Subtotals Labor Burden and cost

	156	7.8	15.6	$7,272.89

TOTAL ANNUAL BURDEN AND COST (rounded)

179

$7,273

Assumptions:

a  We have assumed that the average number of respondents that will be
subject to the rule will be eight.  There will be no additional new
source per year that will become subject to the rule over the three-year
period of this ICR.

b  This cost is based on the following labor rates which incorporates a
1.6 benefits multiplication factor to account for government overhead
expenses:  Managerial rate of $56.02 (GS-13, Step 5, $35.01 x 1.6),
Technical rate of $41.57 (GS-12, Step 1, $25.98 x 1.6), and Clerical
rate of $22.50 (GS-6, Step 3, $14.06 x 1.6).  These rates are from the
Office of Personnel Management (OPM) “2005 General Schedule” which
excludes locality rates of pay.

  c  We have assumed that three respondent will use alternative fuel
once per year and will have to submit notification of intent to use
alternative fuel.

  d  We have assumed that one respondent will report deviation once a
year.

  e  We have assumed that seven respondents will report no deviation on
a semiannual basis.

  f  It is assumed that one respondents will have a startup, shutdown,
malfunction occur.

  g  We have assumed that three respondents will report on alternative
fuel usage once a year.

 PAGE   14

 PAGE   15

 PAGE   18

 PAGE   17


[Federal Register Volume 88, Number 10 (Tuesday, January 17, 2023)]
[Notices]
[Pages 2750-2751]
[FR Doc No: 2023-00707]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

[Docket No. FAA-2022-0828]

Agency Information Collection Activities: Requests for Comments;
Clearance of Renewed Approval of Information Collection: Small Unmanned
Aircraft Registration System

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Notice and request for comments.

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

SUMMARY: In accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, FAA
invites public comments about our intention to request the Office of
Management and Budget (OMB) approval to renew an information
collection. The Federal Register Notice with a 60-day comment period
soliciting comments on the following collection of information was
published on June 22, 2022. Aircraft registration is necessary to
ensure personal accountability among all users of the National Airspace
System (NAS). Aircraft registration also allows the FAA and law
enforcement agencies to address non-compliance by providing the means
for identifying an aircraft's owner and operator. This collection also
permits individuals to de-register or update their record in the
registration database.

DATES: Written comments should be submitted by February 16, 2023.

ADDRESSES: Written comments and recommendations for the proposed
information collection should be sent within 30 days of publication of
this notice to www.reginfo.gov/public/do/PRAMain. Find this particular
information collection by selecting ``Currently under 30-day Review--
Open for Public Comments'' or by using the search function.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Bonnie Lefko by email at:
[email protected]; phone:<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
    Public Comments Invited: You are asked to comment on any aspect of
this information collection, including (a) Whether the proposed
collection of information is necessary for FAA's performance; (b) the
accuracy of the estimated burden; (c) ways for FAA to enhance the
quality, utility and clarity of the information collection; and (d)
ways that the burden could be minimized without reducing the quality of
the collected information.
    OMB Control Number: 2120-0765.
    Title: Small Unmanned Aircraft Registration System.
    Form Numbers: None.
    Type of Review: Renewal of an information collection.
    Background: The Federal Register Notice with a 60-day comment
period soliciting comments on the following collection of information
was published on June 22, 2022 (87 FR 37373). The Secretary of the
Department of Transportation (DOT) and the Administrator of the Federal
Aviation Administration (FAA) affirmed that all unmanned aircraft,
including model aircraft, are aircraft. As such, in accordance with 49
U.S.C. 44101(a) and as further prescribed in 14 CFR part 48,
registration is required prior to operation. See 80 FR 63912, 63913
(October 22, 2015). Registration allows the FAA to provide respondents
with educational materials regarding safety of

flight in the NAS to promote greater accountability and responsibility
of these new users. Registration also allows the FAA and law
enforcement agencies to address non-compliance by providing the means
for identifying an aircraft's owner and operator.
    Subject to certain exceptions discussed below, aircraft must be
registered prior to operation. See 49 U.S.C. 44101-44103. Upon
registration, the Administrator must issue a certificate of
registration to the aircraft owner. See 49 U.S.C. 44103.
    Registration, however, does not provide the authority to operate.
Persons intending to operate a small unmanned aircraft must operate in
accordance with the exception for limited recreational operations (49
U.S.C. 44809), part 107 or part 91, in accordance with a waiver issued
under part 107, in accordance with an exemption issued under 14 CFR
part 11 (including those persons operating under an exemption issued
pursuant to 49 U.S.C. 44807), or in conjunction with the issuance of a
special airworthiness certificate, and are required to register.
    Respondents: 283,761 registrants and 21,910 de-registrants based on
CY 2021 data.
    Frequency: Information is collected on occasion.
    Estimated Average Burden per Response: 6 minutes per response to
register and 3 minutes per response to de-register.
    Estimated Total Annual Burden: Approximately 28,376 hours to
register and 1,096 to de-register.

    Issued in Oklahoma City, OK on January 11, 2023.
Bonnie Lefko,
Program Analyst, FAA, Civil Aviation Registry, AFB-700.
[FR Doc. 2023-00707 Filed 1-13-23; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P