STANDARD FORM 83 SUPPORTING STATEMENT FOR ICR NO. 1847.02  FEDERAL PLAN REQUIREMENTS FOR LARGE MUNICIPAL WASTE COMBUSTORS CONSTRUCTED ON OR BEFORE SEPTEMBER 20, 1994 ( SUBPART FFF)

RENEWAL U. S. Environmental Protection Agency Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards Research Triangle Park, NC 27711 OCTOBER 2001 2 PART A OF THE SUPPORTING STATEMENT FOR STANDARD FORM 83 Municipal Waste Combustors 1. IDENTIFICATION OF THE INFORMATION COLLECTION ( a) Title of the Information Collection.

" Federal plan reporting and recordkeeping requirements for large municipal waste combustors." This is a renewal and has been assigned tracking number EPA ICR 1847.02 for years 4, 5 and 6.

( b) Characterization of Information Collection.

This supporting statement addresses information collection activities that would be imposed by the proposed " Federal Plan Requirements for Large Municipal Waste Combustors ( MWC's) Constructed on or before September 20, 1994," 40 CFR 62 subpart FFF ( MWC Federal plan). This information collection renewal is required as a result of a Federal plan to implement and enforce the Clean Air Act ( CAA) emission guidelines ( 40 CFR part 60 subpart Cb) for large municipal waste combustors ( MWC's) that were promulgated under the authority of CAA sections 111 and 129. The emission guidelines are not Federally enforceable. Under the CAA section 129( b)( 2), States were required to submit State plans to the Environmental Protection Agency ( EPA) for approval by December 19, 1996 that implement and enforce the guidelines. Section 129( b)( 3) requires EPA to promulgate a Federal plan to implement and enforce the guidelines in those States that have not submitted an approvable plan to EPA by December 19, 1997. Reporting and recordkeeping requirements would apply to MWC units with capacities to combust greater than 250 tons per day ( tpd) ( large MWC's). The EPA Regional Offices will collect the required information ( after promulgation of the MWC Federal plan) to ensure that the subpart FFF Federal plan is being implemented and enforced for affected facilities in States that have not submitted an approvable State plan.

Reduced dioxin/ furan testing Although no burden reduction credit is being taken on this SF 83 for MWC plants that are eligible for the following provision, it should be noted that a provision for less frequent dioxin/ furan testing is included in the MWC Federal plan. This provision allows plants to test only one unit per year rather than all units, as is normally required, if all units at the plant achieve emission levels less than the emission limit for 2 consecutive years. It is believed that most units will qualify for this option. As most plants have 2 or more units, this provision will reduce dioxin testing frequency, costs, and burden by at least one half starting in the third year after the compliance date of the affected facility specified in the MWC Federal plan. 3 2. AUTHORITY/ NEED FOR AND USE OF THE COLLECTION ( a) Authority/ Need for the Collection.

The EPA is required under section 129 of the CAA, as amended, to establish guidelines for existing stationary sources that reflect the maximum achievable control technology ( MACT) for achieving continuous emission reductions:

Section 129( a)( 1) States: The Administrator shall establish performance standards and other requirements pursuant to section 111 and this section of each category of solid waste incineration units. Such standards shall include emissions limitations and other requirements applicable to new units and guidelines ( under section 111( d) and this section) and other requirements applicable to existing units.

Section 129( a)( 2) States: Standards applicable to solid waste incineration units promulgated under section 111 and this section shall reflect the maximum degree of reduction in emissions of air pollutants listed under section ( a)( 4) that the Administrator, taking into consideration the cost of achieving such emission reduction, and any non air quality health and environmental impacts and energy requirements, determines is achievable for new or existing units in each category.

Section 129( b)( 1) States: Performance standards under this section and section 111 for solid waste incineration units shall include guidelines promulgated pursuant to section 111( d) and this section applicable to existing units. Such guidelines shall include, as provided in this section, each of the elements required by subsection ( a) ( emissions limitations, notwithstanding any restriction in section 111( d) regarding issuance of such limitations), subsection ( c) ( monitoring), subsection ( d) ( operator training), subsection ( e), ( permits), and subsection ( h)( 4) ( residual risk).

Section 129 also requires EPA to develop a Federal plan to enforce the emission guidelines for any State that has not submitted an approvable State plan by December 19, 1997. Section 129( b)( 3) is the legal authority for the MWC Federal plan.

Section 129( b)( 3) States: The Administrator shall develop, implement, and enforce a plan for existing solid waste incineration units within any category located in any State which has not submitted an approvable plan under this subsection with respect to units in such category within 2 years after the date on which the Administrator promulgated the relevant guidelines.

Section 129 is reproduced in Attachment 1. Certain reports and records are necessary to ensure that the MWC Federal plan requirements are being achieved on a continuous basis. 4 ( b) Use/ Users of the Data.

The information will be used by the Agency to ensure that the MWC Federal plan requirements are implemented and are complied with on a continuous basis through proper operation and maintenance of the emission control device.

In addition, records and reports are necessary to enable EPA to identify MWC units that may not be in compliance with the MWC Federal plan requirements. Based on reported information, EPA will decide which plants should be inspected and what records or processes should be inspected at the plants. The records that plants maintain will indicate to EPA whether plant personnel are operating and maintaining control equipment properly.

3. NONDUPLICATION, CONSULTATIONS, AND OTHER COLLECTION CRITERIA ( a) Nonduplication.

A computer search of EPA's ongoing ICR's revealed no duplication of information gathering efforts. This Federal plan will apply to MWC's in States that do not have an approved State plan. In those cases where States have not been delegated authority to implement and enforce the MWC Federal plan, yet still require information from the MWC plant, the plant owner or operator may submit a copy of the State or local reports to the Administrator in lieu of the report required by the Federal plan, if the same information is provided.

( b) Public notice prior to ICR submission to OMB.

A public notice of this collection was provided in the notice of proposed rulemaking published on August 17, 2001, 66FR43253. A comment was received from Mark Strohfus, Great River Energy, 17845 E. Hwy 10, P. O. Box 800, Elk River, MN 55330 0800. Mr. Strohfus wanted to know if EPA plan to increase the monitoring, recordkeeping, or reporting burden of large municipal waste combustors? EPA's responded to Mr. Strohfus as follows: Yes. A table is attached to the ICR for Subpart FFF that shows burden level by year. Subpart FFF is implemented over a number of years and the burden increases with time as air pollution control retrofits and CEMS retrofits are completed. In the first three year period, the burden is minimal as the air pollution control retrofits and CEMS retrofits are underway, but not completed. During the next three year period, the burden increases as MWCs come into compliance. By the third three year period, steady state burden level is achieved. All of these burden estimates are attached to the original ICR that was approved by OMB.

( c) Consultations. 5 The proposed MWC Federal plan includes the same recordkeeping and reporting requirements as the subpart Cb emission guidelines. An important element in the efforts to solicit public comments when developing the regulation in 1988 was the review of staff technical analyses and policy recommendations by the National Air Pollution Control Techniques Advisory Committee ( NAPCTAC). This advisory committee comprises representatives of State and local governments, regulated industries, environmental organizations, and technical consultants with expertise in air pollution control technologies. Prior to the December 20, 1989 proposed subpart Ea NSPS for MWC plants, presentations to NAPCTAC were made on May 18, 1989 and June 7, 1989 to solicit the views of committee members and interested members of the public. To provide interested persons the opportunity for oral presentation of data, views, or arguments regarding the December 20, 1989 proposed standards, public hearings were held in Boston, Massachusetts, on January 22 and 23, 1990; in Detroit, Michigan, on January 25 and 26, 1990; and in Seattle, Washington, on January 30 and 31, 1990. These hearings were open to the public, and the public was given the opportunity to comment on the proposed standards. The public comment period for the December 20, 1989 proposed standards was from December 20, 1989 to March 1, 1990. Over 300 comment letters were received, and about 100 interested parties testified at the public hearing.

On January 31, 1991, presentations were made to NAPCTAC to solicit their views on the additional requirements to be added to the standards through proposal of subparts Eb and Cb, including standards for cadmium ( Cd), lead ( Pb), mercury ( Hg), and siting. Additionally, after the subpart Eb NSPS and the subpart Cb emission guidelines were proposed on September 20, 1994, 152 letters commenting on the proposed standards and guidelines were received. Comments were provided by industry representatives, governmental entities, environmental groups, and private citizens. Though the comment period officially lasted from September 20, 1994 through November 21, 1994, one third of the comment letters received and considered by EPA were received after November 21, 1994. After consideration of the comments, subparts Eb and Cb were promulgated on December 19, 1995.

The Federal plan contains the same testing, monitoring, recordkeeping and reporting requirements as subparts Eb and Cb. Section 60.39b of subpart Cb, promulgated in December 1995, requires that for a State plan to be approved, it must contain the recordkeeping and reporting requirements of subpart Eb. Because this Federal plan will be promulgated in lieu of State plans for MWC's in States that do not have approved State plans, this Federal plan must also contain the same recordkeeping and reporting as subparts Eb and Cb. Public comments on the Federal plan requirements are solicited by the proposal notice.

( d) Effects of Less Frequent Data Collection.

The Federal plan requirements include a combination of annual emission testing and continuous monitoring with an abbreviated annual report ( more detailed semiannual 6 reports if any emission limits are exceeded) for demonstrating compliance with the air emissions standards. The frequency of these reports was chosen by EPA as the period that will provide an adequate margin of assurance that affected facilities will not operate for extended periods in violation of the standards.

Continuous monitoring provides assurance of continuous control of acid gas emissions and is an enforcement policy of EPA. Either sulfur dioxide ( SO2) or hydrogen chloride ( HCl), or both could be monitored; however, continuous monitoring devices for HCl are not readily available and are more expensive than SO2 monitors. Further, it was determined that continuous monitoring of SO2 with an annual performance test for HCl will adequately ensure that sources are achieving continuous compliance.

Annual testing and reporting of particulate matter ( PM), HCl, Cd, Pb, Hg, and opacity, in combination with continuous monitoring of opacity, will determine reduction in MWC metal emissions. In addition, quarterly monitoring of carbon usage will help ensure continuous compliance with the Hg emission limit. Less frequent testing and reporting would not ensure continuous compliance.

An annual stack test and report of the measured emission level for dioxin/ furan emissions is necessary to demonstrate control of organic emissions. However, less frequent dioxin/ furan testing is possible for plants if all affected facilities at a plant consistently achieve emission levels lower than the emission limit. Additionally, quarterly monitoring of carbon usage will help ensure continuous compliance with the dioxin/ furan emission limit.

Continuous monitoring of MWC operating parameters ( CO, load, temperature) is a part of good combustion practices ( GCP) and is the best method, together with quarterly monitoring of carbon usage, to ensure continuous reduction in organic emissions from MWC's.

( e) General Guidelines.

With the exception of requiring records to be maintained for more than 3 years, none of the guidelines in CFR 1320.5 are being exceeded. This Federal plan, which implements the emission guidelines, requires all records to be maintained at the source for a period of 5 years. In 40 CFR part 63, subpart A, " General Provisions for National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants for Source Categories," owners or operators of facilities are required to keep and maintain records for a period of 5 years. Under section 129 of the CAA Amendments of 1990, MWC facilities are subject to similar MACT based regulations, such that this 5 year record retention requirement was adopted for MWC facilities. Furthermore, section 129 requires all MWC units to obtain title V operating permits under part 70 or 71 permit programs. The title V permit programs also require records to be retained for 5 years. These records must be kept on file for use, if needed, by the regulating authority to ensure that the plant personnel are operating and maintaining control equipment properly. 7 ( f) Confidentiality and Sensitive Questions.

( i) Confidentiality. All 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 ( see 40 CFR 2; 41 FR 36902, September 1, 1976, amended by 43 FR 39999, September 28, 1978; 43 FR 42251, September 28, 1978; 44 FR 17674, March 23, 1979).

( ii) Sensitive Questions. This section is not applicable because this ICR does not involve matters of a sensitive nature.

4. THE RESPONDENTS AND THE INFORMATION REQUESTED ( a) Respondents/ NAICS Codes.

Respondents are owners or operators of existing municipal waste combustors with a capacity to combust greater than 250 tons per day that are located in those States that have not yet received EPA approval of State plans. The MWC Federal plan requirements affect North American Industry Classification System ( NAICS) Code 92411, Air and Water Resource and Solid Waste Management ( formerly SIC Code 9511, Air and Water Resource and Solid Waste Management), and NAICS Code 562213, Solid Waste Combustors and Incinerators ( formerly SIC Code 4953, Refuse Systems). The 1997 NAICS replaces the 1987 Standard Industrial Code system.

( b) Information Requested.

( i) Data items. Attachment 2, Source Data and Information Requirements, summarizes the recordkeeping and reporting requirements of this regulation.

( ii) Respondent activities. The respondent activities required by the standards are provided under the first column of table 1, introduced in section 6( a). All burden tables are included in Attachment 3.

( iii) Summary of Federal plan requirements. For years 4, 5 and 6 ( renewal) emission controls were installed at the end of year 3.

As the means for determining compliance with the MWC Federal plan requirements for MWC acid gases, MWC metals, MWC organics, and GCP, owners or operators of affected facilities are required to collect the information specified in subpart Cb, keep records, and submit reports. Owners or operators are required to conduct compliance tests and compliance demonstrations for all pollutants and parameters, as well as continuous monitoring or annual retests of all pollutants and parameters, unless the owner or operator qualifies for less frequent dioxin/ furan testing, as described below. 8 Continuous monitoring of SO2, nitrogen oxides ( NOx), opacity, carbon monoxide ( CO), load level, temperature of the flue gas stream, and oxygen ( O2) or carbon dioxide ( CO2) is required. Annual retests for PM, dioxin/ furan, opacity, HCl, Cd, Pb, Hg, and fugitive ash emissions are required. As a means of determining continuous compliance for Hg and dioxin/ furan, owners or operators are required to keep records of the quarterly amount of carbon used for activated carbon injection and to calculate the estimated hourly carbon injection rate for hours of operation.

Owners or operators of affected facilities are required to submit an initial compliance report for all regulated pollutants and parameters. Once a year, owners or operators of affected facilities are required to submit an annual report for all regulated pollutants and parameters that summarizes data collected for all pollutants and parameters regulated by the MWC Federal plan. Owners or operators are required to submit an annual report that indicates the highest emission level established during the annual test or recorded using continuous emissions monitoring systems ( CEMS) for SO2, NOx, CO, MWC unit load level, PM control device inlet temperature, and opacity. If the emission level recorded for any of these pollutants shows emissions above the emission limit for the pollutant or a calculated carbon injection rate below the carbon injection rate established during the Hg or dioxin/ furan annual retest, then the owner or operator is required to submit a semiannual report for the calendar half during which the test was conducted or data were collected, and the report is required to include the supporting data or test report and an explanation for the exceedence. Owners or operators are not required to submit test reports or raw CEMS data unless a pollutant or parameter is recorded as exceeding the emission limit for the pollutant or parameter.

As described above, a provision for less frequent dioxin/ furan testing is included in the MWC Federal plan. It is believed that most affected facilities will qualify for this option. As most plants have 2 or more affected facilities, this option to reduce testing frequency will reduce costs and burden for dioxin/ furan by one half starting in the third year after compliance. This SF 83 burden estimate does not reflect this reduced burden.

Under the MWC Federal plan, owners or operators of affected facilities are required to keep records of certain parameters and information. These records include:

Employees' names and dates of their initial and annual review of the sitespecific operating manual.

Rates and parameters using CEMS for NOx, SO2, CO, and O2 or CO2, and continuous opacity monitors for opacity levels.

Continuous measurements of MWC unit load and PM control device temperature, and computation of average emissions and operating parameters. 9

The date and operating parameters of any opacity level exceedences, with reasons and a description of corrective action.

Results of daily SO2, NOx, and CO CEMS drift tests and quarterly Appendix F accuracy assessments.

Records of initial performance tests and all annual performance retests for compliance with PM, dioxin/ furan, HCl, Cd, Pb, and Hg limits.

Records of periodic testing for fugitive ash emissions.

All records are required to be maintained at the source for a period of 5 years. Refer to section 3( e) for justification of this 5 year recordkeeping requirement.

All reports required under the MWC Federal plan are to be submitted to the applicable EPA Regional Office. The information will be used to determine that all sources subject to the MWC Federal plan are achieving the requirements.

5. THE INFORMATION COLLECTED  AGENCY ACTIVITIES, COLLECTION, METHODOLOGY, AND INFORMATION MANAGEMENT ( a) Agency Activities.

A list of Agency activities is provided in section 6( c) and in table 2 of Attachment 3.

( b) Collection Methodology and Management.

See section 5( d) Collection Schedule.

( c) Small Entity Flexibility.

The Agency considers a small business in the MWC industry to be one with annual gross revenue less than $ 6 million, and a small government to be one that serves a population less than 50,000. The 135 MWC units potentially affected by the Federal plan are not owned by small businesses or non profit organizations. Large MWC units affected by the MWC Federal plan serve a population greater than 50,000, therefore no small governments are affected by this proposed rule. It would take an MWC unit with half the capacity of those affected by the MWC Federal plan to serve a community of about 50,000. For example, an MWC unit with 123 tons per day capacity would serve a community of 50,000 if each person generates 1.8 kg of MSW per day and sends all of it to the MWC plant, which would be operated at 80 percent of capacity. The MWC Federal plan affects only MWC units with a capacity greater than 250 tons per day ( 225 Mg/ day) and therefore affects no small businesses and no small governments. 10 ( d) Collection Schedule.

Information collected in this renewal includes, annual compliance tests for dioxin/ furan, PM, opacity, HCl, Cd, Pb, Hg, and fugitive ash emissions. Continuous monitoring is required for SO2, NOx, CO, CO2 or O2, load, temperature of the flue gas stream, and opacity. For all of the regulated pollutants, a brief annual report listing the highest pollutant emission level recorded for all tested and monitored pollutants is required. Additionally, if any pollutant emission limit is exceeded, a semi annual report providing test and monitoring data and explanation of the exceedence is required.

The EPA intends to prepare annual progress reports on the implementation and enforcement of the MWC Federal plan. Information obtained from annual compliance reports will be published and distributed through the CDS. Data obtained during periodic visits by Agency personnel from records maintained by the respondents will be tabulated for internal EPA use in compliance with enforcement programs.

6. ESTIMATING THE BURDEN AND COST OF THE COLLECTION ( a) Estimating Respondent Burden.

Based on a 1995 MWC inventory and recent information from EPA Regional Offices, this Federal plan is projected to affect 135 MWC units at 56 plants in 19 States. The respondent burden expected to result from implementation of the MWC Federal plan reflects a scenario in which all but three States have approved State plans. Table 1 presents an itemized breakdown of the reporting and recordkeeping requirements for the respondents subject to this Federal plan. ( All burden tables are included in Attachment 3.) The annual cost and labor burden estimates for reporting and recordkeeping are also presented in table 1. These numbers were derived from estimates based on the 1995 MWC inventory, previous subparts Ea and Eb rulemakings, EPA's experience with other standards, and the ESD Manual on burden estimates.

The burden estimate is based on five States. The years 4, 5 and 6 burden estimate includes 24 affected units at 8 plants in three States. See Docket Item A 97 45, II I 7 " Status of Section 111( d)/ 129 State Plans for Large MWC Units" for a summary of State plan submittals.

( b) Estimating Respondent Costs.

The information collection activities for sources subject to these requirements are presented in table 1. The total cost for each respondent activity comprises labor costs, capital/ startup costs, and operating and maintenance ( O& M) costs.

( i) Labor costs, on a per hour basis, are based on those posted on the Bureau of Labor Statistics ( BLS) web site ( http:// state. bls. gov/ news. release) as of March 1998. 11 The occupational category that is the most similar to personnel at MWC plants is assumed to be " electric, gas, and sanitary services, blue collar occupations" for technical personnel and " service producing industries" ( which includes utilities) for management and clerical personnel. Those labor rates are $ 20.01 for technical personnel, $ 24.15 for management personnel, and $ 11.37 for clerical personnel. The labor rates are adjusted with an average fringe benefit rate of 140 percent to account for paid leave, insurance, etc. This fringe benefit rate is determined by averaging the BLS fringe benefit rates for similar occupational categories. The labor rates are also adjusted by an overhead and profit rate of 167 percent. Therefore, the total " loaded" wage rates are calculated by the following equation:

base labor rate x 1.40 x l. 67 = " loaded" wage rate Given the fringe benefit and cost overhead adjustments, the final total " loaded" wage rates are $ 46.78 for technical personnel, $ 56.46 for management personnel, and $ 26.58 for clerical personnel. A copy of the sections used from the President's report is provided in Attachment 4.

( ii) Estimating Capital/ Start up Costs. Capital costs associated with this Federal plan result from the installation of CEMS. All MWC plants ( except for those subject to subpart Ea) must install CEMS to collect the information required by EPA. CEMS are required for monitoring sulfur dioxide, nitrogen oxides, opacity, carbon monoxide, and carbon dioxide or oxygen in the MWC exhaust stream. Start up costs result from initial CEMS demonstrations and from initial emission performance tests for PM, dioxin/ furans, opacity, fugitives, HCl, Pb, Hg, and Cd. It is assumed that all MWC plants will contract a testing company to provide sampling and analytical services for air emissions testing. Based on EPA's experience with CEMS installation, CEMS performance demonstrations, and with manual measurement methods, the estimated cost for each of these activities is as follows:

CEMS Installation ( SO2, NOx, Opacity, CO, CO2 or O 2) = $ 100,000

Initial CEMS performance demonstration = $ 37,200

Initial Manual Emission Tests ( PM, dioxins, opacity, fugitives, HCl, Cd, Pb, Hg) = $ 48,500

Initial Manual Emission Tests for units subject to subpart Ea ( fugitives, Cd, Pb, Hg) = $ 16,760 Given the requirements of the Federal plan, the estimated total annualized capital and startup costs for the affected units averaged over the first 3 years are $ 3,513,000.

( iii) Total Operation and Maintenance ( O& M), and Purchase of Service Costs. Costs associated with O& M and purchase of service costs include daily CEMS calibration, 12 quarterly CEMS audits, and annual manual method compliance tests ( PM, dioxins, opacity, fugitives, HCl, Cd, Pb, Hg).

As part of O& M costs, MWC plants will calibrate the CEMS daily and audit the CEMS quarterly. Operation and maintenance costs include purchasing calibration gases and performing daily calibrations and quarterly appendix F audits. Facilities also will have to conduct one relative accuracy test audit ( RATA) per year for the CEMS. The costs for CEMS O& M are as follows:

Daily calibration = $ 40,150 per year

Quarterly performance audits = $ 8,925 per quarter

RATA = $ 37,200 per year Costs for each annual manual method performance test are the same as the initial manual method tests presented in section 6( b)( ii) of this supporting statement.

The estimated total operation, maintenance, and purchase of services costs averaged over the first 3 years are expected to be $ 58,915. This estimated cost includes the installation of CEMS, quarterly audits of the CEMS, and annual manual method performance tests.

( c) Estimating Agency Burden and Cost.

Because the information collection requirements were developed as an incidental part of standards development, no costs can be attributed to the development of the additional information collection requirements. Because reporting and recordkeeping requirements on the part of the respondents are required under sections 111 and 129 of the CAA, no operational costs would be incurred by the Federal Government. Publication and distribution of the information are part of the AIRS Facility subsystem, with the result that no Federal costs can be directly attributed to the ICR. Examination of records to be maintained by the respondents would occur incidentally as part of the periodic inspection of sources that is part of EPA's overall compliance and enforcement program and, therefore, could not be attributable to the ICR. The only costs that the Federal Government would incur are: user costs associated with the analysis of the reported information; on site observation of the initial CEMS demonstrations and initial performance tests and retests; and the preparation of an annual report summarizing the compliance status of all the affected facilities. These are presented in table 2.

Labor rates for the Federal employees are based on the estimated hourly rates of $ 40.33 for technical personnel ( GS 12, Step 5); $ 66.66 for management personnel ( GS 15, Step 5); and $ 22.73 for clerical personnel ( GS 7, Step 5). These values represent the inclusion of a l. 6 multiplier to account for overhead and fringe benefit costs. 13 ( d) Estimating the Respondent Universe and Total Burden Costs.

The total number of respondents also is referred to as the respondent universe. The respondent universe for this ICR is based on a 1995 MWC inventory and recent information from EPA Regional Offices. The respondents universe has not changed since 1995, therefore, there has been no industry growth. The industry burden is calculated for 135 MWC units at 56 plants. As described below, the burden to the respondent universe varies among the activities because not all respondents must complete each activity.

The Agency estimates that 9 of the units at 4 plants affected by the Federal plan are already subject to subpart Ea, and would incur costs only for the subpart Cb requirements that are beyond the requirements of subpart Ea. Three Ea units at one plant are expected to be affected by the Federal plan during the 4, 5 and 6 year.

Additional estimates regarding the respondent universe are included in the industry burden determinations. EPA estimates that twenty percent of all respondents will repeat initial performance tests due to failure and eight percent will do semi annual excess emissions tests. Also, EPA estimates that approximately fifty percent of the respondents will complete retrofit and conduct initial performance testing during Year 2 and will begin annual performance tests and reports and quarterly appendix F audits of CEMS during Year 3. Also during Year 3, these respondents will begin recordkeeping for affected MWC units. The remaining fifty percent will complete their retrofit and conduct initial performance tests in Year 3. The percentage estimates are based on the previous subparts Ea and Eb rulemakings, EPA's experience with other standards, and the ESD Manual on burden estimates.

( e) Bottom Line Burden Hours and Cost Tables.

( i) The respondent tally. A breakdown for each of the collection, reporting, and recordkeeping activities required by the Federal plan is presented in table 1. The estimate of total annual hours requested from the respondents was based on the assumptions outlined in section 6( d) of this supporting statement. The EPA estimated the respondent burden by totaling the hours per year for technical, managerial, and clerical staff for the 4, 5 and 6 years of this Federal plan and then dividing that total by three. A similar approach was taken for estimating annual labor costs. For the next 4th, 5th and 6th year, the implementation of the Federal plan, EPA estimates that industry would expend 58,915 hours annually at a cost of $ 3,218,400 per year to meet the monitoring, recordkeeping, and reporting requirements.

( ii) The Agency tally. The bottom line Agency burden hours and costs, presented in table 2, are calculated by totaling the hours per year for technical, managerial, and clerical staff ( as specified for respondents), and by totaling the cost column. The estimated average annual burden, over years 4, 5 and 6, for the Agency would be 3625 hours at a cost of $ 172,187 ( including travel expenses) per year. 14 Years 4, 5 and 6 burden includes initial testing. Also during Year 3 initial testing and reporting and appendix F CEMS audits. Respondent hours in Year 3 is 58,915 ( technical, managerial, and clerical). The total cost ( labor plus non labor) for all Year 3 respondents is $ 10,941,000.

( f) Reasons for change in burden.

By the third three year period, the burden level is achieved. Due to State Plan, number of respondents will remain at 56. Since 1995, labor rates have changed as reflected in Tables 1 and 2. ( Renewal)

( g) Burden Statement.

Burden means 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 currently valid OMB control number. The OMB control numbers for EPA's regulations are listed in 40 CFR part 9 and 48 CFR chapter 15.

Send comments on Agency's need for this information, the accuracy of the provided burden estimates, and any suggested methods for minimizing a respondent burden, including through the use of automated collection techniques to Ms Susan Auby, Collection Strategies Division ( Mail Code 2822), Offfice of Environmental Information, United States Environmental Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW, Washington, D. C. 20460 0001; and 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. Include the EPA ICR number 1847.02 and OMB Control Number 2060 0390 in any correspondence. PART B OF THE SUPPORTING STATEMENT This section is not applicable because statistical methods are not used in data collection associated with this regulation. ATTACHMENT 1 Section 129 of the Clean Air Act ATTACHMENT 2 SOURCE DATA AND INFORMATION REQUIREMENTS ATTACHMENT 2 SOURCE DATA AND INFORMATION REQUIREMENTS Requirement Federal plan Regulation Reference ( 40 CFR 62) 40 CFR Subpart Eb Cross Reference RECORDKEEPING 5 year retention of records 62.39b( a) 60.59b( d) ( e)

Records of CEMS rates and parameters and computations of average emissions and parameters. 62.39b( a) 60.59b( d)

Records of initial performance tests and annual performance tests. 62.39b( a) 60.59b( d)

Records of results of daily CEMS drift tests and Appendix F accuracy assessments. 62.39b( a) 60.59b( d)

Records of the occurrence and duration of any startup, shutdown, or malfunction of the facility or any malfunction of the CEMS. 62.39b( a) n/ a Records of quarterly amount of sorbent used for Hg control. 62.39b( a) 60.59b( d)

Records of names of persons who have completed review of operating manual. 62.39b( a) 60.59b( d) ATTACHMENT 2 SOURCE DATA AND INFORMATION REQUIREMENTS ( Continued)

Requirement Federal plan Regulation Reference ( 40 CFR 62) 40 CFR Subpart Eb Cross Reference REPORTING Notification of completion of each increment of progress. 62.39b( a) n/ a Notification of initial performance tests ( PM, dioxin/ furan, opacity, HCl, Cd, Pb, Hg, fugitives). 60.8( d) of General Provisions n/ a Report initial performance tests for all regulated pollutants and parameters. 62.39b( a) 60.59b( f)

Report of CEMS demonstration and test data. 62.39b( a) 60.59b( f)

Annual compliance reports for all pollutants and parameters. 62.39b( a) 60.59b( g)

Semiannual excess emission reports ( SO2, CO, load, temperature, PM, dioxin/ furan, opacity, HCl, Cd, Pb, Hg, fugitives). 62.39b( a) 60.59b( h) ATTACHMENT 3 RESPONDENT AND FEDERAL GOVERNMENT BURDEN AND COST OF RECORDKEEPING AND REPORTING REQUIREMENTS OF SUBPART FFF TABLE 1. ANNUAL RESPONDENT BURDEN AND COST OF RECORDKEEPING AND REPORTING REQUIREMENTS OF THE FEDERAL PLAN FOR EXISTING MWC UNITS SUBJECT TO SUBPART FFF TABLE 1. ANNUAL RESPONDENT BURDEN AND COST OF RECORDKEEPING AND REPORTING REQUIREMENTS OF THE FEDERAL PLAN FOR EXISTING MWC UNITS SUBJECT TO SUBPART FFF ( CONTINUED) TABLE 1. ANNUAL RESPONDENT BURDEN AND COST OF RECORDKEEPING AND REPORTING REQUIREMENTS OF THE FEDERAL PLAN FOR EXISTING MWC UNITS SUBJECT TO SUBPART FFF ( CONTINUED) TABLE 2. ANNUAL FEDERAL GOVERNMENT BURDEN AND COST OF RECORDKEEPING AND REPORTING REQUIREMENTS OF THE FEDERAL PLAN FOR EXISTING MWC UNITS SUBJECT TO SUBPART FFF ATTACHMENT 4 ECONOMIC REPORT OF THE PRESIDENT 1996 ( EMPLOYMENT COST INDEX) ATTACHMENT 5 PAPERWORK REDUCTION ACT SUBMISSION ( OMB FORM 83 I)


[Federal Register Volume 86, Number 89 (Tuesday, May 11, 2021)]
[Notices]
[Pages 25852-25854]
[FR Doc No: 2021-09935]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Docket No. IC21-20-000]

Commission Information Collection Activities (FERC-567, FERC-
576); Consolidated Comment Request; Extension

AGENCY: Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, Department of Energy.

ACTION: Notice of information collections and request for comments.

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

SUMMARY: In compliance with the requirements of the Paperwork Reduction
Act of 1995, the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (Commission or
FERC) is soliciting public comment on the currently approved
information collections, FERC-567 (Gas Pipeline Certificates: Annual
Reports of System Flow Diagrams) and FERC-576 (Report of Service
Interruptions or Damage to Facilities) which will be submitted to the
Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for a review of the information
collection requirements.

DATES: Comments on the collections of information are due July 12,
2021.

ADDRESSES: You may submit copies of your comments (identified by Docket
No. IC21-20-000 and the specific FERC collection number (FERC-567 or
FERC-576)) by one of the following methods:
    Electronic filing through http://www.ferc.gov, is preferred.
     Electronic Filing: Documents must be filed in acceptable
native applications and print-to-PDF, but not in scanned or picture
format.
     For those unable to file electronically, comments may be
filed by USPS mail or by hand (including courier) delivery:
    [cir] Mail via U.S. Postal Service Only: Addressed to: Federal
Energy Regulatory Commission, Secretary of the Commission, 888 First
Street NE, Washington, DC 20426.
    [cir] Hand (including courier) Delivery: Deliver to: Federal Energy
Regulatory Commission, 12225 Wilkins Avenue, Rockville, MD 20852.
    Instructions: All submissions must be formatted and filed in
accordance with submission guidelines at: http://www.ferc.gov. For user
assistance, contact FERC Online Support by email at
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or by phone at<PHONE_NUMBER> (toll-free).
    Docket: Users interested in receiving automatic notification of
activity in this docket or in viewing/downloading comments and
issuances in this docket may do so at http://www.ferc.gov.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ellen Brown may be reached by email at
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>telephone at<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    Comments: Comments are invited on: (1) Whether the collections of
information is necessary for the proper performance of the functions of
the Commission, including whether the information will have practical
utility; (2) the accuracy of the agency's estimate of the burden \1\
and cost of the

collections of information, including the validity of the methodology
and assumptions used; (3) ways to enhance the quality, utility and
clarity of the information collections; and (4) ways to minimize the
burden of the collections of information on those who are to respond,
including the use of automated collection techniques or other forms of
information technology.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ Burden is defined as the total time, effort, or financial
resources expended by persons to generate, maintain, retain, or
disclose or provide information to or for a Federal agency. For
further explanation of what is included in the information
collections burden, reference 5 Code of Federal Regulations 1320.3.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The following information pertains to FERC-
567 only.
    Title: FERC-567, Gas Pipeline Certificates: Annual Reports of
System Flow Diagrams.
    OMB Control No.: 1902-0005.
    Type of Request: Three-year extension of the FERC-567 information
collection requirements with no changes to the current reporting
requirements.
    Abstract: Per 18 Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) 260.8(a), each
major interstate natural gas pipeline with a system delivery capacity
exceeding 100,000 Mcf \2\ per day is required to submit, by June 1 of
each year, diagrams reflecting operating conditions on the pipeline's
main transmission system during the previous 12 months ending on
December 31. The submitted information must include (i) configuration
and location of installed pipeline facilities; (ii) receipt and
delivery points between shippers, and pipeline companies; (iii)
location of compressor stations on a pipeline system; (iv) pipeline
diameters; (v) maximum allowable operating pressures; (vi) suction and
discharge pressures at compressor stations; (vii) installed horsepower
and volumes compressed at each compressor station; (viii) existing
shippers currently nominating service under firm contracts on each
pipeline company; and (ix) peak capacity on the system. The data is
collected so that it's available in the event the Commission needs to
confirm pipeline facility data.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \2\ Mcf is a unit of measurement for natural gas that equals
1,000 cubic feet.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Type of Respondents: Natural gas pipeline companies with a system
delivery capacity in excess of 100,000 Mcf per day.
    Estimate of Annual Burden: The Commission estimates the annual
public reporting burden for the information collection as:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ The number of respondents in the currently approved OMB
inventory for FERC-567 is 197. Changes to the estimate were based on
average number of respondents over the past three years.
    \4\ The Commission staff estimates that the average respondent
for FERC-567 is similarly situated to the Commission, in terms of
salary plus benefits. Based on FERC's 2020 annual average of
$172,329 (for salary plus benefits), the average hourly cost is $83/
hour.

                                       FERC-567--Gas Pipeline Certificates: Annual Reports of System Flow Diagrams
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                     Number of     Annual number
           Respondents              respondents    of responses    Total number of     Average burden and     Total annual burden hours      Cost per
                                        \3\       per respondent      responses       cost per response \4\     and total annual cost     respondent ($)
                                             (1)             (2)    (1) * (2) = (3)  (4)...................  (3) * (4) = (5)............       (5) / (1)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Natural Gas Pipelines...........             124               1                124  4 hrs.; $332..........  496 hrs.; $41,168..........            $332
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The following information pertains to FERC-576 only.
    Title: FERC-576, Report of Service Interruptions or Damage to
Facilities.
    OMB Control No.: 1902-0004.
    Type of Request: Three-year extension of the FERC-576 information
collection requirements with no changes to the current reporting
requirements.
    Abstract: Per 18 CFR 260.9, natural gas pipeline companies must
report (i) damage to any jurisdictional natural gas facilities other
than liquefied natural gas facilities caused by a hurricane, earthquake
or other natural disaster or terrorist activity that results in a loss
of or reduction in pipeline throughput or storage deliverability; and
(ii) serious interruptions of service to any shipper involving
jurisdictional natural gas facilities other than liquefied natural gas
facilities.
    The notifications, made to the Director, Division of Pipeline
Certificates via email or fax as soon as feasibly possible, must state:
(1) The location of the service interruption or damage to natural gas
pipeline or storage facilities; (2) The nature of any damage to
pipeline or storage facilities; (3) Specific identification of the
facilities damaged; (4) The time the service interruption or damage to
the facilities occurred; (5) The customers affected by the service
interruption or damage to the facilities; (6) Emergency actions taken
to maintain service; and (7) Company contact and telephone number. The
information provided by these notifications are kept by the Commission
and are not made part of the public record.
    In addition, if an incident requires reporting of the incident to
the Department of Transportation under the Natural Gas Pipeline Safety
Act of 1968, a copy of such report shall be submitted to the Director
of the Commission's Division of Pipeline Certificates, within 30 days
of the reportable incident. Natural gas companies must also send a copy
of submitted reports to each state commission for the state(s) in which
the reported service interruption occurred. If the Commission did not
collect this information, it would lose a data point that assists in
the monitoring of transactions, operations, and reliability of
interstate pipelines.
    Type of Respondents: Natural gas companies experiencing service
interruptions or damage to facilities.
    Estimate of Annual Burden: The Commission estimates the average
annual burden and cost \5\ for this information collection as follows.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ Costs (for wages and benefits) are based on wage figures
from the Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS) for May 2020 (at https://www.bls.gov/oes/current/naics2_22.htm). Commission staff estimates
that 20% of the work is performed by a manager, and 80% is performed
by legal staff. The hourly costs for wages plus benefits are:
     Management (Occupational Code: 11-0000) is $97.89.
     Legal (Occupational Code: 23-0000) is $142.25.
Therefore, the weighted hourly cost (for wages plus benefits) is
$133.38 [(0.20 * $97.89) + (0.80 * $142.25)].

                                            FERC-576--Report of Service Interruptions or Damage to Facilities
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                   Number of     Annual number                                                                               Cost per
                                  respondents    of responses    Total number of   Average burden hours and   Total annual burden hours   respondent \7\
                                      \6\       per respondent      responses        cost ($) per response      and total annual cost           ($)
                                           (1)             (2)    (1) * (2) = (3)  (4).....................  (3) * (4) = (5)............       (5) / (1)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Notification of Incident--                  50               1                 50  1 hr.; $133.38..........  50 hrs.; $6,669............         $133.38
 Service Interruption.
Notification of Incident--                  22               1                 22  0.25 hrs.; $33.45.......  5.5 hrs.; $735.90..........           33.45
 Damage.
Submittal of DOT Incident                   10               1                 10  0.25 hrs.; $33.45.......  2.5 hrs.; $333.45..........           33.45
 Report.
                               -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Total.....................              82  ..............  .................  ........................  84 hrs.; $11,212.74........  ..............
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Dated: May 5, 2021.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ The total number of respondents in the currently approved
OMB inventory for FERC-576 is 147. Changes to the estimate were
based on average number of respondents over the past three years.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Kimberly D. Bose,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2021-09935 Filed 5-10-21; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


Placeholder: confidential business information item

Solvay Fluorides Comment on 12-28-07

For more information please contact Ross Brennan by phone at
202-343-9226 or by email at   HYPERLINK<EMAIL_ADDRESS><EMAIL_ADDRESS>


[Federal Register: November 21, 2008 (Volume 73, Number 226)]
[Notices]
[Page 70686-70687]
[DOCID:fr21no08-101]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-58944; File No. SR-DTC-2008-09]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; The Depository Trust Company;
Order Granting Approval of a Proposed Rule Change to Expand DTC's Debit
Cap Look-Ahead Processing

November 13, 2008.

I. Introduction

    On September 12, 2008, The Depository Trust Company (``DTC'') filed
with the Securities and Exchange Commission (``Commission'') proposed
rule change SR-DTC-2008-09 pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (``Act'').\1\ Notice of the proposal
was published in the Federal Register on March 7, 2008.\2\ No comment
letters were received. For the reasons discussed below, the Commission
is granting approval of the proposed rule change.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1).
    \2\ Securities Exchange Act Release No. 58730 (October 3, 2008),
73 FR 59694 (October 9, 2008).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

II. Description

    The proposed rule change amends the Look-Ahead Process in DTC's
Settlement Services Guide to allow Money Market Issuance Deliveries
pending for a Custodian's or Dealer's net debit cap to complete against
Maturity Presentments pending for an Issuing/Paying Agent's net debit
cap. DTC's processing system will calculate the net effect of the
dollar amount of offsetting transactions in the accounts of the two
Participants involved. If the net of the transactions result in
positive risk management controls in those two accounts, the
transactions will be completed.
    On June 10, 2003, the Commission approved a proposed rule change to
establish a transaction Look-Ahead Process which became available for
municipal and corporate bonds, including Money Market Instruments
(``MMIs'').\3\ On August 11, 2004, the Commission approved another
proposed rule change which expanded the application and extended the
benefit of the Look-Ahead Process to all equity transactions.\4\ With
this proposed rule change, DTC is proposing to expand the Look-Ahead
Process to MMIs.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\Securities Exchange Act Release No. 48007 (June 10, 2003), 68
FR 35744 (June 16, 2003) (File No. SR-DTC-2003-07).
    \4\Securities Exchange Act Release No. 50182 (August 11, 2004),
69 FR 51341 (August 18, 2004) (File No. SR-DTC-2004-05).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The purpose of DTC's Look-Ahead Process is to reduce the number of
recycling transactions in the system caused by the Net Debit Cap Risk
Management Control.\5\ The existing Look-Ahead Process finds delivery
transactions that are pending because the Receiving Participant has
reached its net debit cap.\6\ It then looks to see whether the
Receiving Participant has a pending delivery for the same security to
another Participant.\7\ In such a situation, DTC's Account Transaction
Processor (``ATP'')\8\ will calculate the net effect to the collateral
\9\ and net debit cap controls for all three Participants involved. If
the net effect will not result in a deficit in the collateral or net
debit cap controls for any of the three Participants, ATP processes the
transactions simultaneously. Without the Look-Ahead Process, the
transaction would pend in DTC's system until another transaction
created sufficient credit in the Receiving Participant's account. Most
credits are generated when a Participant delivers securities versus
payment, pledges securities for value, receives principal, dividend or
other interest allocations, or wires funds (a Settlement Progress
Payment (``SPP'')) to DTC's account at the Federal Reserve Bank of New
York in order to reduce its DTC net debit.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\Net debit caps help ensure that DTC can complete settlement,
even if a Participant fails to settle.
    \6\Before completing a transaction in which a Participant is the
receiver, DTC calculates the resulting effect the transaction would
have on the Participant's account and determines whether the
resulting net balance would exceed the Participant's net debit cap.
Any transaction that would cause the Participant's net settlement
debit to exceed its net debit cap is placed in a pending (recycling)
queue until another transaction creates credits in the Participant's
account.
    \7\For example, Participant A is delivering shares to
Participant B and Participant B has a delivery obligation of shares
with the same CUSIP to Participant C.
    \8\ATP is the core processing system for all transaction
activity affecting security positions held at DTC.
    \9\DTC tracks collateral in a Participant's account through its
Collateral Monitor (``CM''). At all times, the CM reflects the
amount by which the collateral in the account exceeds the net debit
in the account. When processing a transaction, DTC verifies that the
deliverer's and receiver's CMs will not become negative when the
transaction completes. If the transaction would cause either party
to have a negative CM, the transaction will recycle until the
deficient account has sufficient collateral for the transaction to
complete.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In order to further reduce the number of recycling transactions in
the system and to further improve the timeliness and certainty of
transactions completing, DTC is expanding the Look-Ahead Process beyond
same securities for MMIs to allow pairs of money market instrument
transactions between two Participants (i.e., an Issuing Paying Agent
[``IPA''] and a custodian or dealer) that are pending for both parties'
net debit caps to complete. This situation occurs when an IPA has a
delivery of a new money market instrument to a custodian or a dealer
for X dollars and that same custodian or dealer has a maturity of a
money market instrument of equal or greater value awaiting acceptance
by the same IPA. The proposed rule change will allow ATP to process
those transactions simultaneously, as long as neither Participant's
risk management controls were overridden.
    This enhancement to the Look-Ahead Process will reduce the number
of MMI recycling transactions. The Look-Ahead enhancement to DTC's
processing system will not result in any systematic changes for
Participants.

III. Discussion

    Section 17A(b)(3)(F) of the Act requires that the rules of a
clearing agency be designed to assure the

safeguarding of securities and funds which are in the custody or
control of the clearing agency or for which it is responsible.\10\ When
the Commission approved DTC's Debit Cap Look-Ahead Process in 2003 for
municipal and corporate debt transactions and the expansion of the
process to include all equity transactions, all valued pledge
transactions, and all valued release transactions in 2004, the
Commission found that the Look-Ahead Process was consistent with DTC's
obligations under Section 17A(b)(3)(F) to promote the prompt and
accurate clearance and settlement of securities transactions.\11\
Similarly, the expansion of the Look-Ahead Process beyond same
securities for MMIs is designed to reduce the number of pending MMI
transactions at DTC without compromising DTC's risk management
controls. Accordingly, based on this and the earlier findings, we find
that the expansion of the Debit Cap Look-Ahead Process for MMIs should
promote the prompt and accurate clearance and settlement of securities
transactions.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \10\ 15 U.S.C. 78q-1(b)(3)(F).
    \11\ Securities Exchange Act Release Nos. 48007 and 50182.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

IV. Conclusion

    On the basis of the foregoing, the Commission finds that the
proposed rule change is consistent with the requirements of the Act and
in particular Section 17A of the Act and the rules and regulations
thereunder.\12\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \12\ In approving the proposed rule change, the Commission
considered the proposal's impact on efficiency, competition and
capital formation. 15 U.S.C. 78c(f).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    It is therefore ordered, pursuant to Section 19(b)(2) of the Act,
that the proposed rule change (File No. SR-DTC-2008-09) be and hereby
is approved.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \13\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12).

    For the Commission by the Division of Trading and Markets,
pursuant to delegated authority.\13\
Florence E. Harmon,
Acting Secretary.
 [FR Doc. E8-27674 Filed 11-20-08; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


                                           Federal Award Identification Number                                                                  Recipient Name  The FDA's Cooperative Agreement Program for States and Territories to Implement a National Produce Safety Program Project Period: 20XX-20XX                                         Project Plan The Project Plan is the documentation of your plans and key tasks for each applicable Program Objective; as well as key accomplishments for each applicable Program Objective.  Although the format provided is compartmentalized, your plan should "tie together" and be reflective of your jurisdiction's Assessment.  Below is the suggested Project Plan outline; yellow highlight indicated data entry spaces. Changes to the Project Plan throughout this cooperative agreement must be tracked and explained in this document.   Program Overview  A statement with the program's mission and vision. Summarize the expected outcomes of the project.  Enter data Program Objectives Objective 1: Program Documentation Overall Plans:  Enter data Key Milestone/Task Planned Start Date Responsible Party  Planned  Completion Date Status  (not started/delayed/in-progress/completed/abandoned) Enter data MM/YYYY Name and/or Title MM/YYYY Not started/delayed/in-progress/completed/abandoned Enter data

Enter data

Enter data

Key Accomplishments (listed/bulleted) and should directly correlate to plans/goals:   Year 1:  Enter data Year 2:  Enter data Year 3:  Enter data Year 4:  Enter data Year 5:  Enter data Objective 2: Program Administration Position Title  Name/Vacant Calendar months funded by CAP Responsibilities (Oversight/Manager/Supervise/Farm Inventory/Inspector/Administrative/Education  Outreach/Other) Enter data Enter data Enter data Enter data Enter data

Overall Plans:  Enter data Key Milestone/Task Planned Start Date Responsible Party  Planned  Completion Date Status  (not started/delayed/in-progress/completed/abandoned) Enter data MM/YYYY Name and/or Title MM/YYYY Not started/delayed/in-progress/completed/abandoned Enter data

Enter data

Enter data

Key Accomplishments (listed/bulleted) and should directly correlate to plans/goals:   Year 1:  Enter data Year 2:  Enter data Year 3:  Enter data Year 4:  Enter data Year 5:  Enter data Objective 3: Education, Outreach and Technical Assistance The plan should address how your jurisdiction will provide education to all non-exempt covered farms subject to the Produce Safety Rule; and to also provide education to all farms that are 1) Qualified Exempt and 2) Farms growing covered produce with up to $25,000 of produce sales. Additionally, plans and accomplishments for education activities; outreach activities; and technical assistance activities should be distinct from one another. Your Assessment should guide your plans for education activities; outreach activities; and technical assistance activities within your jurisdiction.  Overall Plans:  Enter data Key Milestone/Task Planned Start Date Responsible Party  Planned  Completion Date Status  (not started/delayed/in-progress/completed/abandoned) Enter data MM/YYYY Name and/or Title MM/YYYY Not started/delayed/in-progress/completed/abandoned Enter data

Enter data

Enter data

Key Accomplishments (listed/bulleted) and should directly correlate to plans/goals:   Year 1:  Enter data Year 2:  Enter data Year 3:  Enter data Year 4:  Enter data Year 5:  Enter data Objective 4: Farm Inventory Overall Plans:  Enter data Key Milestone/Task Planned Start Date Responsible Party  Planned  Completion Date Status  (not started/delayed/in-progress/completed/abandoned) Enter data MM/YYYY Name and/or Title MM/YYYY Not started/delayed/in-progress/completed/abandoned Enter data

Enter data

Enter data

Key Accomplishments (listed/bulleted) and should directly correlate to plans/goals:   Year 1:  Enter data Year 2:  Enter data Year 3:  Enter data Year 4:  Enter data Year 5:  Enter data Objective 5: Inspection Program Overall Plans:  Enter data Key Milestone/Task Planned Start Date Responsible Party  Planned  Completion Date Status  (not started/delayed/in-progress/completed/abandoned) Enter data MM/YYYY Name and/or Title MM/YYYY Not started/delayed/in-progress/completed/abandoned Enter data

Enter data

Enter data

Key Accomplishments (listed/bulleted) and should directly correlate to plans/goals:   Year 1:  Enter data Year 2:  Enter data Year 3:  Enter data Year 4:  Enter data Year 5:  Enter data Objective 6: Compliance and Enforcement Program Overall Plans:  Enter data Key Milestone/Task Planned Start Date Responsible Party  Planned  Completion Date Status  (not started/delayed/in-progress/completed/abandoned) Enter data MM/YYYY Name and/or Title MM/YYYY Not started/delayed/in-progress/completed/abandoned Enter data

Enter data

Enter data

Key Accomplishments (listed/bulleted) and should directly correlate to plans/goals:   Year 1:  Enter data Year 2:  Enter data Year 3:  Enter data Year 4:  Enter data Year 5:  Enter data Objective 7: Produce Related Event Response Planning and Implementation Overall Plans:  Enter data Key Milestone/Task Planned Start Date Responsible Party  Planned  Completion Date Status  (not started/delayed/in-progress/completed/abandoned) Enter data MM/YYYY Name and/or Title MM/YYYY Not started/delayed/in-progress/completed/abandoned Enter data

Enter data

Enter data

Key Accomplishments (listed/bulleted) and should directly correlate to plans/goals:   Year 1:  Enter data Year 2:  Enter data Year 3:  Enter data Year 4:  Enter data Year 5:  Enter data Budget Review Utilize the excel Budget Tracker template to document your Budget. The Budget should be reviewed at least quarterly. This table should be used to document the review.

Reviewed Date/Initials/Notes Reviewed Date/Initials/Notes Reviewed Date/Initials/Notes  Reviewed Date/Initials/Notes Jul 1 2021- Jun 30 2022 Enter data Enter data Enter data Enter data Jul 1 2022- Jun 30 2023 Enter data Enter data Enter data Enter data Jul 1 2023- Jun 30 2024 Enter data Enter data Enter data Enter data Jul 1 2024- Jun 30 2025 Enter data Enter data Enter data Enter data Jul 1 2025- Jun 30 2026  Enter data Enter data Enter data Enter data


[Federal Register Volume 81, Number 40 (Tuesday, March 1, 2016)]
[Notices]
[Pages 10692-10693]
[FR Doc No: 2016-04352]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Investment Company Act Release No. 32005; 812-14540]

LoCorr Fund Management, LLC and LoCorr Investment Trust; Notice
of Application

February 24, 2016.
AGENCY: Securities and Exchange Commission (``Commission'').

ACTION: Notice of an application under section 6(c) of the Investment
Company Act of 1940 (``Act'') for an exemption from section 15(a) of
the Act and rule 18f-2 under the Act, as well as from certain
disclosure requirements in rule 20a-1 under the Act, Item 19(a)(3) of
Form N-1A, Items 22(c)(1)(ii), 22(c)(1)(iii), 22(c)(8) and 22(c)(9) of
Schedule 14A under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, and Sections 6-
07(2)(a), (b), and (c) of Regulation S-X (``Disclosure Requirements'').
The requested exemption would permit an investment adviser to hire and
replace certain sub-advisers without shareholder approval and grant
relief from the Disclosure Requirements as they relate to fees paid to
the sub-advisers.\1\

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

    \1\ The requested order would supersede an exemptive order
issued to the Applicants on Sept. 11, 2012 (the ``Prior Order''),
with the result that no person will continue to rely on the Prior
Order if the requested order is granted. See LoCorr Fund Management,
LLC and LoCorr Investment Trust, Investment Company Act Release Nos.
30168 (Aug. 14, 2012) (notice) and 30199 (Sept. 11, 2012) (order).

Applicants:  LoCorr Investment Trust (the ``Trust''), an Ohio business
trust registered under the Act as an open-end management investment
company with multiple series, and LoCorr Fund Management, LLC, a
Minnesota limited liability company registered as an investment adviser
under the Investment Advisers Act of 1940 (``LoCorr'' or the
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
``Adviser,'' and, collectively with the Trust, the ``Applicants'').

Filing Dates:  The application was filed August 28, 2015, and amended
on December 29, 2015 and January 16, 2016.

Hearing or Notification of Hearing:  An order granting the application
will be issued unless the Commission orders a hearing. Interested
persons may request a hearing by writing to the Commission's Secretary
and serving applicants with a copy of the request, personally or by
mail. Hearing requests should be received by the Commission by 5:30
p.m. on March 21, 2016, and should be accompanied by proof of service
on the applicants, in the form of an affidavit or, for lawyers, a
certificate of service. Pursuant to rule 0-5 under the Act, hearing
requests should state the nature of the writer's interest, any facts
bearing upon the desirability of a hearing on the matter, the reason
for the request, and the issues contested. Persons who wish to be
notified of a hearing may request notification by writing to the
Commission's Secretary.

ADDRESSES: Secretary, U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission, 100 F
Street NE., Washington, DC 20549-1090. Applicants: Jon C. Essen, LoCorr
Fund Management, LLC, 261 School Avenue, 4th Floor, Excelsior, MN
55331; and JoAnn Strasser, Esq., Thompson Hine LLP, 41 South High
Street 17th Floor, Columbus, OH 43215.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: David J. Marcinkus, Senior Counsel, at
(202) 551-6882, or Mary Kay Frech, Branch Chief, at<PHONE_NUMBER>
(Division of Investment Management, Chief Counsel's Office).

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The following is a summary of the
application. The complete application may be obtained via the
Commission's Web site by searching for the file number, or an applicant
using the Company name box, at http://www.sec.gov/search/search.htm or
by calling<PHONE_NUMBER>.

Summary of the Application

    1. The Adviser will serve as the investment adviser to the Funds
pursuant to an investment advisory agreement with the Trust (the
``Advisory Agreement'').\2\ The Adviser will provide the Funds with
continuous and comprehensive investment management services subject to
the supervision of, and policies established by, each Fund's board of
trustees (``Board''). The Advisory Agreement permits the Adviser,
subject to the approval of the Board, to delegate to one or more sub-
advisers (each, a ``Sub-Adviser'' and collectively, the ``Sub-
Advisers'') the responsibility to provide the day-to-day portfolio
investment management of each Fund, subject to the supervision and
direction of the Adviser. The primary responsibility for managing the
Funds will remain vested in the Adviser. The Adviser will hire,
evaluate, allocate assets to and oversee the Sub-Advisers, including
determining whether a Sub-Adviser should be terminated, at all times
subject to the authority of the Board.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \2\ Applicants request relief with respect to any existing and
any future series of the Trust and any other registered open-end
management company or series thereof that: (a) Is advised by LoCorr
or its successor or by a person controlling, controlled by, or under
common control with LoCorr or its successor (each, also an
``Adviser''); (b) uses the manager of managers structure described
in the application; and (c) complies with the terms and conditions
of the application (any such series, a ``Fund'' and collectively,
the ``Funds''). For purposes of the requested order, ``successor''
is limited to an entity that results from a reorganization into
another jurisdiction or a change in the type of business
organization.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    2. Applicants request an exemption to permit the Adviser, subject
to Board approval, to hire certain Sub-Advisers pursuant to Sub-
Advisory Agreements and materially amend existing Sub-Advisory
Agreements without obtaining the shareholder approval required under
section 15(a) of the Act and rule 18f-2 under the Act.\3\ Applicants
also seek an exemption from the Disclosure Requirements to permit a
Fund to disclose (as both a dollar amount and a percentage of the
Fund's net assets): (a) The aggregate fees paid to the Adviser and any
Affiliated Sub-Adviser; and (b) the aggregate fees paid to Sub-Advisers
other than Affiliated Sub-Advisers (collectively, ``Aggregate Fee
Disclosure''). For any Fund that employs an Affiliated Sub-Adviser, the
Fund will provide separate disclosure of any fees paid to the
Affiliated Sub-Adviser.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ The requested relief will not extend to any Sub-Adviser that
is an affiliated person, as defined in section 2(a)(3) of the Act,
of a Fund or the Adviser, other than by reason of serving as a sub-
adviser to one or more of the Funds (``Affiliated Sub-Adviser'').
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    3. Applicants agree that any order granting the requested relief
will be subject to the terms and conditions stated in the Application.
Such terms and conditions provide for, among other safeguards,
appropriate disclosure to Fund shareholders and notification about sub-
advisory changes and enhanced Board oversight to protect the interests
of the Funds' shareholders.
    4. Section 6(c) of the Act provides that the Commission may exempt
any person, security, or transaction or any class or classes of
persons, securities, or transactions from any provisions of the Act, or
any rule thereunder, if such relief is necessary or appropriate in the
public interest and consistent with the protection of investors and
purposes fairly intended by the policy and provisions of the Act.
Applicants believe that the requested relief meets this standard
because, as further explained in the Application, the Advisory
Agreements will remain subject to shareholder approval, while the role
of the Sub-Advisers is substantially similar to that of individual
portfolio managers, so that requiring shareholder approval of Sub-
Advisory Agreements would impose unnecessary delays and expenses on the
Funds. Applicants believe that the requested relief from the Disclosure
Requirements meets this standard because it will improve the Adviser's
ability to negotiate fees paid to the Sub-Advisers that are more
advantageous for the Funds.

    For the Commission, by the Division of Investment Management,
under delegated authority.
Robert W. Errett,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2016-04352 Filed 2-29-16; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


[Federal Register: October 10, 2008 (Volume 73, Number 198)]
[Notices]
[Page 60398-60399]
[DOCID:fr10oc08-169]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration

[Docket No. FMCSA-98-3637; FMCSA-99-6156; FMCSA-00-7006; FMCSA-00-7165;
FMCSA-00-8203; FMCSA-02-12294; FMCSA-04-18885; FMCSA-06-23773; FMCSA-
06-24783]

Qualification of Drivers; Exemption Applications; Vision

AGENCY: Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration (FMCSA), DOT.

ACTION: Notice of renewal of exemptions; request for comments.

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

SUMMARY: FMCSA announces its decision to renew the exemptions from the
vision requirement in the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Regulations for
15 individuals. FMCSA has statutory authority to exempt individuals
from the vision requirement if the exemptions granted will not
compromise safety. The Agency has concluded that granting these
exemption renewals will provide a level of safety that is equivalent
to, or greater than, the level of safety maintained without the
exemptions for these commercial motor vehicle (CMV) drivers.

DATES: This decision is effective November 9, 2008. Comments must be
received on or before November 10, 2008.

ADDRESSES: You may submit comments bearing the Federal Docket
Management System (FDMS) Docket ID FMCSA-98-3637; FMCSA-99-6156; FMCSA-
00-7006; FMCSA-00-7165; FMCSA-00-8203; FMCSA-02-12294; FMCSA-04-18885;
FMCSA-06-23773; FMCSA-06-24783, using any of the following methods.
     Federal eRulemaking Portal: Go to http://
www.regulations.gov. Follow the on-line instructions for submitting
comments.
     Mail: Docket Management Facility; U.S. Department of
Transportation, 1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE., West Building Ground
Floor, Room W12-140, Washington, DC 20590-0001.
     Hand Delivery or Courier: West Building Ground Floor, Room
W12-140, 1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE., Washington, DC, between 9 a.m.
and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal Holidays.
     Fax: 1-202-493-2251.
    Each submission must include the Agency name and the docket number
for this Notice. Note that DOT posts all comments received without
change to http://www.regulations.gov, including any personal
information included in a comment. Please see the Privacy Act heading
below.
    Docket: For access to the docket to read background documents or
comments, go to http://www.regulations.gov at any time or Room W12-140
on the ground level of the West Building, 1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE.,
Washington, DC, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday,
except Federal holidays. The FDMS is available 24 hours each day, 365
days each year.
    If you want acknowledgment that we received your comments, please
include a self-addressed, stamped envelope or postcard or print the
acknowledgement page that appears after submitting comments on-line.
    Privacy Act: Anyone may search the electronic form of all comments
received into any of our dockets by the name of the individual
submitting the comment (or of the person signing the comment, if
submitted on behalf of an association, business, labor union, etc.).
You may review the DOT's complete Privacy Act Statement in the Federal
Register published on April 11, 2000 (65 FR 19476). This information is
also available at http://DocketInfo.dot.gov.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Dr. Mary D. Gunnels, Director, Medical
Programs,<PHONE_NUMBER><EMAIL_ADDRESS>FMCSA, Department of
Transportation, 1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE., Room W64-224, Washington,
DC 20590-0001. Office hours are from 8:30 a.m. to 5 p.m. Monday through
Friday, except Federal holidays.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Background

    Under 49 U.S.C. 31136(e) and 31315, FMCSA may renew an exemption
from the vision requirements in 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10), which applies to
drivers of CMVs in interstate commerce, for a two-year period if it
finds ``such exemption would likely achieve a level of safety that is
equivalent to, or greater than, the level that would be achieved absent
such exemption.'' The procedures for requesting an exemption (including
renewals) are set out in 49 CFR part 381.

Exemption Decision

    This notice addresses 15 individuals who have requested a renewal
of their exemption in accordance with FMCSA procedures. FMCSA has
evaluated these 16 applications for renewal on their merits and decided
to extend each exemption for a renewable two-year period. They are:

Donald O. Clopton, Steven H. Heidorn, Jimmy E. Settle, Richard B.
Eckert, Danny E. Hillier, Noel S. Wangerin, Charles B. Edwards, Jimmy
D. Johnson, II, Hubert Whittenburg, Gary R. Evans, Gary L. Killian,
George R. Gorsuch, Jr., Volga Kirkwood, Harlan L. Gunter, Garry R.
Setters.

    These exemptions are extended subject to the following conditions:
(1) That each individual have a physical examination every year (a) by
an ophthalmologist or optometrist who attests that the vision in the
better eye continues to meet the standard in 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10), and
(b) by a medical examiner who attests that the individual is otherwise
physically qualified under 49 CFR 391.41; (2) that each individual
provide a copy of the ophthalmologist's

or optometrist's report to the medical examiner at the time of the
annual medical examination; and (3) that each individual provide a copy
of the annual medical certification to the employer for retention in
the driver's qualification file and retain a copy of the certification
on his/her person while driving for presentation to a duly authorized
Federal, State, or local enforcement official. Each exemption will be
valid for two years unless rescinded earlier by FMCSA. The exemption
will be rescinded if: (1) The person fails to comply with the terms and
conditions of the exemption; (2) the exemption has resulted in a lower
level of safety than was maintained before it was granted; or (3)
continuation of the exemption would not be consistent with the goals
and objectives of 49 U.S.C. 31136(e) and 31315.

Basis for Renewing Exemptions

    Under 49 U.S.C. 31315(b)(1), an exemption may be granted for no
longer than two years from its approval date and may be renewed upon
application for additional two year periods. In accordance with 49
U.S.C. 31136(e) and 31315, each of the 15 applicants has satisfied the
entry conditions for obtaining an exemption from the vision
requirements (63 FR 30285; 63 FR 54519; 63 FR 196; 64 FR 54948; 65 FR
159; 67 FR 67234; 69 FR 62741; 71 FR 62147; 65 FR 20245; 65 FR 57230;
67 FR 57266; 65 FR 33406; 65 FR 57234; 65 FR 66293; 67 FR 67234; 67 FR
46016; 67 FR 57267; 69 FR 53493; 69 FR 62742; 71 FR 62148; 71 FR 6826;
71 FR 19602; 71 FR 32183; 71 FR 41310). Each of these 15 applicants has
requested renewal of the exemption and has submitted evidence showing
that the vision in the better eye continues to meet the standard
specified at 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10) and that the vision impairment is
stable. In addition, a review of each record of safety while driving
with the respective vision deficiencies over the past two years
indicates each applicant continues to meet the vision exemption
standards. These factors provide an adequate basis for predicting each
driver's ability to continue to drive safely in interstate commerce.
Therefore, FMCSA concludes that extending the exemption for each
renewal applicant for a period of two years is likely to achieve a
level of safety equal to that existing without the exemption.

Request for Comments

    FMCSA will review comments received at any time concerning a
particular driver's safety record and determine if the continuation of
the exemption is consistent with the requirements at 49 U.S.C. 31136(e)
and 31315. However, FMCSA requests that interested parties with
specific data concerning the safety records of these drivers submit
comments by November 10, 2008.
    FMCSA believes that the requirements for a renewal of an exemption
under 49 U.S.C. 31136(e) and 31315 can be satisfied by initially
granting the renewal and then requesting and evaluating, if needed,
subsequent comments submitted by interested parties. As indicated
above, the Agency previously published notices of final disposition
announcing its decision to exempt these 15 individuals from the vision
requirement in 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10). The final decision to grant an
exemption to each of these individuals was based on the merits of each
case and only after careful consideration of the comments received to
its notices of applications. The notices of applications stated in
detail the qualifications, experience, and medical condition of each
applicant for an exemption from the vision requirements. That
information is available by consulting the above cited Federal Register
publications.
    Interested parties or organizations possessing information that
would otherwise show that any, or all of these drivers, are not
currently achieving the statutory level of safety should immediately
notify FMCSA.
    The Agency will evaluate any adverse evidence submitted and, if
safety is being compromised or if continuation of the exemption would
not be consistent with the goals and objectives of 49 U.S.C. 31136(e)
and 31315, FMCSA will take immediate steps to revoke the exemption of a
driver.

    Issued on: October 2, 2008.
 Larry W. Minor,
Associate Administrator for Policy and Program Development.
[FR Doc. E8-24104 Filed 10-9-08; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4910-EX-P


[Federal Register Volume 79, Number 41 (Monday, March 3, 2014)]
[Notices]
[Page 11781]
[FR Doc No: 2014-04510]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Docket No. CP14-84-000]

Northwest Pipeline LLC; Notice of Request Under Blanket
Authorization

    Take notice that on February 14, 2014 Northwest Pipeline, Inc.
(Northwest), 295 Chipeta Way, Salt Lake City, Utah 84158, filed in the
above Docket, a prior notice request pursuant to sections 157.205 and
157.208 of the Commission's regulations under the Natural Gas Act (NGA)
and Northwest's blanket authorization in CP82-433, for authorization to
expand the function of an existing compressor unit (1,339 horsepower)
to include operating the unit in tandem with an existing reciprocating
compressor unit located at Northwest's Oregon City compressor station
in Clackamas County, Oregon, all as more fully set forth in the
application which is on file with the Commission and open to public
inspection. The filing may also be viewed on the web at http://www.ferc.gov using the ``eLibrary'' link. Enter the docket number
excluding the last three digits in the docket number field to access
the document. For assistance, please contact FERC Online Support at
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or toll free at<PHONE_NUMBER>, or TTY,
contact<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    Any questions concerning this application may be directed to Pam
Barnes, Project Manager, Business Development, at<PHONE_NUMBER>,
Northwest Pipeline LLC, P.O. Box 58900, Salt Lake City, Utah 84158.
    Specifically, Northwest states that the project will only result in
an operational change to comply with current Environmental Protection
Agency emissions standards. There will be no change in current daily
design capacity, daily maximum capacity, and/or maximum operating
pressures of existing facilities as a result of this proposal.
Northwest states that the mobile unit will maintain its primary
function of replacing out-of-service permanent compression elsewhere on
the system when needed, and the project requires no additional capital
cost expenditures.
    Pursuant to section 157.9 of the Commission's rules, 18 CFR 157.9,
within 90 days of this Notice the Commission staff will either:
complete its environmental assessment (EA) and place it into the
Commission's public record (eLibrary) for this proceeding; or issue a
Notice of Schedule for Environmental Review. If a Notice of Schedule
for Environmental Review is issued, it will indicate, among other
milestones, the anticipated date for the Commission staff's issuance of
the final environmental impact statement (FEIS) or EA for this
proposal. The filing of the EA in the Commission's public record for
this proceeding or the issuance of a Notice of Schedule for
Environmental Review will serve to notify federal and state agencies of
the timing for the completion of all necessary reviews, and the
subsequent need to complete all federal authorizations within 90 days
of the date of issuance of the Commission staff's FEIS or EA.
    Any person may, within 60 days after the issuance of the instant
notice by the Commission, file pursuant to Rule 214 of the Commission's
Procedural Rules (18 CFR 385.214) a motion to intervene or notice of
intervention. Any person filing to intervene or the Commission's staff
may, pursuant to section 157.205 of the Commission's Regulations under
the Natural Gas Act (NGA) (18 CFR 157.205) file a protest to the
request. If no protest is filed within the time allowed therefore, the
proposed activity shall be deemed to be authorized effective the day
after the time allowed for protest. If a protest is filed and not
withdrawn within 30 days after the time allowed for filing a protest,
the instant request shall be treated as an application for
authorization pursuant to section 7 of the NGA.
    The Commission strongly encourages electronic filings of comments,
protests, and interventions via the internet in lieu of paper. See 18
CFR 385.2001(a)(1)(iii) and the instructions on the Commission's Web
site (www.ferc.gov) under the ``e-Filing'' link.

    Dated: February 24, 2014.
Kimberly D. Bose,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2014-04510 Filed 2-28-14; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P