[Federal Register Volume 76, Number 225 (Tuesday, November 22, 2011)]
[Notices]
[Page 72225]
[FR Doc No: 2011-30072]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

Proposed Collection; Comment Request

Upon Written Request, Copies Available From: Securities and Exchange
Commission, Office of Investor Education and Advocacy, Washington, DC
20549-0213.

Extension:
    Rule 17f-2; SEC File No. 270-233; OMB Control No. 3235-0223.

    Notice is hereby given that, pursuant to the Paperwork Reduction
Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 350l et seq.), the Securities and Exchange
Commission (the ``Commission'') is soliciting comments on the
collection of information summarized below. The Commission plans to
submit this existing collection of information to the Office of
Management and Budget for extension and approval.
    Rule 17f-2 (17 CFR 270.17f-2) under the Investment Company Act of
1940 (the ``Act'') (15 U.S.C. 80a-1) is entitled: ``Custody of
Investments by Registered Management Investment Company.'' Rule 17f-2
establishes safeguards for arrangements in which a registered
management investment company (``fund'') is deemed to maintain custody
of its own assets, such as when the fund maintains its assets in a
facility that provides safekeeping but not custodial services. The rule
includes several recordkeeping or reporting requirements. The fund's
directors must prepare a resolution designating not more than five fund
officers or responsible employees who may have access to the fund's
assets. The designated access persons (two or more of whom must act
jointly when handling fund assets) must prepare a written notation
providing certain information about each deposit or withdrawal of fund
assets, and must transmit the notation to another officer or director
designated by the directors. Independent public accountants must verify
the fund's assets at least three times a year and two of the
examinations must be unscheduled.
    The requirement that directors designate access persons is intended
to ensure that directors evaluate the trustworthiness of insiders who
handle fund assets. The requirements that access persons act jointly in
handling fund assets, prepare a written notation of each transaction,
and transmit the notation to another designated person are intended to
reduce the risk of misappropriation of fund assets by access persons,
and to ensure that adequate records are prepared, reviewed by a
responsible third person, and available for examination by the
Commission's examination staff. The requirement that auditors verify
fund assets without notice twice each year is intended to provide an
additional deterrent to the misappropriation of fund assets and to
detect any irregularities.
    The Commission staff estimates that each fund makes 974 responses
and spends an average of 252 hours annually in complying with the
rule's requirements.\1\ Commission staff estimates that on an annual
basis it takes: (i) 0.5 hours of fund accounting personnel at a total
cost of $82.50 to draft director resolutions; \2\ (ii) 0.5 hours of the
fund's board of directors at a total cost of $2,000 to adopt the
resolution; (iii) 244 hours for the fund's accounting personnel at a
total cost of $60,388 to prepare written notations of transactions; \3\
and (iv) 7 hours for the fund's accounting personnel at a total cost of
$1,155 to assist the independent public accountants when they perform
verifications of fund assets.\4\ Approximately 243 funds rely upon rule
17f-2 annually.\5\ Thus, the total annual hour burden for rule 17f-2 is
estimated to be 61,236 hours.\6\ Based on the total costs per fund
listed above, the total cost of the Rule 17f-2's collection of
information requirements is estimated to be $15.5 million.\7\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ The 971 responses are: 1 (one) response to draft and adopt
the resolution and 973 notations. Estimates of the number of hours
are based on conversations with individuals in the mutual fund
industry. The actual number of hours may vary significantly
depending on individual fund assets.
    \2\ This estimate is based on the following calculation: 0.5
(burden hours per fund) x $165 (fund senior accountant's hourly
rate) = $82.50.
    \3\ Respondents estimated that each fund makes 974 responses on
an annual basis and spent a total of 0.25 hours per response. The
fund personnel involved are Fund Payable Manager ($157 hourly rate),
Fund Operations Manager ($331 hourly rate) and Fund Accounting
Manager ($257 hourly rate). The weighted hourly rate of these
personnel is $248. The estimated cost of preparing notations is
based on the following calculation: 974 x 0.25 x $248 = $60,388.
    \4\ This estimate is based on the following calculation: 7 x
$165 (fund senior accountant hourly rate) = $1,155.
    \5\ Based on a review of Form N-17f-2 filings for calendar years
2008-2010, each year approximately 243 funds file Form N-17f-2 with
the Commission.
    \6\ This estimate is based on the following calculation: 243
(funds) x 252 (total annual hourly burden per fund) = 61,236 hours
for rule. The annual burden for rule 17f-2 does not include time
spent preparing Form N-17f-2. The burden for Form N-17f-2 is
included in a separate collection of information.
    \7\ This estimate is based on the following calculation:
$63,625.50 (total annual cost per fund) x 243 funds = $15,460,997.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The estimate of average burden hours is made solely for the
purposes of the Paperwork Reduction Act, and is not derived from a
comprehensive or even a representative survey or study of the costs of
Commission rules and forms. Complying with the collections of
information required by rule 17f-2 is mandatory for those funds that
maintain custody of their own assets. Responses will not be kept
confidential. 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 control number.
    Written comments are invited on: (a) Whether the collection of
information is necessary for the proper performance of the functions of
the Commission, including whether the information has practical
utility; (b) the accuracy of the Commission's estimate of the burden of
the collection of information; (c) ways to enhance the quality,
utility, and clarity of the information collected; and (d) ways to
minimize the burden of the collection of information on respondents,
including through the use of automated collection techniques or other
forms of information technology. Consideration will be given to
comments and suggestions submitted in writing within 60 days of this
publication.
    Please direct your written comments to Thomas Bayer, Director/Chief
Information Officer, Securities and Exchange Commission, c/o Remi
Pavlik-Simon, 6432 General Green Way, Alexandria, VA 22312; or send an
email to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
     Dated: November 16, 2011.
Kevin M. O'Neill,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2011-30072 Filed 11-21-11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


[Federal Register: April 24, 2006 (Volume 71, Number 78)]
[Notices]
[Page 21013]
[DOCID:fr24ap06-59]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Docket No. PF06-23-000]

Gulf South Pipeline Company, LP; Notice of Site Visit for the
Proposed Mississippi Expansion Project

April 13, 2006.
    The Gulf South Pipeline Company (Gulf South) is proposing to
construct approximately 88 miles of 42-inch-diameter pipeline and a new
39,990 horsepower compression station in Madison Parish, Louisiana, and
Warren, Hinds, Copiah and Simpson Counties, Mississippi.
    On April 25 and 26, 2006, staff from the Office of Energy Projects
(OEP) as part of its Pre-Filing Review will visit the proposed pipeline
route and potential compression station sites and will attend open
house meetings sponsored by the applicant to answer questions about the
Pre-Filing Review process. All interested parties are welcome to attend
the site visits and open houses. Those wishing to attend the site
visits must provide their own transportation. The schedule for the site
visits and open houses is as follows:

Tuesday, April 25th

Site Visit: Meet at 8 a.m. (CST). Eagle Ridge Conference Center Parking
Lot, 1500 Raymond Lake Road, Raymond, MS 39154.<PHONE_NUMBER>.
Open House: 5 p.m.-6:30 p.m. (CST). Eagle Ridge Conference Center,
Talon Room, 1500 Raymond Lake Road, Raymond, MS 39154.<PHONE_NUMBER>.

Wednesday, April 26th

Site Visit: Meet at 8 a.m. (CST). Tallulah Country Club Parking Lot,
762 Old Highway 65 South, Tallulah, LA 71282.<PHONE_NUMBER>.
Open House: 5 p.m.-6:30 p.m. (CST). Tallulah Country Club, 762 Old
Highway 65 South, Tallulah, LA 71282.<PHONE_NUMBER>.

    These events are posted on the Commission's calendar located on the
internet at http://www.ferc.gov/EventCalendar/EventsList.aspx. For

additional information regarding these events, please contact the
Commission's Office of External Affairs at<PHONE_NUMBER>.

Magalie R. Salas,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. E6-6034 Filed 4-21-06; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register: September 28, 2007 (Volume 72, Number 188)]
[Notices]
[Page 55270-55271]
[DOCID:fr28se07-144]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

Public Notice for a Change in Use of Aeronautical Property at
Manchester Airport, Manchester, NH

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Request for public comments.

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

SUMMARY: The FAA is requesting public comment on the City of
Manchester, New Hampshire's request to change a portion (.42 acres) of
Airport property from aeronautical use to non-aeronautical use. The
property is located on South Willow Street, Manchester, New Hampshire
and is a portion of map 854, Lot 5 and Map 854, Lot 1B. Upon
disposition the property

will be used for the realignment of South Willow Street for Runway
Safety Area Improvements at Manchester Airport, Manchester, New
Hampshire. The property was acquired under AIP Project Nos. 3-33-0011-
31 and 3-33-0011-67.
    The disposition of proceeds from the disposal of airport property
will be in accordance with FAA's Policy and Procedures Concerning the
Use of Airport Revenue, published in the Federal Register on February
16, 1999.

DATES: Comments must be received on or before October 29, 2007.

ADDRESSES: Documents are available for review by appointment by
contacting Mr. Richard Fixler, Assistant Airport Director, Engineering
& Planning at Manchester Airport. Telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>, Ext. 519 or
by contacting Donna R. Witte, Federal Aviation Administration, 16 New
England Executive Park, Burlington, Massachusetts, Telephone 781-238-
7624.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Donna R. Witte at the Federal Aviation
Administration, 12 New England Executive Park, Burlington,
Massachusetts 01803, Telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Section 124 of The Wendell H. Ford Aviation
investment and Reform Act for the 21st Century (AIR 21) requires the
FAA to provide an opportunity for public notice and comment to the
``waiver'' or ``modification'' of a sponsor's Federal obligation to use
certain airport property for aeronautical purposes.

    Dated: Issued in Burlington, Massachusetts on September 17,
2007.
LaVerne F. Reid,
Manager, Airports Division, New England Region.
[FR Doc. 07-4799 Filed 9-27-07; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4910-13-M


                            EPA Meeting with Vista
                                 June 20, 2012

Attendees:
EPA OUST:
Liz McDermott, Linda Gerber, Paul Miller, Tim Roberts, Erin Knighton, Tim Smith, dave Hamnett

Vista Precision Solutions: Doug Mann

At this meeting EPA and Vista discussed the proposed changes to the UST regulations.  The discussion focused on airport hydrant systems and the capabilities of release detection on these types of systems.


[Federal Register Volume 77, Number 75 (Wednesday, April 18, 2012)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 23120-23123]
[FR Doc No: 2012-9373]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Coast Guard

33 CFR Part 100

[Docket No. USCG-2012-0252]
RIN 1625-AA08

Special Local Regulations; Lowcountry Splash Open Water Swim,
Wando River and Cooper River, Mount Pleasant, SC

AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS.

ACTION: Temporary final rule.

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

SUMMARY: The Coast Guard is establishing special local regulations on
the waters of the Wando River and Cooper River in Mount Pleasant, South
Carolina during the Lowcountry Splash, a 2.4 mile open water swim. The
event is scheduled to take place on Saturday, May 19, 2012.
Approximately 600 people are expected to participate in the swim. These
special local regulations are necessary to provide for the safety of
life on navigable waters of the United States during the event. The
special local regulations establish a series of moving buffer zones,
where all persons and vessels, except those persons and vessels
participating in the open water swim, are prohibited from entering,
transiting through, anchoring in, or remaining unless authorized by the
Captain of the Port Charleston or a designated representative.

DATES: This rule is effective from 7:30 a.m. until 10 a.m. on May 19,
2012.

ADDRESSES: Documents indicated in this preamble as being available in
the docket are part of docket USCG-2012-0252 and are available online
by going to http://www.regulations.gov, inserting USCG-2012-0252 in the
``Search'' box, and then clicking ``Search.'' This material is also
available for inspection or copying at 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.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: If you have questions on this
temporary final rule, call or email Ensign John Santorum, Sector
Charleston Waterways Management Division, Coast Guard; telephone (843)
740-3184, email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>If you have questions on
viewing the docket, call Renee V. Wright, Program Manager, Docket
Operations, telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Regulatory Information

    The Coast Guard is issuing this temporary final rule without prior
notice and opportunity to comment pursuant to authority under section
4(a) of the Administrative Procedure Act (APA) (5 U.S.C. 553(b)). This
provision authorizes an agency to issue a rule without prior notice and
opportunity to comment when the agency for good cause finds that those
procedures are ``impracticable, unnecessary, or contrary to the public
interest.'' Under 5 U.S.C. 553(b)(B), the Coast Guard finds that good
cause exists for not publishing a notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM)
with respect to this rule because the Coast Guard did not receive
necessary information about the event until March 22, 2012. As a
result, the Coast Guard did not have sufficient time to publish an NPRM
and to receive public comments prior to the event. Any delay in the
effective date of this rule would be contrary to the public interest
because immediate action is needed to minimize potential danger to
swimmers, participant vessels, spectators, and the general public.

Basis and Purpose

    The legal basis for the rule is the Coast Guard's authority to
establish special local regulations: 33 U.S.C. 1233. The purpose of the
rule is to insure safety of life on navigable waters of the United
States during the Lowcountry Splash open water swim.

Discussion of Rule

    On Saturday, May 19, 2012, the Logan Rutledge Children's Foundation
will host the Lowcountry Splash, a 2.4 mile open water swim in the
Wando River and Cooper River along the shoreline of Mount Pleasant,
South Carolina. The Lowcountry Splash starts at Hobcaw Yacht Club on
the Wando River, and finishes at the Charleston Harbor Marina and
Resorts at Patriots Point on the Cooper River. Approximately 600
swimmers will be participating in the swim. Buoys will mark the course,
and the course will be patrolled by event staff and volunteers on
safety vessels: 20 motorboats, 20 kayaks, and several jet skis.
    The special local regulations establish a series of buffer zones
around the Lowcountry Splash swimmers and safety vessels on certain
waters of the Wando River and Cooper River in Mount Pleasant, South
Carolina. These buffer zones are as follows: (1) All waters within 75
yards of the lead safety vessel; (2) all waters within 100 yards of the
last safety vessel; and (3) all waters within 100 yards of the swimmers
and each participating safety vessel. The special local regulations
will be enforced from 7:30 a.m. until 10 a.m. on May 19, 2012.
    Persons and vessels not participating in the open water swim are
prohibited from entering, transiting through, anchoring in, or
remaining within the buffer zones unless authorized by the Captain of
the Port Charleston or a designated representative. Persons and vessels
desiring to enter, transit through, anchor in, or remain within the
buffer zones may contact the Captain of the Port Charleston by
telephone at<PHONE_NUMBER>, or a designated representative via VHF
radio on channel 16, to request authorization. If authorization to
enter, transit through, anchor in, or remain within the buffer zones is
granted by the Captain of the Port Charleston or a designated
representative, all persons and vessels receiving such authorization
must comply with the instructions of the Captain of the Port Charleston
or a designated representative. The Coast Guard will provide notice of
the buffer zones by Local Notice to Mariners, Broadcast Notice to
Mariners, and on-scene designated representatives.

Regulatory Analyses

    We developed this rule after considering numerous statutes and
executive orders related to rulemaking. Below we summarize our analyses
based on 13 of these statutes or executive orders.

Regulatory Planning and Review

    Executive Orders 13563, Improving Regulation and Regulatory Review,
and 12866, Regulatory Planning and Review, direct agencies to assess
the costs and benefits of available regulatory alternatives and, if
regulation is necessary, to select regulatory approaches that maximize
net benefits (including potential economic, environmental, public
health and safety effects, distributive impacts, and equity). Executive
Order 13563 emphasizes the importance of quantifying both costs and
benefits, of reducing costs, of harmonizing rules, and of promoting
flexibility. This rule has not been designated a significant regulatory
action under section 3(f) of Executive Order 12866. Accordingly, the
Office of Management and Budget has not reviewed this rule under
Executive Order 12866.
    The economic impact of this rule is not significant for the
following reasons: (1) The buffer zones will be enforced for only two
and a half hours; (2) although persons and vessels will not be able to
enter, transit through, anchor in, or remain within the buffer zones
without authorization from the Captain of the Port Charleston or a
designated representative, they may operate in the surrounding area
during the enforcement period; (3) persons and vessels may still enter,
transit through, anchor in, or remain within the buffer zones if
authorized by the Captain of the Port Charleston or a designated
representative; and (4) the Coast Guard will provide advance
notification of the buffer zones to the local maritime community by
Local Notice to Mariners and Broadcast Notice to Mariners.

Small Entities

    Under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601-612), we have
considered whether this rule would have a significant economic impact
on a substantial number of small entities. The term ``small entities''
comprises small businesses, not-for-profit organizations that are
independently owned and operated and are not dominant in their fields,
and governmental jurisdictions with populations of less than 50,000.
    The Coast Guard certifies under 5 U.S.C. 605(b) that this rule will
not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small
entities. This rule may affect the following entities, some of which
may be small entities: The owners or operators of vessels intending to
enter, transit through, anchor in, or remain within the waters of the
Wando River and Cooper

River in Mount Pleasant, South Carolina encompassed within the
regulated areas from 7:30 a.m. until 10 a.m. on May 19, 2012. For the
reasons discussed in the Regulatory Planning and Review section above,
this rule will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial
number of small entities.

Assistance for Small Entities

    Under section 213(a) of the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement
Fairness Act of 1996 (Pub. L. 104-121), we offer to assist small
entities in understanding the rule so that they can better evaluate its
effects on them and participate in the rulemaking process.
    Small businesses may send comments on the actions of Federal
employees who enforce, or otherwise determine compliance with, Federal
regulations to the Small Business and Agriculture Regulatory
Enforcement Ombudsman and the Regional Small Business Regulatory
Fairness Boards. The Ombudsman evaluates these actions annually and
rates each agency's responsiveness to small business. If you wish to
comment on actions by employees of the Coast Guard, call 1-888-REG-FAIR
(1-888-734-3247). The Coast Guard will not retaliate against small
entities that question or complain about this rule or any policy or
action of the Coast Guard.

Collection of Information

    This rule calls for no new collection of information under the
Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501-3520).

Federalism

    A rule has implications for federalism under Executive Order 13132,
Federalism, if it has a substantial direct effect on State or local
governments and would either preempt State law or impose a substantial
direct cost of compliance on them. We have analyzed this rule under
that Order and have determined that it does not have implications for
federalism.

Protest Activities

    The Coast Guard respects the First Amendment rights of protesters.
Protesters are asked to contact the person listed in the FOR FURTHER
INTFORMATION CONTACT section to coordinate protest activities so that
your message can be received without jeopardizing the safety or
security of people, places or vessels.

Unfunded Mandates Reform Act

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

Taking of Private Property

    This rule will not effect a taking of private property or otherwise
have taking implications under Executive Order 12630, Governmental
Actions and Interference with Constitutionally Protected Property
Rights.

Civil Justice Reform

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

Protection of Children

    We have analyzed this rule under Executive Order 13045, Protection
of Children from Environmental Health Risks and Safety Risks. This rule
is not an economically significant rule and does not create an
environmental risk to health or risk to safety that may
disproportionately affect children.

Indian Tribal Governments

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

Energy Effects

    This action is not a ``significant energy action'' under Executive
Order 13211, Actions Concerning Regulations That Significantly Affect
Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use.

Technical Standards

    The National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act (NTTAA) (15
U.S.C. 272 note) directs agencies to use voluntary consensus standards
in their regulatory activities unless the agency provides Congress,
through the Office of Management and Budget, with an explanation of why
using these standards would be inconsistent with applicable law or
otherwise impractical. Voluntary consensus standards are technical
standards (e.g., specifications of materials, performance, design, or
operation; test methods; sampling procedures; and related management
systems practices) that are developed or adopted by voluntary consensus
standards bodies.
    This rule does not use technical standards. Therefore, we did not
consider the use of voluntary consensus standards.

Environment

    We have analyzed this rule under Department of Homeland Security
Management Directive 023-01 and Commandant Instruction M16475.lD, which
guide the Coast Guard in complying with the National Environmental
Policy Act of 1969 (NEPA) (42 U.S.C. 4321-4370f), and have concluded
this action is one of a category of actions that do not individually or
cumulatively have a significant effect on the human environment. This
rule is categorically excluded, under figure 2-1, paragraph (34)(h), of
the Instruction. This rule involves special local regulations issued in
conjunction with a regatta or marine parade. Under figure 2-1,
paragraph (34)(h), of the Instruction, an environmental analysis
checklist and a categorical exclusion determination are not required
for this rule.

List of Subjects in 33 CFR Part 100

    Marine safety, Navigation (water), Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements, Waterways.

    For the reasons discussed in the preamble, the Coast Guard amends
33 CFR part 100 as follows:

PART 100--SAFETY OF LIFE ON NAVIGABLE WATERS

0
1. The authority citation for part 100 continues to read as follows:

    Authority:  33 U.S.C. 1233.

0
2. Add a temporary Sec.  100.35T07-0252 to read as follows:

Sec.  100.35T07-0252  Special Local Regulations; Lowcountry Splash Open
Water Swim, Wando River and Cooper River, Mount Pleasant, SC.

    (a) Regulated Areas. The following buffer zones are regulated
areas: All waters within 75 yards of the lead safety vessel; all waters
within 100 yards of the last safety vessel; and all waters within 100
yards of the swimmers and each participating vessel. The Lowcountry
Splash, a 2.4 mile open water swim, starts at Hobcaw Yacht Club on the
Wando River, in approximate position 32[deg]49'19'' N, 79[deg]53'48''
W, and finishes at the

Charleston Harbor Marina and Resorts at Patriots Point on the Cooper
River, in approximate position 32[deg]47'11'' N, 79[deg]54'38'' W. All
coordinates are North American Datum 1983.
    (b) Definition. The term ``designated representative'' means Coast
Guard Patrol Commanders, including Coast Guard coxswains, petty
officers, and other officers operating Coast Guard vessels, and
Federal, state, and local officers designated by or assisting the
Captain of the Port Charleston in the enforcement of the regulated
areas.
    (c) Regulations.
    (1) Except for those persons and vessels participating in the open
water swim, all persons and vessels are prohibited from entering,
transiting through, anchoring in, or remaining within the regulated
areas unless authorized by the Captain of the Port Charleston or a
designated representative.
    (2) Persons and vessels desiring to enter, transit through, anchor
in, or remain within the regulated areas may contact the Captain of the
Port Charleston by telephone at<PHONE_NUMBER>, or a designated
representative via VHF radio on channel 16, to request authorization.
If authorization to enter, transit through, anchor in, or remain within
the regulated areas is granted by the Captain of the Port Charleston or
a designated representative, all persons and vessels receiving such
authorization must comply with the instructions of the Captain of the
Port Charleston or a designated representative.
    (3) The Coast Guard will provide notice of the regulated areas by
Local Notice to Mariners, Broadcast Notice to Mariners, and on-scene
designated representatives.
    (d) Effective Date. This rule is effective from 7:30 a.m. until 10
a.m. on May 19, 2012.

    Dated: April 9, 2012.
M.F. White, Jr.,
Captain, U.S. Coast Guard, Captain of the Port Charleston.
[FR Doc. 2012-9373 Filed 4-17-12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 9110-04-P


[Federal Register: November 14, 2008 (Volume 73, Number 221)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Page 67427-67429]
[DOCID:fr14no08-36]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. FAA-2008-1131; Directorate Identifier 2008-NE-37-AD]
RIN 2120-AA64

Airworthiness Directives; Pratt & Whitney (PW) Models PW2037,
PW2037(M), and PW2040 Turbofan Engines

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

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM).

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

SUMMARY: The FAA proposes to adopt a new airworthiness directive (AD)
for PW models PW2037, PW2037(M), and PW2040 turbofan engines. This
proposed AD would require inspecting all high-pressure turbine (HPT)
2nd stage hubs at the next HPT overhaul after the effective date of the
proposed AD. The inspections of the hubs include fluorescent penetrant
inspection (FPI) for cracks and an optical comparator inspection (OCI)
of the blade retention slots to confirm the hubs are within dimensional
tolerances before returning them to service. This proposed AD results
from an uncontained release of HPT 2nd stage blades and blade retention
lugs. We are proposing this AD to detect cracks and remove
nonconforming HPT 2nd stage hubs, which could result in an uncontained
release of turbine blades and blade retention lugs, and damage to the
airplane.

DATES: We must receive any comments on this proposed AD by January 13,
2009.

ADDRESSES: Use one of the following addresses to comment on this
proposed AD.
     Federal Rulemaking Portal: Go to http://
www.regulations.gov and follow the instructions for sending your
comments electronically.
     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: Deliver to Mail address above between 9
a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays.
     Fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    Contact Pratt & Whitney, 400 Main Street, East Hartford, CT 06108
for the service information identified in this AD.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mark Riley, Aerospace Engineer, Engine
Certification Office, FAA, Engine and Propeller Directorate, 12 New
England Executive Park, Burlington, MA 01803; e-mail:
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>, fax<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Comments Invited

    We invite you to send us any written relevant data, views, or
arguments regarding this proposal. Send your comments to an address
listed under ADDRESSES. Include ``Docket No. FAA-2008-1131; Directorate
Identifier 2008-NE-37-AD'' in the subject line of your comments. We
specifically invite comments on the overall regulatory, economic,
environmental, and energy aspects of the proposed AD. We will consider
all comments received by the closing date and may amend the proposed AD
in light of those comments.
    We will post all comments we receive, without change, to http://
www.regulations.gov, including any personal information you provide. We
will also post a report summarizing each substantive verbal contact
with FAA personnel concerning this proposed AD. Using the search
function of the Web site, anyone can find and read the comments in any
of our dockets, including, if provided, the name of the individual who
sent the comment (or signed the comment 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 19477-78).

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 (800) 647-
5527) is the same as the Mail address provided in the ADDRESSES
section. Comments will be available in the AD docket shortly after
receipt.

Discussion

    On August 6, 2008, a PW2037 turbofan engine experienced an
uncontained failure of multiple HPT 2nd stage blades. Although the root
cause is still under investigation, we have determined that cracks in
the blade retention lugs of the HPT 2nd stage hub resulted in fracture
of multiple lugs, and release of 2nd stage blades. Optical comparator
inspections (OCIs) performed on the blade retention slots of the HPT
2nd stage hub confirmed the slots were out of dimensional tolerances.
HPT 2nd stage hubs with blade retention slots that are out of tolerance
can cause cracks and fracture of multiple blade retention lugs and
release of 2nd stage blades from the hub. This condition, if not
corrected, could result in an uncontained release of turbine blades and
blade retention lugs, and damage to the airplane.

FAA's Determination and Requirements of the Proposed AD

    We have evaluated all pertinent information and identified an
unsafe condition that is likely to exist or develop on other products
of this same type design. We are proposing this AD, which would require
performing an FPI of the hub for cracks and an OCI of the blade
retention slots on the forward and aft sides of the HPT 2nd stage hub
for conformance to dimensional tolerances at the next HPT overhaul
after the effective date of this AD.

Interim Action

    These actions are interim actions and we are requiring reporting
inspection data, including negative findings, to determine if we need
to take further rulemaking actions in the future.

Costs of Compliance

    We estimate that this proposed AD would affect 762 engines
installed on airplanes of U.S. registry. We also estimate that it would
take about 6 work-hours per engine to perform the proposed actions, and
that the average labor rate is $80 per work-hour. No parts are
required. Based on these figures, we estimate the total cost of the
proposed AD to U.S. operators to be $365,760.

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 have 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 that the proposed AD:
    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. 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.
    We prepared a regulatory evaluation of the estimated costs to
comply with this proposed AD. You may get a copy of this summary at the
address listed under ADDRESSES.

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39

    Air transportation, Aircraft, Aviation safety, Safety.

The Proposed Amendment

    Under the authority delegated to me by the Administrator, the
Federal Aviation Administration 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
airworthiness directive:

Pratt & Whitney: Docket No. FAA-2008-1131; Directorate Identifier
2008-NE-37-AD.

Comments Due Date

    (a) The Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) must receive
comments on this airworthiness directive (AD) action by January 13,
2009.

Affected ADs

    (b) None.

Applicability

    (c) This AD applies to Pratt & Whitney models PW2037, PW2037(M),
and PW2040 turbofan engines. These engines are installed on, but not
limited to, Boeing 757-200 and 757-300 airplanes.

Unsafe Condition

    (d) This AD results from an uncontained release of high-pressure
turbine (HPT) 2nd stage blades and blade retention lugs. We are
issuing this AD to detect cracks and remove nonconforming HPT 2nd
stage hubs, which could result in an uncontained release of turbine
blades and blade retention lugs, and damage to the airplane.

Compliance

    (e) You are responsible for having the actions required by this
AD performed at the next HPT overhaul, unless the actions have
already been done.

Performing Inspections on HPT 2nd Stage Hubs

    (f) Perform a fluorescent penetrant inspection (FPI) of the hub
for cracks. Pratt & Whitney Engine Manual part number 1A6231
(Chapter 72-52-00, Inspection/Check-02, (Subtask 72-52-16-230-007))
contains information on performing the FPI.
    (g) Remove from service any cracked hubs.
    (h) Any HPT 2nd stage hubs inspected as specified in paragraphs
(f) of this AD, must pass an optical comparator inspection before
the hubs are eligible for return to service. Pratt & Whitney Alert
Service Bulletin, PW2000 A72-734, contains information about the
inspection.

Reporting Requirements

    (i) For 6 months from the effective date of the AD, and within
72 hours of completing the inspections required by this AD, report
the following to the Engine Certification Office, ATTN: Mark Riley,
Engine & Propeller Directorate, 12 New England Executive Park,
Burlington, MA 01803:
    (1) Inspection Date.
    (2) Disk part number and serial number.
    (3) Hours since new.
    (4) Cycles since new.
    (5) Hours since overhaul.
    (6) Cycles since overhaul.
    (7) Fluorescent penetrant inspection findings.
    (8) Optical comparator inspection findings.
    (j) Under the provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act, the
Office of Management and

Budget (OMB) have approved the information collection requirements
and has assigned OMB Control Number 2120-0056.

Definitions

    (k) This AD defines an HPT overhaul as when the HPT is at its
piece-part level.

Alternative Methods of Compliance

    (l) The Manager, Engine Certification Office, has the authority
to approve alternative methods of compliance for this AD if
requested using the procedures found in 14 CFR 39.19.

Related Information

    (m) Contact Mark Riley, Aerospace Engineer, Engine Certification
Office, FAA, Engine and Propeller Directorate, 12 New England
Executive Park, Burlington, MA 01803; e-mail<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>, fax<PHONE_NUMBER>, for more information
about this AD.
    (n) Pratt & Whitney Alert Service Bulletin, PW2000 A72-734,
contains information about the optical comparator inspection.

    Issued in Burlington, Massachusetts, on November 6, 2008.
Francis A. Favara,
Manager, Engine and Propeller Directorate, Aircraft Certification
Service.
[FR Doc. E8-26909 Filed 11-13-08; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4910-13-P