[Federal Register: March 5, 2009 (Volume 74, Number 42)]
[Notices]
[Page 9612]
[DOCID:fr05mr09-44]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Docket No. PR09-13-000]

Bay Gas Storage Company, Ltd.; Notice of Petition for Rate
Approval

February 26, 2009.
    Take notice that on February 6, 2009, Bay Gas Storage Company, Ltd.
(Bay Gas) submitted for filing its proposal to charge a lost-an-
unaccounted-for (LAUF) reimbursement percentage of 0.22 percent.
    Any person desiring to participate in this rate proceeding must
file a motion to intervene or to protest this filing must file in
accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of the Commission's Rules of Practice
and Procedure (18 CFR 385.211 and 385.214). Protests will be considered
by the Commission in determining the appropriate action to be taken,
but will not serve to make protestants parties to the proceeding. Any
person wishing to become a party must file a notice of intervention or
motion to intervene, as appropriate. Such notices, motions, or protests
must be filed on or before the date as indicated below. Anyone filing
an intervention or protest must serve a copy of that document on the
Applicant. Anyone filing an intervention or protest on or before the
intervention or protest date need not serve motions to intervene or
protests on persons other than the Applicant.
    The Commission encourages electronic submission of protests and
interventions in lieu of paper using the ``eFiling'' link at http://
www.ferc.gov. Persons unable to file electronically should submit an
original and 14 copies of the protest or intervention to the Federal
Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street, NE., Washington, DC
20426.
    This filing is accessible on-line at http://www.ferc.gov, using the
``eLibrary'' link and is available for review in the Commission's
Public Reference Room in Washington, DC. There is an ``eSubscription''
link on the Web site that enables subscribers to receive e-mail
notification when a document is added to a subscribed docket(s). For
assistance with any FERC Online service, please e-mail
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or call<PHONE_NUMBER> (toll free). For
TTY, call<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Tuesday, March 10, 2008.

Kimberly D. Bose,
Secretary.
 [FR Doc. E9-4717 Filed 3-4-09; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 86, Number 53 (Monday, March 22, 2021)]
[Notices]
[Pages 15281-15284]
[FR Doc No: 2021-05823]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-91336; File No. SR-DTC-2021-003]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; The Depository Trust Company;
Notice of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of a Proposed Rule Change
To Remove the Requirement for Participants To Submit Monthly Position
Confirmations and Clarify Participant Obligation To Reconcile Activity
on a Regular Basis

March 16, 2021.
    Pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934
(``Act'') \1\ and Rule 19b-4 thereunder,\2\ notice is hereby given that
on March 9, 2021, The Depository Trust Company (``DTC'') filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission (``Commission'') the proposed rule
change as described in Items I, II and III below, which Items have been
prepared by the clearing agency. DTC filed the proposed rule change
pursuant to Section 19(b)(3)(A) of the Act \3\ and Rule 19b-4(f)(2)
thereunder.\4\ The Commission is publishing this notice to solicit
comments on the proposed rule change from interested persons.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

I. Clearing Agency's Statement of the Terms of Substance of the
Proposed Rule Change

    The proposed rule change of The Depository Trust Company (``DTC'')
would eliminate the requirement that a Participant must confirm its
activity statements monthly through DTC's Participant Inquiry
Notification System (``PINS'') system. Pursuant to the proposed rule
change, this requirement would be removed from the DTC PTS/PBS
Functions Guides \5\ (``PTS/PBS Guides''), as described below. In
addition, the proposed rule change would revise and add text to clarify
Participants' ongoing obligations to reconcile their respective
transaction activity as set forth in the ClaimConnect\TM\ Service
Guide, Custody Service Guide, Deposits Service Guide, Distributions
Service Guide, Redemptions Service Guide, Reorganizations Service
Guide, Settlement Service Guide and Underwriting Service Guide
(``Service Guides'').\6\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ Available at http://www.dtcc.com/settlement-and-asset-services/edl-ptspbs-function-guides.
    \6\ Available at https://www.dtcc.com/legal/rules-and-procedures. The service guides constitute Procedures of DTC.
Pursuant to the Rules, the term ``Procedures'' means the Procedures,
service guides, and regulations of DTC adopted pursuant to Rule 27,
as amended from time to time. See Rule 1, Section 1, infra note 2.
DTC's Procedures are filed with the Securities and Exchange
Commission (``Commission''). They are binding on DTC and each
Participant in the same manner as they are bound by the Rules. See
Rule 27, infra note 2.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

II. Clearing Agency's Statement of the Purpose of, and Statutory Basis
for, the Proposed Rule Change

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

(A) Clearing Agency's Statement of the Purpose of, and Statutory Basis
for, the Proposed Rule Change

1. Purpose
    The proposed rule change of DTC would eliminate the requirement
that a Participant must confirm its activity statements monthly through
PINS. Pursuant to the proposed rule change, this requirement would be
removed from the PTS/PBS Guides,\7\ as described below. In addition,
the proposed rule change would revise and add text to clarify
Participants' ongoing obligations to reconcile their respective
transaction activity and other information as set forth in the Service
Guides.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ Available at http://www.dtcc.com/settlement-and-asset-services/edl-ptspbs-function-guides.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Background
    DTC provides regular reports and statements to Participants showing
their settlement activity; this includes activity, risk control
monitoring and settlement reports. The Procedures of DTC require
Participants to reconcile both their activity and positions with DTC
upon receipt of applicable daily activity statements at the end of each
day and to immediately report any discrepancies.\8\ Participants must
also provide a month-end confirmation of their activity.\9\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \8\ See Settlement Service Guide, see supra at 6.
    \9\ See PTS/PBS Guides (PIAR-PUTS), available at http://www.dtcc.com/-/media/Files/Downloads/Settlement-Asset-Services/EDL/PTS_Functions_P2.pdf at 20-21.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    With respect to the month-end confirmation, the PTS/PBS Guides
require each Participant to reconcile and confirm with DTC its month-
end securities positions listed on its DTC monthly statement of
positions

(``Monthly Position Statement'').\10\ No later than the 10th business
day after the last Friday of the month, the Participant must confirm
the accuracy of the position statement electronically via PINS.\11\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \10\ Id.
    \11\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    If a Participant has more than one account, it must confirm the
Monthly Position Statement for each account. Also, a partner or officer
of the Participant must perform the end-of-month confirmation at least
once in a 12-month period.\12\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \12\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Pursuant to the PTS/PBS Guides, failure by a Participant to confirm
within the prescribed schedule will subject it to fines, pursuant to
DTC's Rule 21. A first occurrence will cause the Participant to receive
a warning letter of a failure to provide timely confirmation. For a
second occurrence, a fine of $150 will be charged. Each subsequent
occurrence will be subject to a $300 fine. Occurrences are determined
on a moving 12-month period.
    DTC believes that the requirement for Participants to submit a
month-end confirmation of positions is no longer necessary for DTC or
its Participants to ensure prompt and accurate reconciliations by
Participants of their activity. In the past, Participants frequently
received hard copy reports relating to their DTC activity, which could
take longer to process and reconcile than electronic reports. Today,
reports and statements are offered exclusively in electronic form,
which facilitates the daily reconciliation of activity by Participants
in a prompt and accurate manner through automated means. In this
regard, DTC proposes to eliminate the requirement set forth in the PTS/
PBS Guides for Participants to submit a month-end confirmation, as
described below. In this regard, an affirmative confirmation of
positions would no longer be required and the functionality for such an
affirmative confirmation would be decommissioned.
    In addition, DTC proposes to further clarify, within the Service
Guides, Participants obligations to regularly reconcile their activity
daily; and also, as applicable, refine text contained in certain
Service Guides relating to Participants obtaining and reconciling
certain corporate actions-related information that they may use in
connection with their use of DTC's services, as described below. The
proposed rule change would add contact information to the text of the
Service Guides for a Participant to report to DTC any discrepancies in
information, reports and statements provided to it by DTC on the
Participant's activity and positions, as described below.
Proposed Rule Change
PTS/PBS Guides
    As mentioned above, the requirement that DTC proposes to remove, as
described above, for a Participant to perform a month-end confirmation
of its activity is set forth in the PTS/PBS Guides. In this regard, the
proposed rule change DTC would delete the following text from the
applicable section \13\ of the PTS/PBS Guides:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \13\ See supra note 9.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

``About End of Month Confirmation Procedures

    DTC procedures require you to reconcile and confirm with DTC
your month-end positions listed on the DTC Monthly Position
Statement. No later than the 10th business day after the last Friday
of the month, you must confirm the accuracy of the position
statement electronically via PINS. DTC will send a reminder notice
of the confirmation due date via an electronic message posted on the
PINS Bulletin Board.
    If you have multiple accounts, you must confirm the end-of-month
position statement for each account. Also, a partner or officer of
the participant firm must perform the end-of-month confirmation at
least once in a 12-month period.
    Note--You may need a new password or password reset, which can
be obtained by contacting your relationship manager. This must be
accomplished within the 10-day confirmation period.
    You must ensure adequate backup to fulfill this ongoing
requirement. Failure to confirm within the prescribed schedule will
subject you to fines, pursuant to DTC's Rule 21. (DTC's rules are
available at https://login.dtcc.com/dtcorg) You will receive a
warning letter for the first occurrence of a failure to provide
timely confirmation. For a second occurrence, a fine of $150 will be
charged. Each subsequent occurrence will be subject to a $300 fine.
Occurrences are determined on a moving 12-month period.
    If you need help with obtaining passwords or have questions
about this procedure, please contact your relationship manager. For
help with using the PTS function PINS or the Web version (available
at https://login.dtcc.com/dtcorg), please call 1-(888) 382-2721 and
select option 6.
    To view the procedures and screens for processing end of month
confirmations, click here.

 Associated Products

    PINS is used in association with all of DTC's services and
products.

List of Procedures:

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

Accessing the Bulletin Board

    Use the following procedure to access the Bulletin Board where
you can view global notices as well as your own notices.
    1. Type PINS on the Enter Function screen and press ENTER.
    Result--The PINS Menu appears.
    2. Press PF3/15. Result--The Bulletin Board Notice List appears.
    3. Press PF6/18 or type X to the left of a selected notice and
press ENTER to view details for a notice.
    Result--The Bulletin Board Inquiry screen appears.
    Note--If you pressed PF6/18 you will be able to go through all
the notices on the list using the scrolling keys.

Inquiring About End of Month Confirmations

    Use the following procedure to view information about your End
of Month confirmations.
    1. Type PINS on the Enter Function screen and press ENTER.
    Result--The PINS Menu appears.
    2. Type 6 in the Enter Option field and press ENTER.
    Result--The End of Month Confirmation Inquiry screen appears,
displaying your notification confirmations for the past thirteen
months and the status of each.

Processing an End of Month Confirmation

    Use the following procedure to confirm outstanding end of month
confirmations or add new notifications.
    1. Type PINS on the Enter Function screen and press ENTER.
    Result-- The PINS Menu appears.
    2. Type 11 in the Enter Option field and press ENTER.
    Result--The End of Month Confirmation Initialization screen
appears.
    Note-- If a partner or officer of your company has not executed
the confirmation process within the last twelve months, a message
indicating this is displayed and you will not be able to continue
this process. In this case, contact your relationship manager.
    3. Refer to the Field Descriptions for the End of Month
Confirmation Initialization screen and type the appropriate
information in the entry fields provided, then press ENTER.
    Result-- The End of Month Confirmation Browse screen appears,
displaying the open notifications for the specified month and year.
    4. Optional. To view detailed information about the
notifications, press PF6/18.
    Result-- The Notification Inquiry screen appears. You can use
the scrolling keys to display the information for all items for the
specified month and year.
    Note-- You can also display the details for a specific item on
the End of Month Confirmation Browse screen by typing any character
to the left of the item and pressing ENTER. The Notification Inquiry
screen appears.
    5. Optional. To add a notification, press PF4/16.
    Result-- The Activity Code List screen appears.

    6. Optional. Type the appropriate code in the Enter Activity
Code field and press ENTER.
    Result-- The Notification Add screen appears.
    7. Optional. Refer to the Field Descriptions for the
Notification Add screen and type the appropriate information in the
entry field provided, then press PF1/13.
    Result-- The notification is added.
    8. Optional. Press PF6/18.
    Result-- The End of Month Confirmation Browse screen appears,
displaying the notification you added.
    9. Optional. To view the details of one or more notifications,
see Step 4. To add another notification, see Steps 5 to 7.
    10. Press PF1/13 to confirm the notifications for the specified
month and year.
    Result-- The message 'End of month confirmation has been
finalized' appears.''
Service Guides
    In addition, to provide added clarity regarding a Participant's
obligation to reconcile its activity daily, DTC would add the following
text to the ``Overview'' section of each of the Service Guides: \14\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \14\ These Service Guides, consistent with the term defined
above, include the ClaimConnect\TM\ Service Guide, Custody Service
Guide, Deposits Service Guide, Distributions Service Guide,
Redemptions Service Guide, Reorganizations Service Guide, Settlement
Service Guide and Underwriting Service Guide. See also, supra note
6.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    ``Note: It is the sole responsibility of Participants to perform
a daily reconciliation of their activity and positions with the
information, reports and statements provided by DTC. Participants
must immediately report to DTC any discrepancy between their
activity and positions with the information, reports and statements
provided by DTC or other issues relating to the accuracy of the
information, reports and statements provided by DTC. Such reports
must be made to DTC by (i) calling the Client Support hotline at 1-
888-382-2721 (and selecting Option 1, Option 1) to speak with a DTC
representative and (ii) providing a written detailed description of
the discrepancy to the DTC representative, or as otherwise directed
by DTC in writing. DTC shall not be liable for any loss resulting or
arising directly or indirectly from mistakes, errors, or omissions
related to the information, reports or statements provided by DTC,
other than those caused directly by gross negligence or willful
misconduct on the part of DTC.''

    In addition, to promote consistency among the Service Guides in
this regard, DTC would delete the following text as it appears in the
``Overview'' section of the Deposits Service Guide because it would be
replaced by the above.

    ``Warning! Although DTC makes every effort to provide
Participants with timely information with respect to deposit
activity, Participants are primarily responsible for maintaining
such information for purposes of their own bookkeeping. It is
recommended that every Participant reconcile its records with
information provided by DTC before and after making a deposit and
before and after any critical dates.''

    Also, to promote consistency among the Service Guides in this
regard, DTC would delete the following text as it appears in the
``Overview'' section of the Settlement Service Guide because it would
be replaced by the above.

    ``Note--Although DTC makes every effort to provide the
Participant with timely information, the Participant is primarily
responsible for obtaining such information without reliance on DTC.
DTC recommends that Participants reconcile their records with DTC's
records before any critical dates or cutoff times.''

    Furthermore, DTC would delete the following text as it appears in
the ``Overview'' section of the Distributions Service Guide relating to
obtaining and reconciling certain corporate actions-related information
and replace it with text revised for further clarity in this regard, as
more fully described below:

    ``Note: Although DTC makes every effort to provide you with
timely information regarding income payments, you are primarily
responsible for obtaining such information without reliance on DTC.
We recommend that you reconcile your records with DTC's in advance
of dividend or interest payable dates.''

    Also, DTC would delete the following text as it appears in the
``Overview'' section of the Redemptions Service Guide relating to
obtaining and reconciling certain corporate actions-related information
and replace it with text revised for further clarity in this regard, as
more fully described below:

    ``Note: Although DTC makes every effort to provide you with
timely information regarding redemption and maturity payments, you
are primarily responsible for obtaining such information without
reliance on DTC. We recommend that you reconcile your records with
DTC's in advance of redemption or maturity payable dates.''

    DTC would delete the following text as it appears in the
``Overview'' section of the Reorganizations Service Guide relating to
obtaining and reconciling certain corporate actions-related information
and replace it with text revised for further clarity in this regard, as
more fully described below:
    ``Note:
    This guide provides information regarding DTC's processing of
reorganization events. DTC obtains this information from sources it
believes to be reliable, but DTC does not represent the accuracy,
adequacy, timeliness, completeness or fitness for any particular
purpose of this information, which is provided as is. Furthermore,
this information is subject to change. Participants should
independently obtain, monitor and review any available documentation
relating to the reorganization activity and verify information
obtained from DTC. In addition, nothing contained in such
information shall relieve participants of their responsibility under
DTC's Rules and Procedures to check the accuracy of this
information.''

    DTC would replace the text deleted from the Distributions,
Redemptions and Reorganizations Service Guides, as proposed above, with
the following:

    ``Subject to the terms of the ``Important Legal Information''
section, while DTC endeavors to provide Participants with timely and
accurate information with respect to Distributions, Redemptions, and
Reorganizations events, Participants are responsible for monitoring,
obtaining and confirming such information without reliance on DTC,
and for reconciling their records in advance of any critical dates,
including, but not limited to, dividend, interest payable,
redemption, maturity payable, and voluntary and mandatory
reorganizations dates.''
Effective Date
    The proposed rule change would become effective upon filing.
2. Statutory Basis
    Section 17A(b)(3)(F) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934
(``Act''),\15\ requires that the rules of the clearing agency be
designed, inter alia, to promote the prompt and accurate clearance and
settlement of securities transactions. DTC believes that the proposed
rule change is consistent with this provision of the Act.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \15\ 15 U.S.C. 78q-1(b)(3)(F).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The proposal would eliminate an outdated requirement that
Participants perform month-end confirmations, as described above. By
removing this requirement, Participants would be able to allocate the
time they spend on month-end confirmations to other DTC-related
activities as they deem necessary, including performance of daily
reconciliations. By removing an obligation that DTC believes in no
longer necessary to facilitate the prompt and accurate reconciliation
of Participant reports, and by facilitating Participants' ability to
allocate the associated resources to other activities relevant to their
DTC activity, including checking the accuracy of daily activity
statements and reports relating to activity at DTC, DTC believes the
proposed rule change would promote the prompt and accurate clearance
and settlement of securities transactions.
    The proposed changes to revise and add text to clarify
Participants' ongoing obligations to reconcile their respective
transaction activity in the Service Guides will enhance the clarity and
transparency of the Service Guides. By

enhancing the clarity and transparency of the Service Guides, the
proposed changes would allow Participants to more efficiently and
effectively conduct their business in accordance with the Service
Guides, which DTC believes would promote the prompt and accurate
clearance and settlement of securities transactions.
    Therefore, for the above reasons, DTC believes that the proposed
rule change helps promote the prompt and accurate clearance and
settlement of securities transactions, consistent with Section
17(A)(b)(3)(F) of the Act.\16\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \16\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

(B) Clearing Agency's Statement on Burden on Competition

    DTC does not believe that the proposed rule change will have any
impact on competition because the elimination of the requirement of a
month-end confirmation by Participants, as described above, will merely
change the ability of Participants to review and reconcile their
activity with DTC in a prompt and accurate manner and not otherwise
affect Participants' rights or obligations. The proposed changes to
revise and add text to clarify Participants' ongoing obligations to
reconcile their respective transaction activity in the Service Guides
will merely enhance the clarity and transparency of the Services Guides
and would not affect DTC's operations or the rights or obligations of
the Participants.

(C) Clearing Agency's Statement on Comments on the Proposed Rule Change
Received From Members, Participants, or Others

    Written comments relating to this proposed rule change have not
been solicited or received. DTC will notify the Commission of any
written comments received by DTC.

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

    The foregoing rule change has become effective pursuant to Section
19(b)(3)(A) \17\ of the Act and paragraph (f) \18\ of Rule 19b-4
thereunder. At any time within 60 days of the filing of the proposed
rule change, the Commission summarily may temporarily suspend such rule
change if it appears to the Commission that such action is necessary or
appropriate in the public interest, for the protection of investors, or
otherwise in furtherance of the purposes of the Act.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \17\ 15 U.S.C 78s(b)(3)(A).
    \18\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

IV. Solicitation of Comments

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

Electronic Comments

     Use the Commission's internet comment form
    (http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml); or
     Send an email to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Please include
File Number SR-DTC-2021-003 on the subject line.

Paper Comments

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

All submissions should refer to File Number SR-DTC-2021-003. This file
number should be included on the subject line if email is used. To help
the Commission process and review your comments more efficiently,
please use only one method. The Commission will post all comments on
the Commission's internet website (http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml).
Copies of the submission, all subsequent amendments, all written
statements with respect to the proposed rule change that are filed with
the Commission, and all written communications relating to the proposed
rule change between the Commission and any person, other than those
that may be withheld from the public in accordance with the provisions
of 5 U.S.C. 552, will be available for website viewing and printing in
the Commission's Public Reference Room, 100 F Street, NE, Washington,
DC 20549 on official business days between the hours of 10:00 a.m. and
3:00 p.m. Copies of the filing also will be available for inspection
and copying at the principal office of DTC and on DTCC's website
(http://dtcc.com/legal/sec-rule-filings.aspx). All comments received
will be posted without change. Persons submitting comments are
cautioned that we do not redact or edit personal identifying
information from comment submissions. You should submit only
information that you wish to make available publicly. All submissions
should refer to File Number SR-DTC-2021-003 and should be submitted on
or before April 12, 2021.

    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets,
pursuant to delegated authority.\19\
J. Matthew DeLesDernier,
Assistant Secretary.

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

    \19\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

[FR Doc. 2021-05823 Filed 3-19-21; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


                                 Attachment F                                            Supporting Statement for a Generic Information Collection Request (ICR)                      Under the Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA)

 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY  Identification of the Information Collection  -  Title and Numbers       Title:  	ICR Numbers: EPA ICR No.: XXXX.XX; OMB Control No.: XXXX-XXXX 	Docket ID No.: EPA-HQ-XXXX-XXXX-XXXX

 Abstract

 Explain the circumstances that make the collection of information necessary.          Indicate how, by whom, and for what purpose the information is to be used.  Except for a new collection, indicate the actual use the Agency has made of the information received from the current collection

 Describe whether, and to what extent, the collection of information involves the use of automated, electronic, mechanical, or other technological collection techniques or other forms of information technology, e.g., permitting electronic submission of responses.

 Describe efforts to identify duplication.

 If the collection of information impacts small businesses or other small entities, describe the methods used to minimize burden.

 Describe the consequence to Federal program or policy activities if the collection is not conducted or is conducted less frequently, as well as any technical or legal obstacles to reducing burden.

 Explain any special circumstances that require the collection to be conducted in a manner inconsistent with OMB guidelines.

 If applicable, provide a copy and identify the date and page number of publication in the Federal Register of the agency's notice, required by 5CFR 320.8(d), soliciting comments on the information collection prior to submission to OMB. Summarize public comments received in response to that notice and describe actions taken in response to the comments. Specifically address comments received on cost and hour burden. Describe efforts to consult with persons outside DOE to obtain their views on the availability of data, frequency of collection, the clarity of instructions and recordkeeping, disclosure, or reporting format (if any), and on the data elements to be recorded, disclosed, or report.

 Explain any decision to provide any payment or gift to respondents, other than remuneration of contractors or grantees.

 Describe any assurance of confidentiality provided to respondents and the basis for the assurance in statute, regulation, or agency policy.

 Provide additional justification for any questions of a sensitive nature, such as sexual behavior and attitudes, religious beliefs, and other matters that are commonly considered private.

  12. Provide estimates of the hour burden of the collection of information.

  13. Provide an estimate for the total annual cost burden to respondents or recordkeepers resulting from the collection of information.

  14. Provide estimates of annualized cost to the Federal government.      Agency Activities         Unit Burden for Agency Activities

               Total Agency Burden and Cost

    15. Explain the reasons for any program changes or adjustments reported in Items 13 (or 14) of OMB Form 83-I.

    16. For collections whose results will be published, outline the plans for tabulation and publication.

 If seeking approval to not display the expiration date for OMB approval of the information collection, explain the reasons why display would be inappropriate.

Explain each exception to the certification statement identified in Item 19 of OMB Form 83-I.


[Federal Register: February 5, 2008 (Volume 73, Number 24)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Page 6622-6627]
[DOCID:fr05fe08-21]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. FAA-2008-0123; Directorate Identifier 2007-NM-056-AD]
RIN 2120-AA64

Airworthiness Directives; McDonnell Douglas Model DC-8-11, DC-8-
12, DC-8-21, DC-8-31, DC-8-32, DC-8-33, DC-8-41, DC-8-42, and DC-8-43
Airplanes; Model DC-8-51, DC-8-52, DC-8-53, and DC-8-55 Airplanes;
Model DC-8F-54 and DC-8F-55 Airplanes; Model DC-8-61, DC-8-62, and DC-
8-63 Airplanes; Model DC-8-61F, DC-8-62F, and DC-8-63F Airplanes; Model
DC-8-71, DC-8-72, and DC-8-73 Airplanes; and Model DC-8-71F, DC-8-72F,
and DC-8-73F Airplanes

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

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM).

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

SUMMARY: The FAA proposes to supersede an existing airworthiness
directive (AD) that applies to McDonnell Douglas Model DC-8 airplanes.
The existing AD currently requires, among other things, revision of an
existing program of structural inspections. This proposed AD would
require implementation of a program of structural inspections of
baseline structure to detect and correct fatigue cracking in order to
ensure the continued airworthiness of these airplanes as they approach
the manufacturer's original fatigue design life goal. This proposed AD
results from a significant number of these airplanes approaching or
exceeding the design service goal on which the initial type
certification approval was predicated. We are proposing this AD to
detect and correct fatigue cracking that could compromise the
structural integrity of these airplanes.

DATES: We must receive comments on this proposed AD by March 21, 2008.

ADDRESSES: You may send comments by any of the following methods:
     Federal eRulemaking Portal: Go to http://www.regulations.gov.
 Follow the instructions for submitting comments.

     Fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>.
     Mail: U.S. Department of Transportation, Docket
Operations, M-30, West Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140, 1200 New
Jersey Avenue, SE., Washington, DC 20590.
     Hand Delivery: U.S. Department of Transportation, Docket
Operations, M-30, West Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140, 1200 New
Jersey Avenue, SE., Washington, DC 20590, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m.,
Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays.
    For service information identified in this AD, contact Boeing
Commercial Airplanes, Long Beach Division, 3855 Lakewood Boulevard,
Long Beach, California 90846, Attention: Data and Service Management,
Dept. C1-L5A (D800-0024).

Examining the AD Docket

    You may examine the AD docket on the Internet at http://www.regulations.gov
; or in person at the Docket Management Facility

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 Office (telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>) is in the
ADDRESSES section. Comments will be available in the AD docket shortly
after receipt.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Jon Mowery, Aerospace Engineer,
Airframe Branch, ANM-120L, FAA, Los Angeles Aircraft Certification
Office, 3960 Paramount Boulevard, Lakewood, California 90712-4137;
telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Comments Invited

    We invite you to send any written relevant data, views, or
arguments about this proposed AD. Send your comments to an address
listed under the ADDRESSES section. Include ``Docket No. FAA-2008-0123;
Directorate Identifier 2007-NM-056-AD'' at the beginning of your
comments. We specifically invite comments on the overall regulatory,
economic, environmental, and energy aspects of this proposed AD. We
will consider all comments received by the closing date and may amend
this proposed AD because 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 we
receive about this proposed AD.

Discussion

    On January 11, 1993, we issued AD 93-01-15, amendment 39-8469 (58
FR 5576, January 22, 1993), for McDonnell Douglas Model DC-8 airplanes.
That AD requires structural inspections to detect fatigue cracking,
reporting of the inspection results, and repair, as

necessary, to ensure continued airworthiness as these airplanes
approach the manufacturer's original fatigue design life goal. That AD
resulted from new data submitted by the manufacturer indicating that
additional inspections and an expanded sample size are necessary to
increase the confidence level of the statistical program to ensure
timely detection of cracks in the principal structural elements (PSEs).
We issued that AD to prevent fatigue cracking, which could result in a
compromise of the structural integrity of these airplanes.

Supplemental Inspection Documents (SIDs) ADs

    In the early 1980s, as part of our continuing work to maintain the
structural integrity of older transport category airplanes, we
concluded that the incidence of fatigue cracking may increase as these
airplanes reach or exceed their design service goal (DSG). A
significant number of these airplanes were approaching or had exceeded
the DSG on which the initial type certification approval was
predicated. In light of this, and as a result of increased utilization,
longer operational lives, and the high levels of safety expected of the
currently operated transport category airplanes, we determined that a
supplemental structural inspection program (SSIP) was necessary to
ensure a high level of structural integrity for all airplanes in the
transport fleet.

Issuance of Advisory Circular (AC)

    As a follow-on from that determination, we issued AC No. 91-56,
``Supplemental Structural Inspection Program for Large Transport
Category Airplanes,'' dated May 6, 1981. That AC provides guidance
material to manufacturers and operators for use in developing a
continuing structural integrity program to ensure safe operation of
older airplanes throughout their operational lives. This guidance
material applies to transport airplanes that were certified under the
fail-safe requirements of part 4b (``Airplane Airworthiness, Transport
Categories'') of the Civil Air Regulations of the Federal Aviation
Regulations (FAR) (14 CFR part 25), and that have a maximum gross
weight greater than 75,000 pounds. The procedures set forth in that AC
are applicable to transport category airplanes operated under subpart D
(``Special Flight Operations'') of part 91 of the FAR (14 CFR part 91);
part 121 (``Operating Requirements: Domestic, Flag, and Supplemental
Operations''); part 125 (``Certification and Operations: Airplanes
having a Seating Capacity of 20 or More Passengers or a Maximum Payload
of 6,000 Pounds or More''); and part 135 (``Operating Requirements:
Commuter and On-Demand Operations'') of the FAR (14 CFR parts 121, 125,
and 135). The objective of the SSIP was to establish inspection
programs to ensure timely detection of fatigue cracking.

Aging Aircraft Safety Act (AASA)

    In October 1991, Congress enacted Title IV of Public Law 102-143,
the AASA of 1991, to address aging aircraft concerns. That Act
instructed the FAA administrator to prescribe regulations that will
ensure the continuing airworthiness of aging aircraft.

FAA Responses To AASA

    On January 25, 2005, as one of the responses to the AASA, we issued
the Aging Airplane Safety; Final Rule (AASFR) (70 FR 5518, February 2,
2005). The AASFR applies to certain transport category, turbine powered
airplanes with a type certificate issued after January 1, 1958
(including the airplanes that would be subject to this proposed AD),
that are operated under 14 CFR parts 121 or 129, with the exception of
airplanes operated within the State of Alaska. Sections 121.370a and
129.16 of the AASFR require the maintenance programs of those airplanes
to include damage tolerance-based inspections and procedures for
structure that is susceptible to fatigue cracking that could contribute
to a catastrophic failure. The inspections and procedures must take
into account the adverse affects that RAMs may have on fatigue cracking
and the inspection of the structure. The procedures are to be
established and incorporated before December 20, 2010. Compliance with
this proposed AD also would be compliance with some aspects of the
AASFR.

Relevant Service Information

    We have reviewed Boeing Report No. L26-011, ``DC-8 All Series
Supplemental Inspection Document (SID),'' Volume I, Revision 6, dated
July 2005 (hereafter ``Revision 6''). The purpose of Revision 6 is to
define the mandatory inspection requirements for the PSEs and to
provide specific non-destructive inspection (NDI) techniques and
procedures for each PSE. Revision 6 also revises the maintenance
program by removing provisions for the sampling inspection program.
However, Revision 6 retains the program goal to inspect airplanes in
advance of a certain threshold for the possibility of increasing that
threshold and using service history to justify delaying inspections on
the younger portion of the fleet. As with previous revisions, Revision
6 provides credit for inspections previously accomplished within the
required intervals. Revision 6 provides a description of PSEs, NDI
locations, planning and reporting procedures, and certain criteria upon
which the supplemental inspection program is based.
    We also have reviewed McDonnell Douglas Report No. L26-011, ``DC-8
Supplemental Inspection Document (SID),'' Volume II, Revision 8, dated
January 2005. This document describes specific non-destructive testing
inspections of the SID, and has been approved as an acceptable
alternative method of compliance with corresponding paragraphs of AD
93-01-15.
    Accomplishing the actions specified in the service information
described above is intended to adequately address the unsafe condition.

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. This proposed AD would retain certain
requirements of AD 93-01-15. This proposed AD also would require
revision of the FAA-approved maintenance program. This proposed AD
would require implementation of a structural inspection program of
baseline structure to detect and correct fatigue cracking in order to
ensure the continued airworthiness of airplanes as they approach the
manufacturer's original fatigue design life goal. For the purposes of
this proposed AD, a PSE is defined as an element that contributes
significantly to the carrying of flight, ground or pressurization
loads, and the integrity of that element is essential in maintaining
the overall structural integrity of the airplane.
    The following paragraphs summarize certain specific actions in this
proposed AD:
    Paragraph (h) of the proposed AD would require a revision of the
maintenance inspection program that provides for inspection(s) of the
PSE in accordance with Boeing Report No. L26-011, ``DC-8 Supplemental
Inspection Document (SID),'' Volume I, Revision 6, dated July 2005.
PSEs are also defined and specified in the SID.
    Paragraph (i) of the proposed AD would specify that the SID be
implemented on a PSE-by-PSE basis before structure exceeds its 75%
fatigue life threshold (\3/4\NTH) and its full fatigue life
threshold (NTH). The threshold value is defined as the life
of the

structure measured in total landings, when the probability of failure
reaches one in a billion. The DC-8 SID program is not a sampling
program. Airplanes would be inspected once before reaching both PSE
thresholds (once by \3/4\NTH and once by NTH). In
order for the inspection to have value, no PSE would be inspected
before half of the fatigue life threshold, \1/2\NTH. The
additional \3/4\NTH threshold aids in advancing the
threshold for some PSEs as explained in Section 4 of Volume I of the
SID. Inspection of each PSE should be done in accordance with the NDI
procedures set forth in Volume II of the SID.
    For airplanes past the threshold NTH, the proposed AD
would require that the PSE be inspected at repetitive intervals not to
exceed [Delta]NDI/2 as specified in Section 4 of Volume I of the SID
per the NDI procedure, which is specified in Volume II of the SID. The
definition of [Delta]NDI/2 is half of the life for a crack to grow from
a given NDI detectable crack size to instability.
    Paragraph (i) of this proposed AD also would require, for airplanes
that have exceeded the NTH, that each PSE be inspected
within 18 months after the effective date of this AD. The entire PSE
must be inspected regardless of whether or not it has been repaired,
altered, or modified.
    Paragraph (j) of this proposed AD would require that, if any PSE is
repaired, altered, or modified, it must be considered a ``discrepant
finding.'' A discrepant PSE indicates that it could not be completely
inspected because the NDI procedure could not be accomplished due to
differences on the airplane from the NDI reference standard (i.e.,
RAMs). For any discrepancy (e.g., a PSE cannot be inspected as
specified in Volume II of the SID or does not match rework, repair, or
modification description in Volume I of the SID), this proposed AD
would require that the discrepancy be inspected in accordance with a
method approved by the FAA.
    Paragraph (k) of this proposed AD would require that all negative
or positive findings of the inspection done in paragraph (i) of the AD
be reported to Boeing at the times specified, and per instructions
contained in Section 4 of Volume I of the SID.
    Paragraph (l) of this proposed AD would require that any cracked
structure detected during any inspection required by paragraph (i) of
this proposed AD be repaired before further flight. Additionally,
paragraph (l) of this AD would require accomplishment of the actions as
specified in paragraphs (l)(1), (l)(2), and (l)(3) of this proposed AD,
at the times specified below.
    1. Within 18 months after repair, accomplish a damage tolerance
assessment (DTA) that defines the threshold for inspection and submit
the assessment for approval to the Manager, Los Angeles Aircraft
Certification Office (ACO), FAA.
    2. Before reaching 75% of the threshold, submit the inspection
methods and repetitive inspections intervals for the repair for
approval by the Manager of the Los Angeles ACO.
    3. Before the threshold, the inspection method and repetitive
inspection intervals are to be incorporated into the FAA-approved
structural maintenance or inspection program for the airplane.
    For the purposes of this proposed AD, the FAA anticipates that
submissions of the DTA of the repair, if acceptable, should be approved
within six months after submission.
    Paragraph (m) of this proposed AD specifies the requirements of the
inspection program for transferred airplanes. Before any airplane that
is subject to this proposed AD can be added to an air carrier's
operations specifications, a program for the accomplishment of the
inspections required by this proposed AD must be established. Paragraph
(m) of the proposed AD would require accomplishment of the following:
    1. For airplanes that have been inspected per this proposed AD: The
inspection of each PSE must be done by the new operator per the
previous operator's schedule and inspection method, or per the new
operator's schedule and inspection method, at whichever time would
result in the earlier accomplishment date for that PSE inspection. The
compliance time for accomplishment of this inspection must be measured
from the last inspection done by the previous operator. After each
inspection has been done once, each subsequent inspection must be done
per the new operator's schedule and inspection method.
    2. For airplanes that have not been inspected per this proposed AD:
The inspection of each PSE must be done either before adding the
airplane to the air carrier's operations specification, or per a
schedule and an inspection method approved by the FAA. After each
inspection has been performed once, each subsequent inspection must be
done per the new operator's schedule.
    Accomplishment of these actions will ensure that: (1) An Operator's
newly acquired airplanes comply with its SSIP before being operated;
and (2) frequently transferred airplanes are not permitted to operate
without accomplishment of the inspections defined in the SID.
    Paragraph (n) of this proposed AD specifies that repairs and
inspection/replacement programs done before the effective date in
accordance with McDonnell Douglas Report No. MDC 91K0262, ``DC-8 Aging
Aircraft Repair Assessment Program Document,'' Revision 1, dated
October 2000; are acceptable for compliance with the requirements of
paragraphs (g) and (l) of this proposed AD.

Differences Between the Proposed AD and the SID

    The SID specifies to contact the manufacturer for instructions on
how to repair certain conditions, but this proposed AD would require
repairing those conditions in one of the following ways:
     Using a method that we approve; or
     Using data that meet the certification basis of the
airplane, and that have been approved by an Authorized Representative
for the Boeing Commercial Airplanes Delegation Option Authorization
Organization whom we have authorized to make those findings.

Change to Existing AD

    This proposed AD would retain all requirements of AD 93-01-15.
Since AD 93-01-15 was issued, the AD format has been revised, and
certain paragraphs have been rearranged. As a result, the corresponding
paragraph identifiers have changed in this proposed AD, as listed in
the following table:

                      Revised Paragraph Identifiers
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                            Corresponding requirement in
        Requirement in AD 93-01-15                this proposed AD
------------------------------------------------------------------------
paragraph (b).............................  paragraph (f).
paragraph (c).............................  paragraph (g).
------------------------------------------------------------------------

Costs of Compliance

    There are about 194 airplanes of the affected design in the
worldwide fleet. The following table provides the estimated costs for
U.S. operators to comply with this proposed AD.

                                                 Estimated Costs
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                Number of U.S.-
            Action                 Work hours      Average labor     Cost per       registered      Fleet cost
                                                   rate per hour     operator        airplanes
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Revision of maintenance         544 per operator             $80         $43,520             131        $739,840
 inspection program (required    (17 U.S.
 by AD 93-01-15).                operators).
Revision of maintenance         250 per operator              80          20,000             131         340,000
 program and inspections (new    (17 U.S.
 proposed actions).              operators).
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The number of inspection work hours, as indicated above, is
presented as if the accomplishment of the actions in this proposed AD
is to be conducted as ``stand alone'' actions. However, in actual
practice, these actions for the most part will be done coincidentally
or in combination with normally scheduled airplane inspections and
other maintenance program tasks. Therefore, the actual number of
necessary additional inspection work hours will be minimal in many
instances. Additionally, any costs associated with special airplane
scheduling will be minimal.

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
regulation:
    1. Is not a ``significant regulatory action'' under Executive Order
12866;
    2. Is not a ``significant rule'' under the DOT Regulatory Policies
and Procedures (44 FR 11034, February 26, 1979); and
    3. Will not have a significant economic impact, positive or
negative, on a substantial number of small entities under the criteria
of the Regulatory Flexibility Act.
    We prepared a regulatory evaluation of the estimated costs to
comply with this proposed AD and placed it in the AD docket. See the
ADDRESSES section for a location to examine the regulatory evaluation.

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39

    Air transportation, Aircraft, Aviation safety, Safety.

The Proposed Amendment

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

PART 39--AIRWORTHINESS DIRECTIVES

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

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

Sec.  39.13  [Amended]

    2. The Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) amends Sec.  39.13 by
removing amendment 39-8469 (58 FR 5576, January 22, 1993) and adding
the following new airworthiness directive (AD):

McDonnell Douglas: Docket No. FAA-2008-0123; Directorate Identifier
2007-NM-056-AD.

Comments Due Date

    (a) The FAA must receive comments on this AD action by March 21,
2008.

Affected ADs

    (b) This AD supersedes AD 93-01-15.

Applicability

    (c) This AD applies to all McDonnell Douglas airplanes
identified in Table 1 of this AD, certificated in any category.

                         Table 1.--Applicability
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                  Model
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
(1) DC-8-11, DC-8-12, DC-8-21, DC-8-31, DC-8-32, DC-8-33, DC-8-41, DC-8-
 42, and DC-8-43 airplanes.
(2) DC-8-51, DC-8-52, DC-8-53, and DC-8-55 airplanes.
(3) DC-8F-54 and DC-8F-55 airplanes.
(4) DC-8-61, DC-8-62, and DC-8-63 airplanes.
(5) DC-8-61F, DC-8-62F, and DC-8-63F airplanes.
(6) DC-8-71, DC-8-72, and DC-8-73 airplanes.
(7) DC-8-71F, DC-8-72F, and DC-8-73F airplanes.
------------------------------------------------------------------------

Unsafe Condition

    (d) This AD results from a significant number of these airplanes
approaching or exceeding the design service goal on which the
initial type certification approval was predicated. We are issuing
this AD to detect and correct fatigue cracking that could compromise
the structural integrity of these airplanes.

Compliance

    (e) You are responsible for having the actions required by this
AD performed within the compliance times specified, unless the
actions have already been done.

Certain Requirements of AD 93-01-15

Revise the FAA-Approved Maintenance Inspection Program

    (f) Within 6 months after February 26, 1993 (the effective date
of AD 93-01-15), incorporate a revision of the FAA-approved
maintenance inspection program that provides no less than the
required inspection of the Principal Structural Elements (PSE's)
defined in Sections 2 and 3 of Volume I of McDonnell Douglas Report
No. L26-011, ``DC-8 Supplemental Inspection Document (SID),'' dated
March 1991, in accordance with Section 2 of Volume III-91, dated
April 1991, of that document. The non-destructive inspection
techniques set forth in Sections 2 and 3 of Volume II, dated March
1991, of that SID provide acceptable methods for accomplishing the
inspections required by this AD. All inspection results, negative or
positive, must be reported to McDonnell Douglas, in accordance with
the instructions of Section 2 of Volume III-91 of the SID.
Information collection requirements contained in this regulation
have been approved by the OMB under the provisions of the Paperwork
Reduction Act of 1980 (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.) and have been
assigned OMB Control Number 2120-0056.

Corrective Action

    (g) Cracked structure detected during the inspections required
by paragraph (f) of this AD must be repaired before further flight,
in accordance with a method approved by the Manager, Los Angeles
Aircraft Certification Office (ACO), FAA, Transport Airplane
Directorate.

New Requirements of This AD

Revision of the Maintenance Inspection Program

    (h) Within 12 months after the effective date of this AD,
incorporate a revision of the FAA-approved maintenance inspection
program that provides for inspection(s) of the PSEs, in accordance
with Boeing Report No. L26-011, ``DC-8 All Series Supplemental
Inspection Document (SID),'' Volume I, Revision 6, dated July 2005.
Incorporation of this revision ends the requirements of paragraphs
(f) and (g) of this AD.

Non-Destructive Inspections (NDIs)

    (i) For all PSEs listed in Section 2 of Boeing Report No. L26-
011, ``DC-8 All Series Supplemental Inspection Document (SID),''
Volume I, Revision 6, dated July 2005, perform an NDI for fatigue
cracking of each PSE, in accordance with the NDI procedures
specified in Section 2 of McDonnell Douglas Report No. L26-011,
``DC-8 Supplemental Inspection Document (SID),'' Volume II, Revision
8, dated January 2005, at the times specified in paragraph (i)(1),
(i)(2), or (i)(3) of this AD, as applicable.
    (1) For airplanes that have less than three quarters of the
fatigue life threshold (\3/4\NTH) as of the effective
date of this AD: Perform the NDI for fatigue cracking at the times
specified in paragraphs (i)(1)(i) and (i)(1)(ii) of this AD. After
reaching the threshold (NTH), repeat the inspection for
that PSE at intervals not to exceed [Delta]NDI/2.
    (i) Perform an initial NDI no earlier than one-half of the
threshold (\1/2\NTH) but before reaching three-quarters
of the threshold (\3/4\NTH), or within 60 months after
the effective date of this AD, whichever occurs later.
    (ii) Repeat the NDI no earlier than \3/4\NTH but
before reaching the threshold (NTH), or within 18 months
after the inspection required by paragraph (i)(1)(i) of this AD,
whichever occurs later.

    Note 1: The DC-8 SID and this AD refer to the repetitive
inspection interval as [Delta]NDI/2. However, the headings of the
tables in Section 4 of Volume I of the DC-8 SID refer to the
repetitive inspection interval of NDI/2. The values listed under
NDI/2 in the tables in Section 4 of Volume I of the DC-8 SID are the
repetitive inspection intervals, [Delta]NDI/2.

    (2) For airplanes that have reached or exceeded three-quarters
of the fatigue life threshold (\3/4\NTH), but less than
the threshold (NTH), as of the effective date of this AD:
Perform an NDI before reaching the threshold (NTH), or
within 18 months after the effective date of this AD, whichever
occurs later. Thereafter, after passing the threshold
(NTH), repeat the inspection for that PSE at intervals
not to exceed [Delta]NDI/2.
    (3) For airplanes that have reached or exceeded the fatigue life
threshold (NTH) as of the effective date of this AD:
Perform an NDI within 18 months after the effective date of this AD.
Thereafter, repeat the inspection for that PSE at intervals not to
exceed [Delta]NDI/2.

Discrepant Findings

    (j) If any discrepancy (e.g., differences on the airplane from
the NDI reference standard, such as PSEs that cannot be inspected as
specified in McDonnell Douglas Report No. L26-011, ``DC-8
Supplemental Inspection Document (SID),'' Volume II, Revision 8,
dated January 2005, or do not match rework, repair, or modification
descriptions in Boeing Report No. L26-011, ``DC-8 All Series
Supplemental Inspection Document (SID),'' Volume I, Revision 6,
dated July 2005) is detected during any inspection required by
paragraph (i) of this AD, do the action specified in paragraph
(j)(1) or (j)(2) of this AD, as applicable.
    (1) If a discrepancy is detected during any inspection done
before 3/4NTH or NTH: The area of the PSE
affected by the discrepancy must be inspected before NTH
or within 18 months after the discovery of the discrepancy,
whichever occurs later, in accordance with a method approved by the
Manager, Los Angeles ACO.
    (2) If a discrepancy is detected during any inspection done
after NTH: The area of the PSE affected by the
discrepancy must be inspected before the accumulation of an
additional [Delta]NDI/2 or within 18 months after the discovery of
the discrepancy, whichever occurs later, in accordance with a method
approved by the Manager, Los Angeles ACO.

Reporting Requirements

    (k) All negative or positive findings of the inspections done in
accordance with paragraph (i) of this AD must be reported to Boeing
at the times specified in, and in accordance with, the instructions
contained in Section 4 of Boeing Report No. L26-011, ``DC-8 All
Series Supplemental Inspection Document (SID),'' Volume I, Revision
6, dated July 2005. Information collection requirements contained in
this regulation have been approved by the Office of Management and
Budget (OMB) under the provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act of
1980 (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.) and have been assigned OMB Control
Number 2120-0056.

Corrective Actions

    (l) Any cracked structure of a PSE detected during any
inspection required by paragraph (i) of this AD must be repaired
before further flight using a method approved in accordance with the
procedures specified in paragraph (o) of this AD. Accomplish the
actions described in paragraphs (l)(1), (l)(2), and (l)(3) of this
AD, at the times specified.
    (1) Within 18 months after repair, do a damage tolerance
assessment (DTA) that defines the threshold for inspection of the
repair and submit the assessment for approval.
    (2) Before reaching 75% of the repair threshold as determined in
paragraph (l)(1) of this AD, submit the inspection methods and
repetitive inspection intervals for the repair for approval.
    (3) Before the repair threshold, as determined in paragraph
(l)(1) of this AD, incorporate the inspection method and repetitive
inspection intervals into the FAA-approved structural maintenance or
inspection program for the airplane.

    Note 2: For the purposes of this AD, we anticipate that
submissions of the DTA of the repair, if acceptable, should be
approved within 6 months after submission.

    Note 3: FAA Order 8110.54, ``Instructions for Continued
Airworthiness,'' dated July 1, 2005, provides additional guidance
about the approval of repairs to PSEs.

Inspection for Transferred Airplanes

    (m) Before any airplane that has exceeded the fatigue life
threshold (NTH) can be added to an air carrier's
operations specifications, a program for the accomplishment of the
inspections required by this AD must be established as specified in
paragraph (m)(1) or (m)(2) of this AD, as applicable.
    (1) For airplanes that have been inspected in accordance with
this AD: The inspection of each PSE must be done by the new operator
in accordance with the previous operator's schedule and inspection
method, or the new operator's schedule and inspection method, at
whichever time would result in the earlier accomplishment date for

that PSE inspection. The compliance time for accomplishing this
inspection must be measured from the last inspection done by the
previous operator. After each inspection has been done once, each
subsequent inspection must be done in accordance with the new
operator's schedule and inspection method.
    (2) For airplanes that have not been inspected in accordance
with this AD: The inspection of each PSE required by this AD must be
done either before adding the airplane to the air carrier's
operations specification, or in accordance with a schedule and an
inspection method approved by the Manager, Los Angeles ACO. After
each inspection has been done once, each subsequent inspection must
be done in accordance with the new operator's schedule.

Acceptable for Compliance

    (n) McDonnell Douglas Report No. MDC 91K0262, ``DC-8 Aging
Aircraft Repair Assessment Program Document,'' Revision 1, dated
October 2000, provides inspection/replacement programs for certain
repairs to the fuselage pressure shell. Accomplishing these repairs
and inspection/replacement programs before the effective date of
this AD is considered acceptable for compliance with the
requirements of paragraphs (g) and (l) of this AD for repairs
subject to that document.

Alternative Methods of Compliance (AMOCs)

    (o)(1) The Manager, Los Angeles ACO, has the authority to
approve AMOCs for this AD, if requested in accordance with the
procedures found in 14 CFR 39.19.
    (2) To request a different method of compliance or a different
compliance time for this AD, follow the procedures in 14 CFR 39.19.
Before using any approved AMOC on any airplane to which the AMOC
applies, notify your appropriate principal inspector (PI) in the FAA
Flight Standards District Office (FSDO), or lacking a PI, your local
FSDO.
    (3) An AMOC that provides an acceptable level of safety may be
used for any repair required by this AD, if it is approved by an
Authorized Representative for the Boeing Commercial Airplanes
Delegation Option Authorization Organization who has been authorized
by the Manager, Los Angeles ACO, to make those findings. For a
repair method to be approved, the repair must meet the certification
basis of the airplane and 14 CFR 25.571, Amendment 45, and the
approval must specifically refer to this AD.
    (4) AMOCs approved previously in accordance with AD 93-01-15 are
approved as AMOCs for the corresponding provisions of this AD.

    Issued in Renton, Washington, on January 24, 2008.
Ali Bahrami,
Manager, Transport Airplane Directorate, Aircraft Certification
Service.
 [FR Doc. E8-1989 Filed 2-4-08; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


[Federal Register Volume 80, Number 156 (Thursday, August 13, 2015)]
[Notices]
[Pages 48552-48553]
[FR Doc No: 2015-20000]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Coast Guard

[USCG-2015-0636; OMB Control Number 1625-0088]

Information Collection Request to Office of Management and Budget

AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS.

ACTION: Sixty-day notice requesting comments.

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

SUMMARY:  In compliance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, the
U.S. Coast Guard intends to submit an Information Collection Request
(ICRs) to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB), Office of
Information and Regulatory Affairs (OIRA), requesting approval of a
revision of a currently approved collection: 1625-0088, Voyage Planning
for Tank Barge Transits in the Northeast United States. Our ICR
describes the information we seek to collect from the public. Before
submitting this ICR to OIRA, the Coast Guard is inviting comments as
described below.

DATES: Comments must reach the Coast Guard on or before October 13,
2015.

ADDRESSES: You may submit comments identified by Coast Guard docket
number [USCG-2015-0636] to the Docket Management Facility (DMF) at the
U.S. Department of Transportation (DOT). To avoid duplicate
submissions, please use only one of the following means:
    (1) Online: http://www.regulations.gov.
    (2) Mail: DMF (M-30), DOT, West Building Ground Floor, Room W12-
140, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., Washington, DC 20590-0001.
    (3) Hand delivery: Same as mail address above, between 9 a.m. and 5
p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays. The telephone
number is<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    (4) Fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>. To ensure your comments are received in a
timely manner, mark the fax, to attention Desk Officer for the Coast
Guard.
    The DMF maintains the public docket for this Notice. Comments and
material received from the public, as well as documents mentioned in
this Notice as being available in the docket, will become part of the
docket and will be available for inspection or copying at room W12-140
on the West Building Ground Floor, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE.,
Washington, DC, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday,
except Federal holidays. You may also find the docket on the Internet
at http://www.regulations.gov.
    Copies of the ICR(s) are available through the docket on the
Internet at http://www.regulations.gov. Additionally, copies are
available from: Commandant (CG-612), Attn Paperwork Reduction Act
Manager, U.S. Coast Guard, 2703 Martin Luther King, Jr. Ave. SE., Stop
7710, Washington, DC 20593-7710.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr. Anthony Smith, Office of
Information Management, telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>, or fax<PHONE_NUMBER>,
for questions on these documents. Contact Ms. Cheryl Collins, Program
Manager, Docket Operations,<PHONE_NUMBER>, for questions on the docket.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Public Participation and Request for Comments

    This Notice relies on the authority of the Paperwork Reduction Act
of 1995; 44 U.S.C. Chapter 35, as amended. An ICR is an application to
OIRA seeking the approval, extension, or renewal of a Coast Guard
collection of information (Collection). The ICR contains information
describing the Collection's purpose, the Collection's likely burden on
the affected public, an explanation of the necessity of the Collection,
and other important information describing the Collection. There is one
ICR for each Collection.
    The Coast Guard invites comments on whether these ICRs should be
granted based on the Collections being necessary for the proper
performance of Departmental functions. In particular, the Coast Guard
would appreciate comments addressing: (1) The practical utility of the
Collection; (2) the accuracy of the estimated burden of the Collection;
(3) ways to enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of information
subject to the Collection; and (4) ways to minimize the burden of the
Collection on respondents, including the use of automated collection
techniques or other forms of information technology. In response to
your comments, we may revise these ICRs or decide not to seek approval
of revisions of the Collection. We will consider all comments and
material received during the comment period.
    We encourage you to respond to this request by submitting comments
and related materials. Comments must contain the OMB Control Number of
the ICR and the docket number of this request, [USCG-2015-0636], and
must be received by October 13, 2015. We will post all comments
received, without change, to http://www.regulations.gov. They will
include any personal information you provide. We have an agreement with
DOT to use their DMF. Please see the ``Privacy Act'' paragraph below.

Submitting Comments

    If you submit a comment, please include the docket number [USCG-
2015-0636], indicate the specific section of the document to which each
comment applies, providing a reason for each comment. You may submit
your comments and material online (via http://www.regulations.gov), by
fax, mail, or hand delivery, but please use only one of these means. If
you submit a comment online via www.regulations.gov, it will be
considered received by the Coast Guard when you successfully transmit
the comment. If you fax, hand deliver, or mail your comment, it will be
considered as having been received by the Coast Guard when it is
received at the DMF. We recommend you include your name, mailing
address, an email address, or other contact information in the body of
your document so that we can contact you if we have questions regarding
your submission.
    You may submit your comments and material by electronic means,
mail, fax, or delivery to the DMF at the address under ADDRESSES; but
please submit them by only one means. To submit your comment online, go
to http://www.regulations.gov, and type ``USCG-2015-0636'' in the
``Search'' box. If you submit your comments by mail or hand delivery,
submit them in an unbound format, no larger than 8\1/2\ by 11 inches,
suitable for copying and electronic filing. If you submit comments by
mail and would like to know that they reached the Facility, please
enclose a stamped, self-addressed postcard or envelope. We will
consider all comments and material received during the comment period
and will address them accordingly.
    Viewing comments and documents: To view comments, as well as
documents mentioned in this Notice as being available in the docket, go
to http://www.regulations.gov, click on the ``read comments'' box,
which will then become highlighted in blue. In the ``Search'' box
insert ``USCG-2015-0636'' and click ``Search.'' Click the ``Open Docket
Folder'' in the ``Actions'' column. You may also visit the DMF in Room
W12-140 on the ground floor of the DOT West Building, 1200 New Jersey
Avenue SE., Washington, DC 20590, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday
through Friday, except Federal holidays.

Privacy Act

    Anyone can search the electronic form of comments received in
dockets by the name of the individual submitting the comment (or
signing the comment, if submitted on behalf of an association,
business, labor union, etc.). You may review a Privacy Act statement
regarding Coast Guard public dockets in the January 17, 2008, issue of
the Federal Register (73 FR 3316).

Information Collection Request

    1. Title: Voyage Planning for Tank Barge Transits in the Northeast
United States.
    OMB Control Number: 1625-0088.
    Summary: The information collection requirement for a voyage plan
serves as a preventive measure and assists in ensuring the successful
execution and completion of a voyage in the First Coast Guard District.
This rule (33 CFR 165.100) applies to primary towing vessels engaged in
towing tank barges carrying petroleum oil in bulk as cargo.
    Need: Section 311 of the Coast Guard Authorization Act of 1998,
Public Law 105-383, 33 U.S.C. 1231, and 46 U.S.C. 3719 authorize the
Coast Guard to promulgate regulations for towing vessel and barge
safety for the waters of the Northeast subject to the jurisdiction of
the First Coast Guard District. This regulation is contained in 33 CFR
165.100. The information for a voyage plan will provide a mechanism for
assisting vessels towing tank barges to identify those specific risks,
potential equipment failures, or human errors that may lead to
accidents.
    Forms: None.
    Respondents: Owners and operators of towing vessels.
    Frequency: On occasion.
    Burden Estimate: The estimated burden has decreased from 1,116
hours to 880 hours a year due to a decrease in the estimated annual
number of responses.

    Authority:  The Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995; 44 U.S.C.
Chapter 35, as amended.

    Dated: August 1, 2015.
Thomas P. Michelli,
Deputy Chief Information Officer, U.S. Coast Guard.
[FR Doc. 2015-20000 Filed 8-12-15; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 9110-04-P


[Federal Register Volume 78, Number 109 (Thursday, June 6, 2013)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 34013-34014]
[FR Doc No: 2013-13351]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 52

[EPA-R03-OAR-2012-0955; FRL-9819-5]

Approval and Promulgation of Air Quality Implementation Plans;
Delaware, District of Columbia, Maryland, Pennsylvania, Virginia, and
West Virginia; Removal of Obsolete Regulations and Updates to Citations
to State Regulations Due to Recodification

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Proposed rule.

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

SUMMARY: EPA is proposing to remove over fifty rules in the Code of
Federal Regulations (CFR) at 40 CFR part 52 for Delaware, the District
of Columbia, Maryland, Pennsylvania, Virginia, and West Virginia
because they are unnecessary or obsolete. EPA is also proposing to
clarify regulations in 40 CFR part 52 which reflect updated citations
of certain Commonwealth of Virginia rules due to the Commonwealth's
recodification of its regulations at the state level. These proposed
actions make no substantive changes to these State Implementation Plans
(SIPs) and impose no new requirements. In the Final Rules section of
this Federal Register, EPA is

approving these determinations as a direct final rule without prior
proposal because the Agency views this as a noncontroversial submittal
and anticipates no adverse comments. A detailed rationale for the
approval is set forth in the direct final rule. If no adverse comments
are received in response to this action, no further activity is
contemplated. If EPA receives adverse comments, the direct final rule
will be withdrawn and all public comments received will be addressed in
a subsequent final rule based on this proposed rule. EPA will not
institute a second comment period. Any parties interested in commenting
on this action should do so at this time.

DATES: Comments must be received in writing by July 8, 2013.

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID Number EPA-
R03-OAR-2012-0955 by one of the following methods:
    A. www.regulations.gov. Follow the on-line instructions for
submitting comments.
    B. Email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>    C. Mail: EPA-R03-OAR-2012-0955, Harold A. Frankford, Mailcode
3AP00, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region III, 1650 Arch
Street, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19103.
    D. Hand Delivery: At the previously-listed EPA Region III address.
Such deliveries are only accepted during the Docket's normal hours of
operation, and special arrangements should be made for deliveries of
boxed information.
    Instructions: Direct your comments to Docket ID No. EPA-R03-OAR-
2012-0955. EPA's policy is that all comments received will be included
in the public docket without change, and may be made available online
at www.regulations.gov, including any personal information provided,
unless the comment includes information claimed to be Confidential
Business Information (CBI) or other information whose disclosure is
restricted by statute. Do not submit information that you consider to
be CBI or otherwise protected through www.regulations.gov or email. The
www.regulations.gov Web site is an ``anonymous access'' system, which
means EPA will not know your identity or contact information unless you
provide it in the body of your comment. If you send an email comment
directly to EPA without going through www.regulations.gov, your email
address will be automatically captured and included as part of the
comment that is placed in the public docket and made available on the
Internet. If you submit an electronic comment, EPA recommends that you
include your name and other contact information in the body of your
comment and with any disk or CD-ROM you submit. If EPA cannot read your
comment due to technical difficulties and cannot contact you for
clarification, EPA may not be able to consider your comment. Electronic
files should avoid the use of special characters, any form of
encryption, and be free of any defects or viruses.
    Docket: All documents in the electronic docket are listed in the
www.regulations.gov index. Although listed in the index, some
information is not publicly available, i.e., CBI or other information
whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Certain other material, such
as copyrighted material, is not placed on the Internet and will be
publicly available only in hard copy form. Publicly available docket
materials are available either electronically in www.regulations.gov or
in hard copy during normal business hours at the Air Protection
Division, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region III, 1650 Arch
Street, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19103.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Harold A. Frankford,<PHONE_NUMBER>,
or by email at<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: For further information, please see the
information provided in the direct final action, with the same title,
that is located in the ``Rules and Regulations'' section of this
Federal Register publication. Please note that if EPA receives adverse
comment on an amendment, paragraph, or section of this rule and if that
provision may be severed from the remainder of the rule, EPA may adopt
as final those provisions of the rule that are not the subject of an
adverse comment.

    Dated: May 16, 2013.
W.C. Early,
 Acting Regional Administrator, Region III.
[FR Doc. 2013-13351 Filed 6-5-13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


[Federal Register: August 25, 2006 (Volume 71, Number 165)]
[Notices]
[Page 50478-50479]
[DOCID:fr25au06-134]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

Proposed Collection; Comment Request

Upon written request, copies available from: Securities and Exchange
Commission, Office of Filings and Information Services, Washington, DC
20549.

Extension:
    Rule 17i-6, SEC File No. 270-532, OMB Control No. 3235-0588.

    Notice is hereby given that pursuant to the Paperwork Reduction Act
of 1995 \1\ the Securities and Exchange Commission (``Commission'')
intends to submit to the Office of Management and Budget a request for
extension of the previously approved collections of information
discussed below. The Code of Federal Regulation citation to this
collection of information is the following rule: 17 CFR 240.17i-6.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ 44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Section 231 of the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act of 1999 \2\ (the
``GLBA'') amended Section 17 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 to
create a regulatory framework under which a holding company of a
broker-dealer (``investment bank holding company'' or ``IBHC'') may
voluntarily be supervised by the Commission as a supervised investment
bank holding company (or ``SIBHC'').\3\ In 2004, the Commission
promulgated rules, including Rule 17i-6, to create a framework for the
Commission to supervise SIBHCs.\4\ This framework includes
qualification criteria for SIBHCs, as well as recordkeeping and
reporting requirements. Among other things, this regulatory framework
for SIBHCs is intended to provide a basis for non-U.S. financial
regulators to treat the Commission as the principal U.S. consolidated,
home-country supervisor for SIBHCs and their affiliated broker-
dealers.\5\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \2\ Pub. L. 106-102, 113 Stat. 1338 (1999).
    \3\ See 15 U.S.C. 78q(i).
    \4\ See Exchange Act Release No. 49831 (Jun. 8, 2004), 69 FR
34472 (Jun. 21, 2004).
    \5\ See--H.R. Conf. Rep. No. 106-434, 165 (1999). See also--
Exchange Act Release No. 49831, at 6 (Jun. 8, 2004), 69 FR 34472, at
34473 (Jun. 21, 2004).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Pursuant to Section 17(i)(3)(A) of the Exchange Act, an SIBHC must
make and keep records, furnish copies thereof, and make such reports as
the Commission may require by rule.\6\ Rule 17i-6 requires that an
SIBHC file with the Commission certain monthly and quarterly reports
and an annual audit report. The reports and notices required to be
filed pursuant to Rule 17i-6 must be preserved for a period of not less
than three years.\7\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ 15 U.S.C. 78q(i)(3)(A).
    \7\ 17 CFR 240.17i-5(b)(3).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The collections of information required by Rule 17i-6 are necessary
to allow the Commission adequately to supervise the activities of these
SIBHCs and to effectively determine whether supervision of an IBHC as
an SIBHC is necessary or appropriate in furtherance of the purposes of
section 17 of the Act. Rule 17i-6s also enhances the Commission's
supervision of an SIBHCs' subsidiary broker-dealers through collection
of additional information and inspections of affiliates of those
broker-dealers. Without these reports, the Commission would be unable
to adequately supervise an SIBHC, nor would it be able to determine
whether continued supervision of an IBHC as an SIBHC were necessary and
appropriate in furtherance of the purposes of section 17 of the Act.
    We estimate that three IBHCs will file Notices of Intention with
the Commission to be supervised by the Commission as SIBHCs. An SIBHC
will require about eight hours each month to prepare and file the
monthly reports required by this rule (or approximately 96 hours per
year).\8\ On average, it will take an SIBHC about 16 hours each quarter
(or 64 hours each year) \9\ to prepare and file the quarterly reports
required by this rule. An SIBHC will require about 200 hours to prepare
and file the annual audit reports required by this rule. Consequently,
the total annual

burden of Rule 17i-6 on all SIBHCs is approximately 1,080 hours.\10\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \8\ (8 hours x 12 months in a year) = 96 hours/year.
    \9\ (16 hours x 4 quarters in a year) = 64 hours/year.
    \10\ (96 hours per year to prepare and file monthly reports + 64
hours each year to prepare and file quarterly reports + 200 hours
each year to prepare and file annual audit reports) x 3 SIBHCs =
1,080 hours.

    We believe that an IBHC likely will upgrade its information
technology (``IT'') systems in order to more efficiently comply with
certain of the SIBHC framework rules (including Rules 17i-4, 17i-5,
17i-6 and 17i-7), and that this would be a one-time cost. Depending on
the state of development of the IBHC's IT systems, it would cost an
IBHC between $1 million and $10 million to upgrade its IT systems to
comply with the SIBHC framework of rules. Thus, on average, it would
cost each of the three IBHCs about $5.5 million to upgrade their IT
systems, or approximately $16.5 million in total. It is impossible to
determine what percentage of the IT systems costs would be attributable
to each Rule, so we allocated the total estimated upgrade costs equally
(at 25% for each of the above-mentioned Rules), with $4,125,000
attributable to Rule 17i-6.
    Written comments are invited on: (a) Whether the collection of
information is necessary for the proper performance of the functions of
the agency, including whether the information will have practical
utility; (b) the accuracy of the agency'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.
    Comments should be directed to: R. Corey Booth, Director/Chief
Information Officer, Securities and Exchange Commission, C/O Shirley
Martinson, 6432 General Green Way, Alexandria, Virginia 22312 or send
an e-mail to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Comments must be submitted within
60 days of this notice.

    Dated: August 14, 2006.
Nancy M. Morris,
Secretary.
 [FR Doc. E6-14124 Filed 8-24-06; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 8010-01-P