[Federal Register Volume 81, Number 198 (Thursday, October 13, 2016)]
[Notices]
[Pages 70718-70719]
[FR Doc No: 2016-24701]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-79064; File No. SR-BatsBZX-2016-64]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; Bats BZX Exchange, Inc.; Notice of
Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of a Proposed Rule Change Related to
Fees To Make a Clarifying Change Related to the Tape B Quoting Tier

October 6, 2016.
    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 September 28, 2016, Bats BZX Exchange, Inc. (``Exchange'' or
``BZX'') filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission
(``Commission'') the proposed rule change as described in Items I, II
and III below, which Items have been prepared by the Exchange. The
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.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

    The Exchange filed a proposal to amend the fee schedule applicable
to Members \3\ and non-members of the Exchange pursuant to BZX Rules
15.1(a) and (c) in order to make a clarifying change related to the
Tape B Quoting Tier.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ The term ``Member'' is defined as ``any registered broker or
dealer that has been admitted to membership in the Exchange.'' See
Exchange Rule 1.5(n).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

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

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

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

1. Purpose
    The Exchange proposes to amend its fee schedule to make clear that
the additional rebate per share for orders in Tape B securities
associated with meeting the Tape B Quoting Tier (the ``Tape B Rebate'')
does not apply to the rebates set forth in footnote 14 part A of the
fee schedule (the ``LMM Incentive Program''). Specifically, this means
that a Member does not receive the Tape B Rebate on top of the rebate
that the LMM receives under the LMM Incentive Program for securities in
which they are the LMM.\4\ The Exchange notes this clarification
applies only to the rebates for securities in which a Member receives
rebates under the LMM Incentive Program and that enrollment in LMP
Securities is available to all Members, including LMMs, and Members
that act as an LMM are eligible to receive the Tape B Rebate for
securities in which the Member is not the LMM.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ As provided in the fee schedule, the Exchange notes that to
the extent a Member qualifies for higher rebates than those provided
by a tier for which such Member qualifies, such as the LMM Incentive
Program, the higher rebates shall apply.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange proposes to implement these amendments to its fee
schedule effective immediately.
2. Statutory Basis
    The Exchange believes that the proposed rule change is consistent
with the requirements of the Act and the rules and regulations
thereunder that are applicable to a national securities exchange, and,
in particular, with the requirements of Section 6 of the Act.\5\
Specifically, the Exchange believes that the proposed rule change is
consistent with Section 6(b)(4) and 6(b)(5) of the Act,\6\ in that it
provides for the equitable allocation of reasonable dues, fees and
other charges among its Members and other persons using its facilities.
The Exchange notes that it is not proposing to make any changes to the
rebates or fees that it currently charges. As such, the Exchange
believes that the change is reasonable, fair and equitable, and non-
discriminatory because it is non-substantive and is designed to make
sure that the fee schedule is as clear and easily understandable as
possible.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ 15 U.S.C. 78f.
    \6\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(4) and (5).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

B. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement on Burden on Competition

    The Exchange does not believe that the proposed rule change will
result in any burden on competition that is not necessary or
appropriate in furtherance of the purposes of the Act, as amended. The
Exchange does not believe that the changes burden competition, as this
change is intended to make the Exchange's fee schedule as clear and
easily understandable as possible.

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

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

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

    The foregoing rule change has become effective pursuant to Section
19(b)(3)(A) of the Act \7\ and paragraph (f) of Rule 19b-4
thereunder.\8\ 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.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A).
    \8\ 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 proposal 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 No. SR-BatsBZX-2016-64 on the subject line.

Paper Comments

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

All submissions should refer to File No. SR-BatsBZX-2016-64. 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 Web site (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 Web site 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 such filing will also be available
for inspection and copying at the principal office of the Exchange. All
comments received will be posted without change; the Commission does
not edit personal identifying information from submissions. You should
submit only information that you wish to make available publicly. All
submissions should refer to File No. SR-BatsBZX-2016-64 and should be
submitted on or before November 3, 2016.

    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets,
pursuant to delegated authority.\9\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \9\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Brent J. Fields,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2016-24701 Filed 10-12-16; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 88, Number 186 (Wednesday, September 27, 2023)]
[Notices]
[Pages 66486-66487]
[FR Doc No: 2023-20991]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Federal Emergency Management Agency

[Internal Agency Docket No. FEMA-4503-DR; Docket ID FEMA-2023-0001]

Alabama; Amendment No. 9 to Notice of a Major Disaster
Declaration

AGENCY: Federal Emergency Management Agency, DHS.

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: This notice amends the notice of a major disaster declaration
for the State of Alabama (FEMA-4503-DR), dated March 29, 2020, and
related determinations.

DATES: This change occurred on June 29, 2023.

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

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The Federal Emergency Management Agency
(FEMA) hereby gives notice that pursuant to the authority vested in the
Administrator, under Executive Order 12148, as amended, Robert D.
Samaan, of FEMA is appointed to act as the Federal Coordinating Officer
for this disaster.

    This action terminates the appointment of Gracia B. Szczech as
Federal Coordinating Officer for this disaster.

    The following Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance Numbers
(CFDA) are to be used for reporting and drawing funds: 97.030,
Community Disaster Loans; 97.031, Cora Brown Fund; 97.032, Crisis
Counseling; 97.033, Disaster Legal Services; 97.034, Disaster
Unemployment Assistance (DUA); 97.046, Fire Management Assistance
Grant; 97.048, Disaster Housing Assistance to Individuals and
Households In Presidentially Declared Disaster Areas; 97.049,
Presidentially Declared Disaster Assistance--Disaster Housing
Operations for Individuals and Households; 97.050, Presidentially
Declared Disaster Assistance to Individuals and Households--Other
Needs; 97.036, Disaster Grants--Public Assistance (Presidentially
Declared Disasters); 97.039, Hazard Mitigation Grant.

Deanne Criswell,
Administrator, Federal Emergency Management Agency.
[FR Doc. 2023-20991 Filed 9-26-23; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 9111-23-P


[Federal Register: December 10, 2007 (Volume 72, Number 236)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Page 69612-69614]
[DOCID:fr10de07-20]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. FAA-2007-28996; Directorate Identifier 2006-NM-217-AD;
Amendment 39-15283; AD 2007-25-02]
RIN 2120-AA64

Airworthiness Directives; Airbus Model A310 Series Airplanes

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

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: The FAA is adopting a new airworthiness directive (AD) for all
Airbus Model A310 series airplanes. This AD requires revising the
Airworthiness Limitations section of the Instructions for Continued
Airworthiness to incorporate new and revised structural inspections and
inspection intervals. This AD results from issuance of new and revised
structural inspections and inspection intervals. We are issuing this AD
to detect and correct fatigue cracking, which could result in reduced
structural integrity of the airplane.

DATES: This AD becomes effective January 14, 2008.
    The Director of the Federal Register approved the incorporation by
reference of certain publications listed in the AD as of January 14,
2008.

ADDRESSES: For service information identified in this AD, contact
Airbus, 1 Rond Point Maurice Bellonte, 31707 Blagnac Cedex, France.

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 AD, the regulatory evaluation,
any comments received, and other information. The address for the
Docket Office (telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>) is the Document Management
Facility, U.S. Department of Transportation, Docket Operations, M-30,
West Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140, 1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE.,
Washington, DC 20590.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Tom Stafford, Aerospace Engineer,
International Branch, ANM-116, FAA, Transport Airplane Directorate,
1601 Lind Avenue, SW., Renton, Washington 98057-3356; telephone (425)
227-1622; fax<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Discussion

    The FAA issued a notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) to amend 14
CFR part 39 to include an AD that would apply to all Airbus Model A310
series airplanes. That NPRM was published in the Federal Register on
August 16, 2007 (72 FR 45952). That NPRM proposed to require revising
the Airworthiness Limitations section of the Instructions for Continued
Airworthiness to incorporate new and revised structural inspections and
inspection intervals.

Comments

    We provided the public the opportunity to participate in the
development of this AD. We have considered the comments received.

Support for the NPRM

    Airbus supports issuance of this AD without further delay.

Request To Revise Address for Reporting Requirement

    Airbus requests that we revise the address for the reporting
requirement specified in the NPRM. We agree and have revised paragraph
(i) of this AD to refer to the address provided in Airbus's comment.

Conclusion

    We have carefully reviewed the available data, including the
comments received, and determined that air safety and the public
interest require adopting the AD with the change described previously.
We have determined that this change will neither increase the economic
burden on any operator nor increase the scope of the AD.

Costs of Compliance

    This AD affects about 69 airplanes of U.S. registry. The required
actions take about 2 work hours per airplane, at an average labor rate
of $80 per work hour. Based on these figures, the estimated cost of the
AD for U.S. operators is $11,040, or $160 per airplane.

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 AD will not have federalism
implications under Executive Order 13132. This AD will 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 this AD:
    (1) Is not a ``significant regulatory action'' under Executive
Order 12866;
    (2) Is not a ``significant rule'' under 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 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, Incorporation by
reference, Safety.

Adoption of the Amendment

0
Accordingly, under the authority delegated to me by the Administrator,
the FAA amends 14 CFR part 39 as follows:

PART 39--AIRWORTHINESS DIRECTIVES

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

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

Sec.  39.13  [Amended]

0
2. The Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) amends Sec.  39.13 by
adding the following new airworthiness directive (AD):

2007-25-02 Airbus: Amendment 39-15283. Docket No. FAA-2007-28996;
Directorate Identifier 2006-NM-217-AD.

Effective Date

    (a) This AD becomes effective January 14, 2008.

Affected ADs

    (b) None.

Applicability

    (c) This AD applies to all Airbus Model A310 series airplanes,
certificated in any category.

    Note 1: This AD requires revisions to certain operator
maintenance documents to include new inspections. Compliance with
these inspections is required by 14 CFR 91.403(c). For airplanes
that have been previously modified, altered, or repaired in the
areas addressed by these inspections, the operator may not be able
to accomplish the inspections described in the revisions. In this
situation, to comply with 14 CFR 91.403(c), the operator must
request approval for an alternative method of compliance according
to paragraph (j) of this AD. The request should include a
description of changes to the required inspections that will ensure
the continued damage tolerance of the affected structure. The FAA
has provided guidance for this determination in Advisory Circular
(AC) 25.1529-1.

Unsafe Condition

    (d) This AD results from issuance of new and revised structural
inspections and inspection intervals. We are issuing this AD to
detect and correct fatigue cracking, which could result in reduced
structural integrity of the airplane.

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.

Revision of Airworthiness Limitations Section (ALS) of the Instructions
for Continued Airworthiness (ICA)

    (f) Within 3 months after the effective date of this AD, do the
actions specified in paragraphs (f)(1) and (f)(2) of this AD.
    (1) Revise the ALS of the ICA to incorporate the structural
inspections and inspection intervals defined in Airbus A310
Airworthiness Limitations Items (ALI) Document, AI/SE-M2/95A.0263/
06, Issue 6, dated April 2006 (approved by the European Aviation
Safety Agency (EASA) on May 31, 2006) (hereafter referred to as
``Issue 6 of the ALI''). Accomplish the actions specified in Issue 6
of the ALI at the times specified in that ALI, except as provided by
paragraph (g) of this AD. Thereafter, except as provided by
paragraphs (f)(2) and (j) of this AD, no alternative structural
inspection intervals may be approved. The actions specified in Issue
6 of the ALI must be accomplished in accordance with Issue 6 of the
ALI.
    (2) Revise the ALS of the ICA to incorporate the new and revised
structural inspections and inspection intervals defined in Airbus
Temporary Revision (TR) 6.1, dated November 2006 (approved by the
EASA on December 12, 2006), to Issue 6 of the ALI. Thereafter,
except as provided by paragraph (j) of this AD, no alternative
structural inspection intervals may be approved.

Exception to Issue 6 of the ALI

    (g) The tolerance (grace period) for compliance with Issue 6 of
the ALI is within 1,500 flight cycles after the effective date of
this AD provided that none of the following is exceeded:
    (1) Thresholds or intervals in the operator's current approved
maintenance schedule that are taken from a previous ALI issue, if
existing, and are higher than or equal to those given in Issue 6 of
the ALI.
    (2) 18 months after the effective date of this AD.
    (3) 50 percent of the intervals given in Issue 6 of the ALI.
    (4) Any application tolerance specified in Section D of Issue 6
of the ALI.

Corrective Actions

    (h) Damaged, cracked, or corroded structure detected during any
inspection done in accordance with Issue 6 of the ALI must be
repaired, before further flight, in accordance with Issue 6 of the
ALI; or in accordance with other data meeting the certification
basis of the airplane that has

been approved by either the Manager, International Branch, ANM-116,
Transport Airplane Directorate, FAA, or the EASA (or its delegated
agent). Where Issue 6 of the ALI specifies to contact Airbus for
appropriate action:
    Before further flight, repair the damaged, cracked, or corroded
structure using a method approved by either the Manager,
International Branch, ANM-116, or the EASA (or its delegated agent).

Reporting Requirement

    (i) If any damage that exceeds the allowable limits specified in
Issue 6 of the ALI is detected during any inspection required by
this AD: At the applicable time specified in paragraph (i)(1) or
(i)(2) of this AD, submit a report of the finding to Airbus,
Customer Service Directorate, Attn: Department Manager Maintenance
Engineering, 1 Rond Point Maurice Bellonte, 31707 Blagnac Cedex,
France; e-mail<EMAIL_ADDRESS>The report must include the
ALI task reference, airplane serial number, the number of flight
cycles and flight hours on the airplane, identification of the
affected structure, location and description of the finding
including its size and orientation, and the circumstance of
detection and inspection method used. Under the provisions of the
Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. 3501, et seq.), the Office of
Management and Budget (OMB) has approved the information collection
requirements contained in this AD and has assigned OMB Control
Number 2120-0056.
    (1) If the inspection was done after the effective date of this
AD: Submit the report within 30 days after the inspection.
    (2) If the inspection was accomplished prior to the effective
date of this AD: Submit the report within 30 days after the
effective date of this AD.

Alternative Methods of Compliance (AMOCs)

    (j)(1) The Manager, International Branch, ANM-116, Transport
Airplane Directorate, FAA, 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.

Related Information

    (k) EASA airworthiness directive 2006-0260, dated August 25,
2006, also addresses the subject of this AD.

Material Incorporated by Reference

    (l) You must use Airbus A310 Airworthiness Limitations Items
Document, AI/SE-M2/95A.0263/06, Issue 6, dated April 2006; and
Airbus Temporary Revision 6.1, including pages 1 and 2 of Section D
and page 1 of Section E, dated November 2006, to Airbus A310
Airworthiness Limitations Items Document, AI/SE-M2/95A.0263/06,
Issue 6, dated April 2006; to perform the actions that are required
by this AD, unless the AD specifies otherwise. The Director of the
Federal Register approved the incorporation by reference of these
documents in accordance with 5 U.S.C. 552(a) and 1 CFR part 51.
Contact Airbus, 1 Rond Point Maurice Bellonte, 31707 Blagnac Cedex,
France, for a copy of this service information. You may review
copies at the FAA, Transport Airplane Directorate, 1601 Lind Avenue,
SW., Renton, Washington; or at the National Archives and Records
Administration (NARA). For information on the availability of this
material at NARA, call<PHONE_NUMBER>, or go to: http://www.archives.gov/federal-register/cfr/ibr-locations.html
.

    Issued in Renton, Washington, on November 23, 2007.
Ali Bahrami,
Manager, Transport Airplane Directorate, Aircraft Certification
Service.
[FR Doc. E7-23544 Filed 12-7-07; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


[Federal Register Volume 87, Number 242 (Monday, December 19, 2022)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 77540-77541]
[FR Doc No: 2022-27340]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 71

[Docket No. FAA-2022-1561; Airspace Docket No. 22-ANM-58]
RIN 2120-AA66

Proposed Establishment of Class E Airspace; Escalante Municipal
Airport, Escalante, UT

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

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM).

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

SUMMARY: This action proposes to establish Class E airspace extending
upward from 700 feet above the surface at Escalante Municipal Airport,
UT. This action will support the airport's transition from visual
flight rules (VFR) to instrument flight rules (IFR) at the airport.

DATES: Comments must be received on or before February 2, 2023.

ADDRESSES: Send comments on this proposal to the U.S. DOT, Docket
Operations, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE, West Building Ground Floor, Room
W12-140, Washington, DC 20590; telephone:<PHONE_NUMBER> or (202) 366-
9826. You must identify ``FAA Docket No. FAA-2022-1561; Airspace Docket
No. 22-ANM-58,'' at the beginning of your comments. You may also submit
comments through the internet at www.regulations.gov.
    FAA Order JO 7400.11G, Airspace Designations and Reporting Points,
and subsequent amendments can be viewed online at www.faa.gov/air_traffic/publications. For further information, you can contact the
Airspace Policy Group, Federal Aviation Administration, 800
Independence Avenue SW, Washington, DC 20591; telephone: (202) 267-
8783.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Nathan A. Chaffman, Federal Aviation
Administration, Western Service Center, Operations Support Group, 2200
S. 216th Street, Des Moines, WA 98198; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Authority for This Rulemaking

    The FAA's authority to issue rules regarding aviation safety is
found in Title 49 of the United States Code. 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. This rulemaking is promulgated under the authority described
in Subtitle VII, Part A, Subpart I, Section 40103. Under that section,
the FAA is charged with prescribing regulations to assign the use of
airspace necessary to ensure the safety of aircraft and the efficient
use of airspace. This regulation is within the scope of that authority,
as it would establish Class E airspace at Escalante Municipal Airport,
UT, to support IFR operations at the airport.

Comments Invited

    Interested parties are invited to participate in this proposed
rulemaking by submitting such written data, views, or arguments, as
they may desire. Comments that provide the factual basis supporting the
views and suggestions presented are particularly helpful in developing
reasoned regulatory decisions on the proposal. Comments are
specifically invited on the overall regulatory, aeronautical, economic,
environmental, and energy-related aspects of the proposal.
Communications should identify both docket numbers and be submitted in
triplicate to the address listed above. Persons wishing the FAA to
acknowledge receipt of their comments on this notice must submit with
those comments a self-addressed, stamped postcard on which the
following statement is made: ``Comments to Docket No. FAA-2022-1561;
Airspace Docket No. 22-ANM-58.'' The postcard will be date/time stamped
and returned to the commenter.
    All communications received before the specified closing date for
comments will be considered before taking action on the proposed rule.
The proposal contained in this notice may be changed in light of the
comments received. A report summarizing each substantive public contact
with FAA personnel concerned with this rulemaking will be filed in the
docket.

Availability of NPRMs

    An electronic copy of this document may be downloaded through the
internet at www.regulations.gov. Recently published rulemaking
documents can also be accessed through the FAA's web page at
www.faa.gov/air_traffic/publications/airspace_ amendments.
    You may review the public docket containing the proposal, any
comments received, and any final disposition in person in the Dockets
Office (see the ADDRESSES section for the address and phone number)
between 9:00 a.m. and 5:00 p.m., Monday through Friday, except federal
holidays. An informal docket may also be examined during normal
business hours at the Northwest Mountain Regional Office of the Federal
Aviation Administration, Air Traffic Organization, Western Service
Center, Operations Support Group, 2200 S. 216th Street, Des Moines, WA
98198.

Availability and Summary of Documents for Incorporation by Reference

    This document proposes to amend FAA Order JO 7400.11G, dated August
19, 2022, and effective September 15, 2022. FAA Order JO 7400.11G is
publicly available as listed in the ADDRESSES section of this document.
FAA Order JO 7400.11G lists Class A, B, C, D, and E airspace areas, air
traffic service routes, and reporting points.

The Proposal

    Class E airspace beginning at 700 feet above the surface should be
established at Escalante Municipal Airport, UT, to contain departing
aircraft until reaching 1,200 feet above the surface, arriving aircraft
below 1,500 feet above the surface, and circling maneuvers southwest of
the airport. The proposed airspace is described in relation to the
airport reference point and is approximately 7.5 nautical miles by 13.5
nautical miles in size, which will fully contain IFR operations at the
airport.
    The Class E5 airspace designation is published in paragraph 6005 of
FAA Order JO 7400.11G, dated August 19, 2022, and effective September
15, 2022, which is incorporated by reference in 14 CFR 71.1. The Class
E airspace designation listed in this document will be published
subsequently in FAA Order JO 7400.11, which is published annually and
becomes effective on September 15.

Regulatory Notices and Analyses

    The FAA has determined that this regulation only involves an
established body of technical regulations for which frequent and
routine amendments are necessary to keep them operationally current, is
non-controversial, and unlikely to result in adverse or negative
comments. It therefore: (1) is not a ``significant regulatory action''
under Executive Order 12866; (2) is not a ``significant rule'' under
DOT regulatory policies and procedures (44 FR 11034; February 26,
1979); and (3) does not warrant preparation of a regulatory evaluation
as the anticipated impact is so minimal. Since this is a routine matter
that will only affect air traffic procedures and air navigation, it is
certified that this rule--when promulgated--would not have a
significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities
under the criteria of the Regulatory Flexibility Act.

Environmental Review

    This proposal will be subject to an environmental analysis in
accordance with FAA Order 1050.1F, Environmental Impacts: Policies and
Procedures, prior to any FAA final regulatory action.

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 71

    Airspace, Incorporation by reference, Navigation (air).

The Proposed Amendment

    Accordingly, pursuant to the authority delegated to me, the Federal
Aviation Administration proposes to amend 14 CFR part 71 as follows:

PART 71--DESIGNATION OF CLASS A, B, C, D, AND E AIRSPACE AREAS; AIR
TRAFFIC SERVICE ROUTES; AND REPORTING POINTS

0
1. The authority citation for 14 CFR part 71 continues to read as
follows:

    Authority:  49 U.S.C. 106(f), 106(g), 40103, 40113, 40120; E.O.
10854, 24 FR 9565, 3 CFR, 1959-1963 Comp., p. 389.

Sec.  71.1  [Amended]

0
2. The incorporation by reference in 14 CFR 71.1 of FAA Order JO
7400.11G, Airspace Designations and Reporting Points, dated August 19,
2022, and effective September 15, 2022, is amended as follows:

Paragraph 6005 Class E Airspace Areas Extending Upward From 700
Feet or More Above the Surface of the Earth.

* * * * *

ANM UT E5 Escalante, UT [New]

Escalante Municipal Airport, UT
    (Lat. 37[deg]44'43'' N, long. 111[deg]34'13'' W)

    That airspace extending upward from 700 feet above the surface
bounded by a line beginning at a point on the 124[deg] bearing, 7.3
miles from the airport, then to the 154[deg] bearing at 7.2 miles,
then to the 245[deg] bearing at 5.6 miles, then to the 281[deg]
bearing at 8.6 miles, then to the 335[deg] bearing at 7 miles,
thence to the point of beginning.

    Issued in Des Moines, Washington, on December 9, 2022.
B.G. Chew,
Group Manager, Operations Support Group, Western Service Center.
[FR Doc. 2022-27340 Filed 12-16-22; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


[Federal Register Volume 81, Number 243 (Monday, December 19, 2016)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 91890-91894]
[FR Doc No: 2016-30192]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 35

[EPA-HQ-OW-2016-0568; FRL 9953-23-OW]
RIN 2040-AF64

Fees for Water Infrastructure Project Applications Under WIFIA

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Proposed rule.

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

SUMMARY: EPA is proposing to establish fees related to the provision of
federal credit assistance under Subtitle C of the Water Resources
Reform and Development Act of 2014 (WRRDA), which is referred to as the
Water Infrastructure Finance and Innovation Act of 2014 (WIFIA). WIFIA
authorizes EPA to provide secured (direct) loans and loan guarantees to
eligible water infrastructure projects and to charge fees to recover
all or a portion of the Agency's cost of providing credit assistance
and the costs of retaining expert firms, including financial,
engineering, and legal advisory services, in the field of municipal and
project finance to assist in the underwriting and servicing of Federal
credit instruments. The agency seeks comment on all aspects of this
proposal.

DATES: Comments must be received on or before February 17, 2017.

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-OW-
2016-0568, at http://www.regulations.gov. Follow the online
instructions for submitting comments. Once submitted, comments cannot
be edited or removed from Regulations.gov. The EPA may publish any
comment received to its public docket. Do not submit electronically any
information you consider to be Confidential Business Information (CBI)
or other information whose disclosure is restricted by statute.
Multimedia submissions (audio, video, etc.) must be accompanied by a
written comment. The written comment is considered the official comment
and should include discussion of all points you wish to make. The EPA
will generally not consider comments or comment contents located
outside of the primary submission (i.e. on the web, cloud, or other
file sharing system). For additional submission methods, the full EPA
public comment policy, information about CBI or multimedia submissions,
and general guidance on making effective comments, please visit http://www2.epa.gov/dockets/commenting-epa-dockets.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Jordan Dorfman, Water Infrastructure
Division, Office of Wastewater Management, Mail Code 4201C,
Environmental Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Avenue NW.,
Washington, DC, 20460; telephone number:<PHONE_NUMBER>; email address:
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. General Information

A. Does this action apply to me?

    This action only applies to entities seeking credit assistance
under the WIFIA program for the development and construction of a water
infrastructure project. EPA has published an interim final rule to
implement this new credit assistance program in the ``Rules and
Regulations'' section of this Federal Register. A list of eligible
entities and eligible projects can be found in the Interim Final Rule
entitled, ``Credit Assistance for Water Infrastructure Projects.'' This
interim final rule is available at Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-OW-2016-0569,
at http://www.regulations.gov.

B. What should I consider as I prepare my comments for EPA?

    Submitting Confidential Business Information (CBI). Do not submit
this information to EPA through regulations.gov or email. Clearly mark
the part or all of the information that you claim to be CBI. For CBI
information in a disk, CD-ROM, or flash drive that you mail to EPA,
mark the outside of the disk, CD-ROM, or flash drive as CBI and then
identify electronically within the disk, CD-ROM, or flash drive the
specific information that is claimed as CBI. In addition to one
complete version of the comment that includes information claimed as
CBI, a copy of the comment that does not contain the information
claimed as CBI must be submitted for inclusion in the public docket.
Information so marked will not be disclosed except in accordance with
procedures set forth in 40 CFR part 2.
    Tips for preparing your comments. When submitting comments,
remember to:
     Identify the document by docket ID number and other
identifying information (subject heading, Federal Register date and
page number).
     Follow directions. The Agency may ask you to respond to
specific questions.
     Explain why you agree or disagree; suggest alternatives
and substitute language for your requested changes.
     Describe any assumptions and provide any technical
information and/or data that you used.
     If you estimate potential costs or burdens, explain how
you arrived at your estimate in sufficient detail to allow for it to be
reproduced.
     Provide specific examples to illustrate your concerns and
suggest alternatives.
     Explain your views as clearly as possible, avoiding the
use of profanity or personal threats.
     Make sure to submit your comments by the comment period
deadline identified.

II. Background

A. What action is the Agency taking?

    EPA is proposing to establish fees associated with the provision of
federal credit assistance under the WIFIA program. WIFIA authorizes EPA
to provide secured (direct) loans and loan guarantees to eligible water
infrastructure projects. EPA has published an Interim Final Rule
entitled, ``Credit Assistance for Water Infrastructure Projects'' to
establish procedures for the implementation of the WIFIA Program. As
specified under 33 U.S.C. 3908(b)(7), 3909(b), and 3909(c)(3), Congress
in WIFIA authorizes EPA to charge fees to recover all or a portion of
the Agency's cost of providing credit assistance and the costs of
retaining expert firms, including financial, engineering, and legal
advisory services, in the field of municipal and project finance to
assist in the underwriting and servicing of Federal credit instruments.
EPA is proposing an application fee, credit processing fee, servicing
fee, and fee for extraordinary expenses to cover these costs to the
extent not covered by congressional appropriations.

B. What is the Agency's authority for taking this action?

    This proposed rule is issued under the authority of 33 U.S.C.
3908(b)(7), 3909(b), 3909(c)(3), and 3911.

C. What fees are being proposed?

    In the Interim Final Rule entitled, ``Credit Assistance for Water
Infrastructure Projects,'' EPA established an application process for
WIFIA credit assistance that is divided into two steps. The first step
requires the submission of a letter of interest. No fees are proposed
for the letter of interest step. Projects selected to continue in the
application process will then be invited to submit an application at
which time the application fee must be paid. For this second step, EPA
will

only select those projects that it expects might reasonably proceed to
closing. For more information on this process, please refer to the
WIFIA Implementation Rule at 40 CFR part 35 subpart Q or in Docket ID
No. EPA-HQ-OW-2016-0569, at http://www.regulations.gov. Consequently,
EPA anticipates that the fees proposed in this notice would apply only
to projects the Agency expects are likely to proceed to closing.
Detailed application information will be contained in a program guide
developed by EPA and will be posted on the WIFIA Web site and made
available to the public at the time a solicitation for letters of
interest is published. This two-step process limits the time, cost and
effort required to be expended by prospective borrowers prior to having
a reasonable expectation of funding by WIFIA.
    While this rule, and the interim final WIFIA Implementation Rule,
have separate processes for comments, EPA is aware that the similar
timelines for comment and the relationship between the two rules may
cause confusion. Therefore, in the event that comments are received for
this rule under the heading of the interim final rule, or vice versa,
EPA will consider all comments and respond accordingly.
    As described in greater detail below, the types of fees EPA is
proposing to establish are consistent with other Federal Credit
programs. In particular, the WIFIA program was designed by Congress to
resemble the Transportation Infrastructure Finance and Innovation Act
program, commonly known as TIFIA. Accordingly, to the extent
practicable, the WIFIA program has been crafted by EPA to be
implemented in a similar manner as the Department of Transportation
implements the TIFIA program. The rationale for establishing these fees
is to cover EPA's costs of administering the program to the extent
these costs are not covered by congressional appropriations. To
effectively administer the program, EPA will incur both internal
administrative costs (staffing, program support contracts, and other
costs) as well as the costs of retaining expert firms, including legal,
engineering, and financial advisory services, in the field of municipal
and project finance, to assist in the underwriting of the Federal
credit instrument. As explained in greater detail below, the latter
costs may range from $350,000-$700,000 per project, though EPA cannot
provide assurance that costs will not exceed this range. Assuming 10
loans at an average of $100 million per loan, external expert costs
alone could be in the range of $3.5 million to $7 million, and those
costs could be higher if a larger number of loans (with a smaller
average loan size) were made. The combination of EPA's internal
administrative costs and these external expert costs would not be fully
covered by the $2.2 million set aside for administrative costs in
WIFIA. To the extent Congress does not appropriate funds to cover these
program costs, EPA will need to exercise its authority under WIFIA to
recover such costs through fees in order to effectively administer the
program.
    In many lending contexts, such fees can be reimbursed as part of
the principal of the loan. WIFIA, however, prohibits this by not
including such fees as eligible project costs. However, other sources
of financing can finance the fees. WIFIA assistance can only pay for up
to 49% of eligible project costs. The remaining costs must be borne by
the borrower, either internally or through another financing source.
While fees cannot be used to calculate the amount eligible for WIFIA
financing, the fees can still be reimbursed from other sources. While
the ability to finance fees with a WIFIA loan could reduce the burden
on applicants by allowing the reimbursement for these costs by the loan
proceeds, EPA's reading of the statute is that this would require
amendment to the WIFIA statute or specific authorizing language in an
appropriations bill.
Application Fee
    EPA is proposing to require a non-refundable fee for each project
that is invited to submit a full application (second step following
submission of letter of interest) for credit assistance under WIFIA.
EPA is proposing that an application fee will be due upon submission of
the application. For fiscal year 2017, EPA is proposing an application
fee of $25,000 for applications for projects serving small communities
(population of not more than 25,000 people). For all other project
applications, EPA is proposing an application fee of $100,000. As
proposed, these application fees represent an amount equal to 0.5
percent of the minimum threshold project cost ($5 million for small
communities and $20 million for larger communities, 33 U.S.C.
3907(a)(2)), which EPA considers to be sufficient for the Agency to
begin the financial and legal analysis of the project while providing
assurance that the applicant intends to proceed to closing, and
therefore costs incurred by the Agency may be recovered. EPA will
undertake significant costs to evaluate applications and hire expert
firms for underwriting and considers an application fee essential for
applicants to show good faith in applying for assistance, to help cover
the agency's administrative costs in processing applications, and to
ensure effective administration of the program. EPA proposes that these
fees be required at the time of submission of the full application and
that the full application will not be reviewed without fee payment.
Because EPA will only invite projects to submit an application and
application fee if the project is expected to proceed to closing, no
applicant would pay a fee without a reasonable expectation that the
project could receive funding.
    For fiscal years 2018 and beyond, the Agency may need to adjust the
amount of the application fee based on early program implementation
experience. A change in the application fee will not change the total
fees charged, only the initial fee which is credited to the final fee
at closing, or in the event that the project does not proceed to
closing, withdrawal of the application, or denial. EPA seeks comment on
proposed regulatory language that would authorize the Agency to change
the default application fee in subsequent years through the NOFA. In
addition, EPA seeks comment on whether changes to the application fee
should be made through notice and comment or, alternatively, whether
the agency should establish any criteria or constraints for adjustment
of this fee through NOFAs and, if so, what those should be.
Credit Processing Fee
    EPA is also proposing to require a credit processing fee at the
time of closing, or in the event that the project does not proceed to
closing, e.g., if the application is withdrawn or denied, for projects
selected to receive assistance in the form of a direct cash payment.
The proceeds of any such fees would be used to pay the remaining
portion of the Agency's cost of providing credit assistance and the
costs of retaining expert firms, including legal, engineering, and
financial advisory services, in the field of municipal and project
finance to assist in the underwriting of the Federal credit instrument.
EPA proposes that the initial application fee described above would be
credited to the credit processing fee. For example, if the total credit
processing fee is $400,000 and the applicant paid $100,000 with the
application, $300,000 would be due at closing, or in the event that the
project does not proceed to closing, e.g., if the application is
withdrawn or denied. The fee for each project would be set based on the
costs incurred by EPA for that

specific project. Due to the nature of credit processing, the amount is
expected to vary among applicants. This variation is a reflection of
the amount of time taken to process a loan, which may not directly
correlate with the size of the loan. More complicated transactions with
lengthy negotiations will have higher costs. EPA estimates these costs
could be in the range of approximately $350,000-$700,000 per project,
broken down as follows:
     Financial advisor: $100,000 to $250,000 per project;
     Law firm: $200,000 to $350,000 per project; and
     Engineering firm: $50,000 to $100,000 per project.
    EPA is proposing to authorize the waiver of a portion of the fee
charged to an applicant in the event that Congress appropriates
resources adequate to pay for EPA's cost of administering the WIFIA
program as well as additional funding to pay for loan processing. WIFIA
currently provides that EPA may retain $2.2 million annually from funds
appropriated to the program to pay for the administration of the
program, including internal administrative costs of staffing, program
support contracts (separate from the expert advisory services described
previously), and other internal administrative needs. EPA requests
comment on including a provision in the final rule allowing EPA to
waive fees.
    To the extent Congress appropriates administrative funds in excess
of those needed for EPA's internal administrative costs, EPA is
proposing to authorize the use of the remaining available
administrative allowance (less any amount needed for future years'
administration) to reduce fees. EPA is proposing three alternative
methods by which the Agency could allocate additional administrative
funds to reduce fees:
     By reducing fees by an equal amount per loan in the
relevant year;
     By reducing fees by an equal amount per loan for those
projects serving a population of not more than 25,000; or
     By reducing fees by an equal amount per loan for those
projects that serve a population with a median household income that is
80 percent or less of the state median household income.
    Alternatively, EPA could allocate such fee reductions through a
combination of these three methods. EPA requests comment on each of
these potential options or other potential approaches not discussed
here. In the final rule, the Agency would expect to include regulatory
text addressing criteria for allocating fee reductions.
Servicing Fee
    EPA is also proposing to charge an annual servicing fee during
repayment of the loan. The fee will be dependent on the costs of
servicing the credit instrument as determined by the Administrator. EPA
proposes that such fees would be set at a level to enable the Agency to
recover all or a portion of the costs to the Federal Government of
servicing WIFIA credit instruments and will be determined at the time
of closing. EPA expects such fees to range from $12,000 to $15,000
annually per loan.
Extraordinary Expenses
    EPA is also proposing a fee to cover extraordinary expenses. In the
event that a borrower experiences difficulty relating to technical,
financial, or legal matters or other events (e.g., engineering failure
or financial workouts) which require EPA to incur time or expenses
beyond standard monitoring, EPA will be entitled to payment in full
from the borrower of additional fees in an amount determined by EPA and
of related fees and expenses of its independent consultants and outside
counsel, to the extent that such fees and expenses are incurred
directly by EPA and to the extent such third parties are not paid
directly by the borrower.
Optional Supplemental Fee
    EPA is also proposing to allow a separate fee to be charged, with
agreement of the applicant, to reduce the budget authority required to
fund the credit instrument. Although EPA considers it unlikely that a
scenario will arise under which it would assess such a fee, the Agency
sees benefit in establishing the flexibility to allow an applicant to
``buy down'' the budget authority required for the credit instrument.
This could allow an applicant to proceed to closing in the event that
sufficient budget authority would not otherwise be available. EPA
proposes that any such fee would only be charged upon agreement by an
applicant.
Request for Comment
    EPA requests comment on each of the proposed fees described above,
including whether to establish such fees, proposed fee levels or
approaches for calculating fees, and potential criteria and
methodologies for waiving all or a portion of such fees in the event
that Congress appropriates sufficient funds to permit such a waiver. In
particular, EPA requests comments on prospective borrowers' ability to
pay these fees, the use of an upfront application fee, and options for
applicants to finance fees. EPA also requests comment on the proposed
reduced application fee for small communities and the extent to which
this fee reduction is adequate to ensure small communities can
effectively access the WIFIA program. EPA understands that payment of
fees may be difficult for some applicants and requests comment on
potential approaches that could address such concerns while allowing
EPA to recover its costs to ensure effective and sustainable
administration of the WIFIA program.

III. Statutory and Executive Orders Reviews

A. Executive Order 12866: Regulatory Planning and Review and Executive
Order 13563: Improving Regulation and Regulatory Review

    This action is a significant regulatory action that was submitted
to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for review. This rule has
been determined significant because it affects the rights and
obligations of recipients of a loan program and raises novel legal or
policy issues arising out of a legal mandate. Any changes made in
response to OMB recommendations have been documented in the docket.

B. Paperwork Reduction Act

    This action does not impose an information collection burden under
the PRA because this proposal would merely establish fees associated
with a previously promulgated rule.
    An agency may not conduct or sponsor, and a person is not required
to respond to, a collection of information unless it displays a
currently valid OMB control number. The OMB control numbers for the
EPA's regulations in 40 CFR are listed in 40 CFR part 9. When OMB
approves this ICR, the Agency will announce that approval in the
Federal Register and publish a technical amendment to 40 CFR part 9 to
display the OMB control number for the approved information collection
activities contained in this final rule.

C. Regulatory Flexibility Act

    I certify that this action will not have a significant economic
impact on a substantial number of small entities under the RFA. In
making this determination, the impact of concern is any significant
adverse economic impact on small entities. An agency may certify that a
rule will not have a significant economic impact on a

substantial number of small entities if the rule relieves regulatory
burden, has no net burden or otherwise has a positive economic effect
on the small entities subject to the rule. Participation in the WIFIA
loan program is voluntary. While many projects serving small
communities are potentially eligible for WIFIA loans, we anticipate
only one to two small community applications per year as small
communities have access to below market rate loans and other subsidies
through the Clean Water State Revolving Fund, the Drinking Water State
Revolving Fund, and other funding sources. A small community will only
apply and undertake a WIFIA loan in cases where the WIFIA loan provides
positive economic benefits relative to other potential funding sources,
based upon consideration of relevant economic factors, including loan
rate, loan terms, fees and other transaction costs. We have therefore
concluded that this action will have no net regulatory burden for all
directly regulated small entities.

D. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act (UMRA)

    This action does not contain an unfunded mandate of $100 million or
more as described in UMRA, 2 U.S.C. 1531-1538, and does not
significantly or uniquely affect small governments. The action imposes
no enforceable duty on any state, local, or tribal governments or the
private sector.

E. Executive Order 13132: Federalism

    This action does not have federalism implications. It will not have
substantial direct effects 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.

F. Executive Order 13175: Consultation and Coordination With Indian
Tribal Governments

    This action does not have tribal implications as specified in
Executive Order 13175. While a tribal government, or a consortium of
tribal governments may apply for WIFIA credit assistance, this action
does not have substantial direct effects 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.

G. Executive Order 13045: Protection of Children From Environmental
Health Risks and Safety Risks

    This action is not subject to Executive Order 13045 because it is
not economically significant as defined in Executive Order 12866, and
because environmental health or safety risks are not addressed by this
action.

H. Executive Order 13211: Actions Concerning Regulations That
Significantly Affect Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use

    This action is not a ``significant energy action'' because it is
not likely to have a significant adverse effect on the supply,
distribution or use of energy. This rulemaking simply imposes fees
required to apply for credit assistance; therefore, by itself, this
rulemaking will not have any effect on the supply, distribution or use
of energy.

I. National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act (NTTAA)

    This rulemaking does not involve technical standards.

J. Executive Order 12898: Federal Actions To Address Environmental
Justice in Minority Populations and Low-Income Populations

    This action is not subject to Executive Order 12898 (59 FR 7629,
February 16, 1994) because it does not establish an environmental
health or safety standard.

K. National Environmental Policy Act

    Each project obtaining assistance under this program is required to
adhere to the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969, as amended (42
U.S.C. 4321 et seq.). This rulemaking simply imposes fees required to
apply for credit assistance; therefore, by itself, this rulemaking will
not have any effect on the quality of the environment.

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 35

    Environmental protection, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements,
and Water finance.

    Dated: December 6, 2016.
Gina McCarthy,
Administrator.

    For the reasons set forth in the preamble, EPA proposes to amend 40
CFR part 35 as follows:

PART 35--STATE AND LOCAL ASSISTANCE

0
1. The authority citation for part 35 continues to read as follows:

    Authority:  42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.; 33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.; 42
U.S.C. 300f et seq.; 42 U.S.C. 6901 et seq.; 7 U.S.C. 136 et seq.;
15 U.S.C. 2601 et seq.; 42 U.S.C. 13101 et seq.; Pub. L. 104-134,
110 Stat. 1321, 1321-299 (1996); Pub. L. 105-65, 111 Stat. 1344,
1373 (1997), 2 CFR 200.

0
2. Add Sec.  35.10080 to read as follows:

Sec.  35.10080   Fees.

    (a) Application fee. EPA will require a non-refundable application
fee for each project applying for credit assistance under the WIFIA
program. An application fee will be due upon submission of the complete
application. For applications for projects serving small communities
(population of not more than 25,000 people), this application fee will
be $25,000. For all other applications, this application fee will be
$100,000. The initial application fee will be credited to the credit
processing fee required under subsection (c).
    (b) Adjustment of application fee. For each application and
approval cycle, EPA may adjust the amount of the application fee
described in subsection (a) based on program implementation experience
and cost expectations. EPA will publish this amount in each Federal
Register solicitation for letters of interest.
    (c) Credit processing fee. Except as otherwise provided in
subsection (f), EPA will require an additional credit processing fee
for projects selected to receive WIFIA assistance upon closing, or in
the event that the project does not proceed to closing, e.g., if the
application is withdrawn or denied. The proceeds of any such fees will
be used to pay the remaining portion of the Agency's cost of providing
credit assistance and the costs of retaining expert firms, including
financial, engineering, and legal advisory services, in the field of
municipal and project finance, to assist in the underwriting of the
Federal credit instrument. All of, or a portion of, this fee may be
waived.
    (d) Servicing fee. EPA will require borrowers to pay a servicing
fee for each credit instrument approved for funding. Separate fees may
apply for each type of credit instrument (e.g., a loan guarantee, a
secured loan with a single disbursement, or a secured loan with
multiple disbursements), depending on the costs of servicing the credit
instrument as determined by the Administrator. Such fees will be set at
a level sufficient to enable the EPA to recover all or a portion of the
costs to the Federal Government of servicing WIFIA credit instruments.
    (e) Optional supplemental fee. If, in any given year, there is
insufficient budget authority to fund the credit instrument for a
qualified project that has been selected to receive assistance

under WIFIA, EPA and the approved applicant may agree upon a
supplemental fee to be paid by or on behalf of the approved applicant
at the time of execution of the term sheet to reduce the subsidy cost
of that project. No such fee may be included among eligible project
costs.
    (f) Reduced fees. To the extent that Congress appropriates funds in
any given year beyond those sufficient to cover internal administrative
costs, EPA may utilize such appropriated funds to reduce fees that
would otherwise be charged under subsection (c).
    (g) Extraordinary expenses. EPA may require payment in full by the
borrower of additional fees, in an amount determined by EPA, and of
related fees and expenses of its independent consultants and outside
counsel, to the extent that such fees and expenses are incurred
directly by EPA and to the extent such third parties are not paid
directly by the borrower, in the event that a borrower experiences
difficulty relating to technical, financial, or legal matters or other
events (e.g., engineering failure or financial workouts) which require
EPA to incur time or expenses beyond standard monitoring.

[FR Doc. 2016-30192 Filed 12-16-16; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (FFDCA) Considerations for Beauveria bassiana strain ANT-03

                    Docket ID Number: EPA-HQ-OPP-2013-0717
                            Date: October 23, 2014

Section 408(c)(2)(A)(i) of FFDCA allows the EPA to establish an exemption from the requirement for a tolerance (the legal limit for a pesticide chemical residue in or on a food) only if the EPA determines that the exemption is "safe." Section 408(c)(2)(A)(ii) of FFDCA defines "safe" to mean that "there is a reasonable certainty that no harm will result from aggregate exposure to the pesticide chemical residue, including all anticipated dietary exposures and all other exposures for which there is reliable information." This includes exposure through drinking water and in residential settings but does not include occupational exposure. Pursuant to FFDCA section 408(c)(2)(B), in establishing or maintaining in effect an exemption from the requirement of a tolerance, the EPA must take into account the factors set forth in FFDCA section 408(b)(2)(C), which require the EPA to give special consideration to exposure of infants and children to the pesticide chemical residue in establishing a tolerance exemption, and to "ensure that there is a reasonable certainty that no harm will result to infants and children from aggregate exposure to the pesticide chemical residue...." Additionally, FFDCA section 408(b)(2)(D) requires that the EPA consider "available information concerning the cumulative effects of [a particular pesticide's] . . . residues and other substances that have a common mechanism of toxicity."
The EPA performs a number of analyses to determine the risks from aggregate exposure to pesticide residues. First, the EPA determines the toxicity of pesticides. Second, the EPA examines exposure to the pesticide through food, drinking water, and through other exposures that occur as a result of pesticide use in residential settings.
I.  Summary of Petitioned-for Tolerance Exemption
In the Federal Register of December 30, 2013 (78 FR 79359), the EPA issued a notice pursuant to FFDCA section 408(d)(3), 21 U.S.C. 346a(d)(3), announcing the filing of a pesticide tolerance petition (PP 3F8176) by Technology Sciences Group, Inc., on behalf of Anatis Bioprotection Inc., 278, rang Saint-Andre', St.-Jacques-le-Mineur, Quebec JOJ 1ZO, Canada. The petition requested that 40 CFR part 180 be amended by establishing an exemption from the requirement of a tolerance for residues of Beauveria bassiana strain ANT-03. The notice referenced a summary of the petition prepared by Technology Sciences, Inc. for the petitioner, Anatis Bioprotection Inc., which is available in Docket ID Number EPA-HQ-OPP-2013-0717 via http://www.regulations.gov.
II.  Toxicological Profile
Consistent with section 408(b)(2)(D) of FFDCA, the EPA reviewed the available scientific data and other relevant information on Beauveria bassiana strain ANT-03, and considered its validity, completeness, and reliability, as well as the relationship of this information to human risk. The EPA also considered available information concerning the variability of the sensitivities of major identifiable subgroups of consumers, including infants and children.
A.  Overview of Beauveria bassiana strain ANT-03

Beauveria bassiana strain ANT-03 is a naturally occurring bacterium and was originally isolated in 2000 from Lygus lineolaris found dead in a field in Sherrington, Quebec, Canada. The natural occurrence of Beauveria bassiana strains located in soils and insects is well documented in the US and worldwide. Anatis Bioprotection Inc. proposed to register a technical and an end-use product that contain Beauveria bassiana strain ANT-03 as an active ingredient that would be applied as a microbial insecticide in agricultural, horticultural and residential settings.
The end-use product containing Beauveria bassiana strain ANT-03 is proposed for use on growing crops as a contact mycoinsecticide to control or suppress foliar-feeding pests and certain grubs.
B.  Microbial Pesticide Toxicology Data Requirements

All applicable mammalian toxicology data requirements supporting the request for an exemption from the requirement of a tolerance for residues of Beauveria bassiana strain ANT-03 in or on all food commodities have been fulfilled with data submitted by the petitioner or have been waived by the EPA.

The toxicity and pathogenicity tests and irritation tests (acute eye and primary dermal irritation) that address potential routes of exposure to the active ingredient are all classified in Toxicity Category III or IV and revealed little to no toxicity attributed to Beauveria bassiana strain ANT-03.  Hypersensitivity incidents are to be reported, should they occur during research, development, and testing; no hypersensitivity reports were submitted.

The overall conclusions from all toxicological information submitted by the petitioner are briefly described below, and more in-depth synopses of study results can be found in the associated draft Biopesticides Registration Action Document provided as a reference in Section VII of this document (Ref. 3).

Acute Oral Toxicity and Pathogenicity  -  Rat (Harmonized Guideline 885.3050; MRID No. 48974203): In an acute oral toxicity and pathogenicity study, groups of ~8-week-old Sprague-Dawley rats (12/sex) were given a single oral dose of Beauveria bassiana strain ANT-03 (1.2 x 10[11] conidia/g) in sterile phosphate buffer saline (PBS) at a dose of 1.3 x 10[9] CFU/animal. The animals were observed for up to 21 days with interim scheduled sacrifices on Days 3, 7, and 14. Five males and five females were treated with inactivated test substance as controls; two males and two females were untreated "shelf controls"; and five males and five females were untreated controls. There were no treatment-related deaths, clinical signs, necropsy findings, or changes in body weight or body weight gain. The test organism was variously recovered from the blood, brain, spleen, lungs, liver, kidneys, or cecum contents through day 7, and cleared by Day 14. The test organism cleared from the mesenteric lymph nodes by day 21. Based on dissemination from an oral dose to dispersed internal regions of test animals, this organism may be infectious by oral exposure, though not pathogenic or toxic and is unlikely to grow at body temperatures.

EPA determined this study to be acceptable and concluded that Beauveria bassiana strain ANT-03 is not acutely toxic or pathogenic orally at 1.3 x 109 CFU/animal.

Acute Pulmonary Toxicity and Pathogenicity  -  Rat (Harmonized Guideline 885.3150; MRID No. 48974204): In an acute pulmonary toxicity and pathogenicity study, groups of ~7-8 week old Sprague-Dawley rats (15/sex) were exposed by the intratracheal route to Beauveria bassiana strain ANT- 03 (1.2 x 10[11] conidia/g) in sterile PBS at a dose of 1.1 x 10[9] CFU/animal. The animals were observed up to 21 days with interim scheduled sacrifices on Days 3, 7, and 14. Five males and five females were treated with autoclaved test substance as inactivated controls, four animals/sex were untreated "shelf controls"; and five animals/sex were untreated controls. Based on the results of this study, Beauveria bassiana strain ANT-03 was not toxic, infective, and/or pathogenic to rats when dosed at 1.1 x 10[9] CFU/animal. There were no test substance related deaths, clinical signs, or necropsy findings. No test organisms were recovered from the blood, liver, kidneys, mesenteric lymph nodes, brain, and spleen or cecum contents at any time. Except for the Day 0 sacrifice, the test substance was not seen in the lungs at any time.

EPA determined this study to be acceptable and concluded that Beauveria bassiana strain ANT-03 is not acutely toxic, infective, or pathogenic when inhaled at 1.4 x 109 CFU/animal.

Acute Intraperitoneal Injection Toxicity and Pathogenicity  -  Rat (Harmonized Guideline 885.3200; MRID No. 48974205):  In an acute intraperitoneal injection toxicity and pathogenicity study, fifteen male and fifteen female albino Sprague-Dawley rats were injected with Beauveria bassiana strain ANT-03 (1.2 x 10[11] conidia/g) in sterile PBS at a dose of 1.4 x 10[9] CFU/animal. The animals were treated on day 0 and observed for up to 21 days. Three rats/sex treated with the test material were sacrificed one hour after dosing and the peritoneal cavity washed with PBS for dose verification and enumeration. The remaining animals were sacrificed and necropsied on day 21. Two additional groups of five rats/sex served as untreated and inactivated MPCA controls and were also sacrificed on day 21. Based on the results of this study, Beauveria bassiana strain ANT-03 does not appear to be toxic when administered in a single dose to rats by IP injection at 1.4 x 10[9] CFU/animal. There were no treatment-related deaths, clinical signs, gross necropsy findings, or changes in body weight or body weight gain. Mesenteric lymph node weights in treated females were significantly lighter than untreated controls.

EPA determined this study to be acceptable and concluded that Beauveria bassiana strain ANT-03 is not acutely toxic, infective, or pathogenic intravenously at 1.1 x 109 CFU/animal.

Acute Dermal Toxicity  -  Rat (OCSPP Guideline 870.1200; MRID No. 48974206): In an acute dermal toxicity study, groups of five male and five female young adult Sprague-Dawley rats were dermally exposed to Beauveria bassiana strain ANT-03 (1.2 x 10[11] conidia/g) moistened with deionized water (1.0 mL/g), applied to clipped application sites of approximately 10% of the body surface area for 24 hours at a dose level of 5050 mg/kg body weight. The animals were treated on day 0 and observed for a period of 14 days. There were no deaths or abnormal gross necropsy findings. All of the animals gained weight during both weeks of the study. There were no abnormal systemic clinical signs, and signs of dermal irritation were not detected at any time during the study.

EPA determined this study to be acceptable and concluded that Beauveria bassiana strain ANT-03 has an acute dermal NOAEL combined of > 5050 mg/Kg bw (EPA Toxicity Category IV).

      Acute Oral Toxicity  -  Rat (Harmonized Guideline 870.1100)
      Acute Dermal Toxicity  -  Rat (Harmonized Guideline 870.1200)
      Acute Inhalation Toxicity  -  Rat (Harmonized Guideline 870.1300)
      Primary Eye Irritation  -  Rabbit (Harmonized Guideline 870.2400)
      Primary Dermal Irritation  -  Rabbit (Harmonized Guideline 870.2500)

In lieu of toxicology testing of Beauveria bassiana strain ANT-03, the applicant provided acceptable scientific justifications/rationales (MRID Nos. 48974213 [Technical Grade Active Ingredient] and 48974302 [Bioceres End-use Product]) to address the above listed data requirements, summarized below. EPA generally agrees with the rationales provided and EPA determined the rationales to be acceptable to address the data requirements. (U.S. EPA 2014a Section VII, Ref. 1).

Oral gavage administration of the test material did not result in mortality, abnormal clinical signs, or gross pathology in rats at a single dose of 1.3 x 109 CFU/animal in an acute oral toxicity/pathogenicity study. As calculated by the reviewer, the administered dose of 1.3 x 109 CFU/rat equated to dose levels of approximately 36.7 to 65.7 mg/kg bw. In an acute pulmonary infectivity and toxicity study intratracheal administration of the test material (in phosphate buffered saline and Tween 20) at a single dose of 1.1 x 109 CFU/animal did not result in mortality, abnormal clinical signs, or gross pathology in rats. As calculated by the reviewer, the administered dose levels were approximately 31.4 to 56.2 mg/kg bw. TGAI's with Beauveria bassiana strains 447, GHA, and HF23 have been tested and classified in US EPA Toxicity Category III for primary eye irritation, and an EP formulated with Beauveria bassiana strain ATCC 74040 has also been classified in US EPA Toxicity Category III for primary eye irritation. In an acute dermal toxicity study, no skin irritation was seen when rats were dermally exposed to the test material moistened with deionized water (1.0 mL/g), applied to clipped application sites of approximately 10% of the body surface area for 24 hours at a dose level of 5050 mg/kg bw.  Because there were no observed adverse effects, the assigned US EPA Toxicity Category IV is assigned for dermal irritation. There are no inert ingredients added to the TGAI.  The inerts added to the EP are present in food, recognized as safe, have tolerance exemptions, and are not expected to produce any toxic effects.

III.  Aggregate Exposure

In examining aggregate exposure, FFDCA section 408 directs the EPA to consider available information concerning exposures from the pesticide residue in food and all other non-occupational exposures, including drinking water from ground water or surface water and exposure through pesticide use in gardens, lawns, or buildings (residential and other indoor uses).

Food Exposure and Risk Characterization: Beauveria bassiana strains are widely found in soils and insects worldwide. The EPA found that increased dietary exposure to Beauveria bassiana strain ANT-03, a naturally occurring bacterium pathogenic to insects and commonly found in agricultural settings and on fresh produce, is anticipated to be negligible because additional applications tend not to significantly increase exposure. Further, Beauveria bassiana is not known to produce any mammalian toxins, and no foodborne disease outbreaks associated with Beauveria bassiana or toxin production from Beauveria bassiana have been reported. The EPA concluded that the risk posed to adults, infants, and children is likely to be minimal because of the low acute oral toxicity/pathogenicity potential of Beauveria bassiana strain ANT-03.

Drinking Water Exposure and Risk Characterization: Since Beauveria bassiana is naturally present in soils and insects, exposure to Beauveria bassiana from surface water and possibly groundwater can be expected.  Exposure to residues of Beauveria bassiana strain ANT-03 in consumed drinking water may occur as a result of spray drift from aerial and ground applications or runoff of prepared fields and rangelands into surface waters. However, if Beauveria bassiana strain ANT-03 were to be transferred to surface water or groundwater intended for eventual human consumption (e.g., through spray drift or runoff) and directed to wastewater treatment systems or drinking water facilities, water treatment processes would remove any Beauveria bassiana present.  It likely would not survive the conditions water is subjected to in such systems or facilities, including chlorination, pH adjustments, filtration, and/or occasionally high temperatures (Centers for Disease Control and Prevention 2009; U.S. EPA 2004, and DeFelice et.al., 1993). In the remote likelihood that Beauveria bassiana strain ANT-03 is present in drinking water (e.g., water not subject to treatment systems or facilities), its target pest specificity and available toxicity and pathogenicity data indicate no toxicity and/or pathogenicity is likely to occur with any drinking water exposure to Beauveria bassiana strain ANT-03 that results from pesticide applications made in accordance with good agricultural practices (Section VII, Ref. 2).

Non-occupational, Residential Risk Characterization: Given the home and garden proposed use pattern for Beauveria bassiana strain ANT-03, non-occupational exposure is expected.  However, repeated exposures to Beauveria bassiana strain ANT-03 from pesticidal applications will not exceed EPA's level of concern in light of the available data that demonstrate Beauveria bassiana strain ANT-03 is not toxic (acute dermal toxicity and acute pulmonary toxicity/ pathogenicity), is non-irritating (primary dermal irritation), and is not pathogenic when used as labeled in accordance with good agricultural practices (acute pulmonary toxicity/pathogenicity, and acute injection toxicity/pathogenicity) (Section VII, Ref. 1).

IV.  Cumulative Effects from Substances with a Common Mechanism of Toxicity

Section 408(b)(2)(D)(v) of FFDCA requires that, when considering whether to establish, modify, or revoke a tolerance or tolerance exemption, the EPA consider "available information concerning the cumulative effects of [a particular pesticide's] . . . residues and other substances that have a common mechanism of toxicity."

Beauveria bassiana strain ANT-03 is not toxic via the dietary, dermal and pulmonary routes of exposure. For the purposes of the tolerance action, therefore, the EPA has concluded that Beauveria bassiana strain ANT-03 does not have a common mechanism of toxicity with other substances. Thus, section 408(b)(2)(D)(v) of the FFDCA does not apply.

V.  Determination of Safety for the United States Population, Infants and Children

In considering the establishment of a tolerance or tolerance exemption for a pesticide chemical residue, FFDCA section 408 (b)(2)(C) provides that the EPA shall assess the available information about consumption patterns among infants and children, special susceptibility of infants and children to pesticide chemical residues, and the cumulative effects on infants and children of the residues and other substances with a common mechanism of toxicity. In addition, FFDCA section 408 (b)(2)(C) provides that the EPA shall apply an additional tenfold (10X) margin of exposure (safety) for infants and children in the case of threshold effects to account for prenatal and postnatal toxicity and the completeness of the database on toxicity and exposure unless the EPA determines that a different margin of exposure (safety) will be safe for infants and children. This additional margin of exposure (safety) is commonly referred to as the Food Quality Protection Act Safety Factor. In applying this provision, the EPA either retains the default value of 10X or uses a different additional safety factor when reliable data available to the EPA support the choice of a different factor.

Based on the acute toxicity and pathogenicity data/information discussed in Section II of this document, the EPA concludes that there are no threshold effects of concern to infants, children, or adults when Beauveria bassiana strain ANT-03 is used as labeled in accordance with good agricultural practices. As a result, the EPA concludes that no additional margin of exposure (safety) is necessary to protect infants and children and that not adding any additional margin of exposure (safety) will be safe for infants and children.

Moreover, based on the same data/information and EPA analysis as presented directly above, the Agency is able to conclude that there is a reasonable certainty that no harm will result to the United States population, including infants and children, from aggregate exposure to the residues of Beauveria bassiana strain ANT-03 when it is used -- as labeled and in accordance with good agricultural practices -- as an insecticide. Such exposure includes all anticipated dietary exposures and all other exposures for which there is reliable information. The EPA has arrived at this conclusion because, considered collectively, the data and information available on Beauveria bassiana strain ANT-03 demonstrate that the substance is not toxic or pathogenic potential to mammals, including infants and children. No toxicological, irritation or pathogenic endpoints were noted in mammalian testing of Beauveria bassiana strain ANT-03 and differential effects to infants and children are not expected.

VI.  Conclusions
The EPA concludes that there is a reasonable certainty that no harm will result to the U.S. population, including infants and children, from aggregate exposure to residues of Beauveria bassiana strain ANT-03. Therefore, EPA is establishing an exemption from the requirement of a tolerance for residues of Beauveria bassiana strain ANT-03 in or on all food commodities when applied as a microbial insecticide and used in accordance with label directions and good agricultural practices.

VII.  References

 1. U.S. EPA. 2014a. Beauveria bassiana strain ANT-03 (review submitted studies for FIFRA     Section 3 registration of an MUP (TGAI) and EP with a food tolerance exemption petition. Memorandum from J. Gagliardi to D. Greenway dated September 17, 2014.

 2. U.S. EPA. 2014b. Environmental risk assessment for the FIFRA Section 3 registration of the TGAI, Beauveria bassiana strain ANT-03 (EPA Reg. No. 89600-R) and the EP, Bioceres (EPA Reg. No. 89600-E), containing the active ingredient Beauveria bassiana strain ANT-03. Memorandum from I. You to D. Greenway dated September 19, 2014

 3. U.S. EPA. 2013. Biopesticides Registration Action Document Beauveria bassiana strain ANT-03 dated October 8, 2014 (available as a "Supporting Document" within docket ID number EPA-HQ-OPP-2013-0718 at http://www.regulations.gov).


[Federal Register Volume 81, Number 116 (Thursday, June 16, 2016)]
[Notices]
[Pages 39298-39299]
[FR Doc No: 2016-14379]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[File No. 500-1]

In the Matter of Enterprise Energy, Inc., Order of Suspension of
Trading

June 14, 2016.
    It appears to the Securities and Exchange Commission
(``Commission'') that the public interest and the protection of
investors require a suspension of trading in the securities of
Enterprise Energy, Inc. (CIK No.<PHONE_NUMBER>) because of recent, unusual
and unexplained market activity and potentially manipulative
transactions in the company's stock. Enterprise Energy, Inc. is a
Nevada corporation with its principal place of business listed as Las
Vegas, Nevada, with stock quoted on OTC Link (previously ``Pink
Sheets'') operated by OTC Markets Group Inc. under the ticker symbol
EYGY.
    Therefore, it is ordered, pursuant to Section 12(k) of the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934, that trading in the securities of
Enterprise Energy, Inc. is suspended for the period from 9:30 a.m. EDT
on June 14, 2016, through 11:59 p.m. EDT on June 27, 2016.

    By the Commission.
Jill M. Peterson,
Assistant Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2016-14379 Filed 6-14-16; 4:15 pm]
 BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


[Federal Register: August 10, 2007 (Volume 72, Number 154)]
[Notices]
[Page 45042-45043]
[DOCID:fr10au07-79]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

[EPA-HQ-OECA-2006-0775; FRL-8452-8]

Agency Information Collection Activities; Submission to OMB for
Review and Approval; Comment Request; NSPS for Stationary Gas Turbines
(Renewal); EPA ICR Number 1071.09, OMB Control Number 2060-0028

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency.

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: In compliance with the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. 3501
et seq.), this document announces that an Information Collection
Request (ICR) has been forwarded to the Office of Management and Budget
(OMB) for review and approval. This is a request to renew an existing
approved collection. The ICR which is abstracted below describes the
nature of the collection and the estimated burden and cost.

DATES: Additional comments may be submitted on or before September 10,
2007.

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, referencing docket ID number EPA-HQ-
OECA-2006-0775, to (1) EPA online using http://www.regulations.gov (our preferred method), or by e-mail to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or by mail to:

EPA Docket Center (EPA/DC), Environmental Protection Agency,
Enforcement and Compliance Docket and Information Center, mail code
2201T, 1200 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW., Washington, DC 20460, and (2) OMB
at: Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, Office of Management
and Budget (OMB), Attention: Desk Officer for EPA, 725 17th Street,
NW., Washington, DC 20503.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Learia Williams, Compliance Assessment
and Media Programs Division, Office of Compliance, Mail Code 2223A,
Environmental Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW.,
Washington, DC 20460; telephone number:<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax number:
(202) 564-0050; e-mail address<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: EPA has submitted the following ICR to OMB
for review and approval according to the procedures prescribed in 5 CFR
1320.12. On October 5, 2006 (71 FR 58853, EPA sought comments on this
ICR pursuant to 5 CFR 1320.8(d). EPA received no comments. Any
additional comments on this ICR should be submitted to EPA and OMB
within 30 days of this notice.

    EPA has established a public docket for this ICR under Docket ID
Number EPA-HQ-OECA-2006-0775, which is available for public viewing
online at http://www.regulations.gov, or in person viewing at the

Enforcement and Compliance Docket and Information Center in the EPA
Docket Center (EPA/DC), EPA West, Room 3334, 1301 Constitution Avenue,
NW., Washington, DC. The EPA Docket Center Public Reading Room is open
from 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., Monday through Friday, excluding legal
holidays. The telephone number for the Reading Room is<PHONE_NUMBER>,
and the telephone number for the Enforcement and Compliance Docket
Center is<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    Use EPA's electronic docket and comment system at http://www.regulations.gov
, to submit or view public comments, access the

index listing of the contents of the docket, and to access those
documents in the docket that are available electronically. Once in the
system, select ``docket search,'' then key in the docket ID number
identified above. Please note that EPA's policy is that public
comments, whether submitted electronically or in paper, will be made
available for public viewing at http://www.regulations.gov, as EPA

receives them and without change, unless the comment contains
copyrighted material, CBI, or other information whose public disclosure
is restricted by statute. For further information about the electronic
docket, go to http://www.regulations.gov.

    Title: NSPS for Stationary Gas Turbines (Renewal).
    ICR Numbers: EPA ICR Number 1071.09, OMB Control Number 2060-0028.
    ICR Status: This ICR is scheduled to expire on August 31, 2007.
Under OMB regulations, the Agency may continue to conduct or sponsor
the collection of information while this submission is pending at OMB.
An Agency may not conduct or sponsor, and a person is not required to
respond to, a collection of information unless it displays a currently
valid OMB control number. The OMB control numbers for EPA's regulations
in title 40 of the CFR, after appearing in the Federal Register when
approved, are listed in 40 CFR part 9, and displayed either by
publication in the Federal Register or by other appropriate means, such
as on the related collection instrument or form, if applicable. The
display of OMB control numbers in certain EPA regulations is
consolidated in 40 CFR part 9.
    Abstract: The New Source Performance Standard (NSPS) for Stationary
Gas Turbines (40 CFR part 60, subpart GG) were proposed on October 3,
1977, and promulgated on September 10, 1979. Owners and operators of
stationary gas turbines must submit a one-time-only notification of
construction/reconstruction, modification, and startup date, initial
performance test date, physical or operational changes, and
demonstration of a continuous monitoring system. They also must provide
a report on initial performance test result, monitoring results and any
excess emissions. Records must be maintained of startups, shutdowns,
malfunctions; periods when the continuous monitoring system is
inoperative; sulfur and nitrogen content of the fuel; fuel to water
ration; rate of fuel consumption; and ambient conditions. Semiannual
reports are also required.
    Any owner or operator subject to the provisions of this part shall
maintain a file of these measurements, and retain the file for at least
two years following the date of such measurements, maintenance reports
and records. All reports are sent to the delegated state or local
authority. In the event that there is no such delegated authority, the
reports are sent directly to the EPA regional office. This information
is being collected to assure compliance with 40 CFR part 60, subpart
GG, as authorized in section 112 and 114(a) of the Clean Air Act. The
required information consists of emissions data and other information
that have been determined to be private.
    An Agency may not conduct or sponsor, and a person is not required
to respond to, a collection of information unless it displays a
currently valid OMB Control Number. The OMB Control Number for EPA's
regulations are listed in 40 CFR part 9 and 48 CFR chapter 15, and are
identified on the form and/or instrument, if applicable.
    Burden Statement: The annual public reporting and recordkeeping
burden for this collection of information is estimated to average 56
hours per response. Burden means the total time, effort, or financial
resources expended by persons to generate, maintain, retain, or
disclose or provide information to or for a Federal agency. This
includes the time needed to review instructions; develop, acquire,
install, and utilize technology and systems for the purposes of
collecting, validating, and verifying information, processing and
maintaining information, and disclosing and providing information;
adjust the existing ways to comply with any previously applicable
instructions and requirements which have subsequently changed; train
personnel to be able to respond to a collection of information; search
data sources; complete and review the collection of information; and
transmit or otherwise disclose the information.
    Respondents/Affected Entities: Stationary gas turbines.
    Estimated Number of Respondents: 535.
    Frequency of Response: Initially, semiannually, and occasionally.
    Estimated Total Annual Hour Burden: 59,519.
    Estimated Total Costs: $3,837,190 which includes $0 annualized
Capital Startup costs, $0 annualized Operations & Maintenance costs
(O&M) and $3,837,190 annualized Labor Costs.
    Changes in the Estimates: There is no change in the labor hours or
cost in this ICR compared to the previous ICR. This is due to two
considerations. First, the regulations have not changed over the past
three years and are not anticipated to change over the next three
years. Secondly, the growth rate for the industry is very low, negative
or non-existent, so there is no significant change in the overall
burden.

    Dated: August 3, 2007.
Sara Hisel-McCoy,
Acting Director, Collection Strategies Division.
 [FR Doc. E7-15673 Filed 8-9-07; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


[Federal Register Volume 86, Number 29 (Tuesday, February 16, 2021)]
[Notices]
[Page 9499]
[FR Doc No: 2021-03030]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Docket No. EL21-24-000]

System Energy Resources, Inc.; Notice of Institution of Section
206 Proceeding and Refund Effective Date

    On February 5, 2021, the Commission issued an order in Docket No.
EL21-24-000, pursuant to section 206 of the Federal Power Act (FPA), 16
U.S.C. 824e, instituting an investigation into whether System Energy
Resources, Inc.'s proposed rate decrease is unjust, unreasonable,
unduly discriminatory, or preferential, or otherwise unlawful and
further decreases may be warranted. System Energy Resources, Inc., 174
FERC ] 61,082 (2021).
    The refund effective date in Docket No. EL21-24-000, established
pursuant to section 206(b) of the FPA, will be the date of publication
of this notice in the Federal Register.
    Any interested person desiring to be heard in Docket No. EL21-24-
000 must file a notice of intervention or motion to intervene, as
appropriate, with the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, in
accordance with Rule 214 of the Commission's Rules of Practice and
Procedure, 18 CFR 385.214 (2020), within 21 days of the date of
issuance of the order.
    In addition to publishing the full text of this document in the
Federal Register, the Commission provides all interested persons an
opportunity to view and/or print the contents of this document via the
internet through the Commission's Home Page (http://www.ferc.gov) using
the ``eLibrary'' link. Enter the docket number excluding the last three
digits in the docket number field to access the document. At this time,
the Commission has suspended access to the Commission's Public
Reference Room, due to the proclamation declaring a National Emergency
concerning the Novel Coronavirus Disease (COVID-19), issued by the
President on March 13, 2020. For assistance, contact FERC at
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or call toll-free,<PHONE_NUMBER> or TYY,
(202) 502-8659.
    The Commission strongly encourages electronic filings of comments,
protests and interventions in lieu of paper using the ``eFile'' link at
http://www.ferc.gov. In lieu of electronic filing, you may submit a
paper copy. Submissions sent via the U.S. Postal Service must be
addressed to: Kimberly D. Bose, Secretary, Federal Energy Regulatory
Commission, 888 First Street NE, Room 1A, Washington, DC 20426.
Submissions sent via any other carrier must be addressed to: Kimberly
D. Bose, Secretary, Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 12225 Wilkins
Avenue, Rockville, Maryland 20852.

    Dated: February 9, 2021.
Nathaniel J. Davis, Sr.,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2021-03030 Filed 2-12-21; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P