Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 33 / Friday, February 19, 2010 / Proposed Rules 7411 

Issued in Kansas City, Missouri, on 

February 8, 2010. 

Steven W. Thompson, 

Acting Manager, Small Airplane Directorate, 

Aircraft Certification Service. 

[FR Doc. 2010–3290 Filed 2–18–10; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4910–13–P 

DELAWARE RIVER BASIN 

COMMISSION 

18 CFR Part 410 

Schedule of Water Charges 

AGENCY: Delaware River Basin 

Commission. 

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking 

and public hearing. 

SUMMARY: The Delaware River Basin 

Commission will hold a public hearing 

to receive comments on proposed 

amendments to the Administrative 

Manual—Part III—Basin Regulations— 

Water Supply Charges to revise the 

schedule of water charges. 

DATES: The Commission will hold a 

public hearing on Tuesday, April 13, 

2010, beginning at 1:30 p.m. The 

hearing will continue until the later of 

3:30 p.m. or such time as all those who 

wish to testify have been afforded an 

opportunity to do so. Written comments 

will be accepted until 5 p.m. on Friday, 

April 16, 2010. 

ADDRESSES: The hearing will take place 

in the Goddard Room at the 

Commission’s office building, located at 

25 State Police Drive, West Trenton, 

New Jersey. Driving directions are 

available on the Commission’s Web 

site—http://www.drbc.net. Please do not 

rely on Internet mapping services as 

they may not provide accurate 

directions to the DRBC. 

Written comments may be submitted 

at the hearing and may also be sent as 

follows: via e-mail to 

Paula.Schmitt@drbc.state.nj.us; 

otherwise, to the attention of the 

Commission Secretary, DRBC, either by 

fax to (609) 883–9522; U.S. Mail to P.O. 

Box 7360, West Trenton, NJ 08628– 

0360; or delivery service to 25 State 

Police Drive, West Trenton, NJ 08628– 

0360. Regardless of the method of 

submission, written comments should 

include the name, affiliation (if any) and 

address of the commenter and the 

subject line ‘‘Schedule of Water 

Charges.’’ 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION, CONTACT: 

Please contact Paula Schmitt at 609– 

477–7224 or Katharine O’Hara at 609– 

477–7205 with questions about the 

public hearing. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Background. In response to the need to 

fund certain water supply storage 

facility projects, the Commission 

between 1964 and 1974 established a 

system of water supply charges 

pursuant to section 3.7 of the Delaware 

River Basin Compact. In December of 

1964, it adopted Resolution 64–16A, ‘‘A 

Resolution to establish policy 

concerning water supply in federal 

projects authorized in the 

Comprehensive Plan.’’ This resolution 

established a revenue stream to repay 

the obligations the Commission 

eventually assumed to purchase 

capacity at the federal government’s 

Beltzville and Blue Marsh water storage 

facilities. The resolution specifically 

provided that the debt for DRBC’s share 

of storage in these facilities would be 

repaid through the sale of water (or 

other products and services) and 

through an apportionment of the costs 

to the states benefiting from those 

projects. See Resolution No. 64–16A, 

adopted December 29, 1964 (adding to 

the Comprehensive Plan a ‘‘Section IX— 

Water Supply Policy’’, par. 3.a. and b. of 

which establish the described debt 

repayment mechanisms). 

The Commission subsequently 

adopted Resolution No. 71–4, ‘‘A 

Resolution to amend and supplement 

the Comprehensive Plan by the addition 

of a new article on policy for water 

supply charges.’’ This resolution 

established a schedule of rates for basin 

water withdrawals and provided that 

the ‘‘charges for water supplied will 

include all costs associated with making 

basin water supply available and 

maintaining its continued availability in 

adequate quantity and quality over 

time.’’ Res. No. 71–4, adopted April 7, 

1971, par. A.2. Resolution No. 71–4 

requires the Commission to collect 

sufficient annual revenue to meet all 

annual project costs, ‘‘including debt 

service, operation, maintenance, 

replacement, reserves, and associated 

administrative costs.’’ Res. No. 71–4, 

par. A.2.b. The Commission recognized 

that the waters of the basin formed a 

‘‘unitary system’’ and thus applied the 

charges to water withdrawals made 

throughout the basin, including upstream of Commission facilities. See 

Res. No. 71–4, preamble. The unitary 

system is sometimes referred to as the 

‘‘pooled water’’ theory. See, for example, 

Delaware River Basin Commission v. 

Bucks County Water & Sewer Authority, 

641 F. 2d 1087, 1094 (3rd Cir. 1982) 

(citing Borough of Morrisville v. 

Delaware River Basin Comm’n, 399 

F.Supp. 469, 471 (E.D. Pa. 1975), aff’d 

per curiam, 532 F.2d 745 (3d Cir. 1976)). 

Resolution No. 71–4 imposed charges 

only on withdrawals from surface 

waters of the basin. In accordance with 

Section 15.1(b) of the Compact, it 

limited charges to the amounts of water 

withdrawn in excess of those ‘‘that 

could lawfully have been made without 

charge on the effective date of the 

Compact.’’ Compact § 15.1(b). 

The Commission has historically 

placed the revenues generated through 

the sale of water in an account called 

the ‘‘Water Supply Storage Facilities 

Fund’’ (‘‘Storage Fund’’). The Storage 

Fund holds funds dedicated to pay the 

costs of project construction, operation, 

maintenance, and replacement, as well 

as associated administrative costs. See 

Res. No. 71–4, par. A.2. The estimated 

balance in the Storage Fund as of June 

30, 2009 was $12.1M. A snapshot of the 

Storage Fund at the close of fiscal year 

ending July 31, 2009 shows the 

following: The Storage Fund received 

approximately $2.6M in water sale 

revenue. It disbursed or incurred 

approximately $2.2M in expenses, 

consisting of approximately $483K in 

interest paid to the U.S. Treasury, 

$423K in asset depreciation, $310K for 

operations and maintenance of the Blue 

Marsh and Beltzville projects, $86K for 

contractual services from the U.S. 

Geological Survey for operation and 

maintenance of stream gauges, and 

$933K associated with Commission 

administration. The fund lost $153K on 

investments (the sole Storage Fund 

investment loss in 35 years). The 

approximately $204K difference 

between the annual costs and revenue is 

retained in the Storage Fund as a reserve 

against the future costs of expected 

significant repair to the facilities. 

Historically, the Commission has not 

charged its full administrative cost 

against the Storage Fund. Periodic 

reviews of the charges have shown that 

the costs involved in Commission 

activities properly chargeable to the 

Storage Fund have exceeded the 

amounts actually charged for many 

years. To the extent that the Storage 

Fund has not been charged its full 

allocable costs, contributions by the 

signatory parties of the Delaware River 

Basin Compact (the states of Delaware, 

New Jersey, New York, Pennsylvania 

and the federal government) have made 

up the difference. In extremely 

challenging economic times, however, 

the signatories find themselves less 

capable of assuming this burden. In 

fiscal year 2010, an adjustment was 

made to better align charges to the 

Storage Fund with actual costs. Even 

absent this adjustment, the trend 

evident since 2008 is that retained 

Storage Fund earnings have leveled off. 


srobinson on DSKHWCL6B1PROD with PROPOSALS
7412 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 33 / Friday, February 19, 2010 / Proposed Rules 

Recent plant closures in the basin are 

expected to result in reductions of 

approximately $500K annually (about 

20 percent) in water sale revenues, 

while the costs of reservoir maintenance 

and operations, contractual services and 

administration continue to rise. 

DRBC’s Current Schedule of Water 

Charges. Resolution No. 71–4 provided 

that water rates would consist of ‘‘the 

weighted-average unit cost of all water 

stored by or on behalf of the 

Commission’’ and specified that the unit 

cost of all water would be determined 

‘‘by dividing all of the commission’s 

annual project cost by the net yield of 

the water supply in federal reservoirs 

authorized in the commission’s 

Comprehensive Plan.’’ Res. No. 71–4, 

par. A.2.a. Also see Res. No. 78–14, 

preamble. 

In accordance with this formula, the 

current schedule of water charges was 

established by Resolution No. 78–14 in 

October of 1978, based on the unit cost 

of water stored by the Commission in 

the Beltzville and Blue Marsh 

reservoirs. It was codified at section 

5.3.1 of the Commission’s 

Administrative Manual—Part III—Basin 

Regulations—Water Supply Charges 

(hereinafter, ‘‘WSC’’). Section 5.3.1 

provides that the Commission ‘‘will 

from time to time, after public notice 

and hearing, make, amend and revise a 

schedule of water charges’’ and that 

until changed, the charges for water 

shall be $.06 per thousand gallons for 

consumptive use ($60 per million 

gallons) and six-tenths of a mill per 

thousand gallons ($.60 per million 

gallons) for non-consumptive use. WSC 

§ 5.3.1. These rates which have remain 

unchanged for more than 30 years, lag 

far behind the rates charged for raw 

(untreated) water by the Commission’s 

sister agency the Susquehanna River 

Basin Commission (SRBC) and by the 

New Jersey Water Supply Authority 

(NJWSA) for raw water from its Raritan 

System. 

The consumptive use rate established 

by SRBC in May of 1992, effective 

January 1, 1993, was $140 per million 

gallons, nearly two-and-a-half times the 

current rate charged by DRBC. In June 

of 2008, SRBC approved a two-step 

increase to $210 per million gallons 

effective January 1, 2009, and $280 per 

million gallons (more than four-and-ahalf times DRBC’s current rate) effective 

January 1, 2010. NJWSA charged $216 

per million gallons as of July 1, 2010 

and will charge $220 per million gallons 

(more than three-and-a-half times 

DRBC’s current rate) as of July 1, 2011, 

for raw water from its Raritan System. 

DRBC’s proposed 2010 and 2011 rates 

for consumptively used water remain 

well below those of its counterparts. 

Proposed Rate Increase. Resolution 

No. 71–4 provided that ‘‘[c]osts, rates 

and charges will be recomputed * * * 

as often as necessary to reflect relevant 

changes in any cost components 

associated with sustaining specific base 

flows.’’ Res. No. 71–4, par. A.2.a. At this 

time, in order to maintain net income to 

the Storage Fund and ensure financial 

stability to address future operating and 

maintenance costs, the Commission is 

proposing its first water charging rate 

increase in 32 years. Because many 

people find the expression of the rates 

confusing, the Commission also is 

proposing that the new rates be 

established per million gallons rather 

than per thousand. 

In light of the difficult economic 

climate, the rate change is proposed in 

two stages. The proposed rates, 

calculated using the formula established 

by Resolution No. 71–4 and set forth 

above, are as follows: The consumptive 

use rate is proposed to be increased 

from $60 to $90 per million gallons 

effective on January 1, 2010, and from 

$90 to $120 per million gallons effective 

on January 1, 2011. The nonconsumptive use rate is proposed to be 

increased from $.60 to $.90 per million 

gallons effective on January 1, 2010, and 

from $.90 to $1.20 per million gallons 

effective on January 1, 2011. 

Even with the proposed increases, 

Delaware Basin water will remain 

inexpensive when compared to raw 

water in neighboring jurisdictions. 

Notably, the proposed 2012 rate of $120 

per million gallons for raw water 

consumptively used in the Delaware 

Basin is less than half the rate of $280 

currently in effect in the Susquehanna 

Basin and only a little more than half 

the rate of $216 currently charged by the 

NJWSA for its Raritan System water, 

which rate will increase to $220 

effective January 1, 2011. The 

Commission’s proposed 2012 rate is 

below the current (2010) rate of $60 per 

million if adjusted for inflation, which 

would be approximately $200 per 

million gallons. 

No Change to Exempt Uses. No 

change to the list of uses exempt from 

charges, as set forth at WSC § 5.3.3 is 

proposed. The following categories of 

uses are currently exempt from water 

charges: Non-consumptive uses of less 

than 1,000 gallons a day and less than 

100,000 gallons during any quarter 

(§ 5.3.3 A.); ballast water used for 

shipping purposes (§ 5.3.3 B.); water 

taken, withdrawn or diverted from 

streams tributary to the River Master’s 

gauging station at Montague, New Jersey 

(§ 5.3.3 C.); and water taken, diverted or 

withdrawn below the mouth of the 

Cohansey River and such proportion of 

water withdrawn above that point and 

below the mouth of the Schuylkill River 

as the Executive Director may determine 

would have no discernable effect upon 

the maintenance of the salt front below 

the mouth of the Schuylkill River 

(§ 5.3.3 D.). 

Pamela M. Bush, 

Commission Secretary. 

[FR Doc. 2010–3219 Filed 2–18–10; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6360–01–P 

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND 

HUMAN SERVICES 

Food and Drug Administration 

21 CFR Parts 16, 58, 71, 101, 170, 171, 

190, 312, 511, 571, and 812 

[Docket No. FDA–2008–N–0115] 

RIN 0910–AC59 

Reporting Information Regarding 

Falsification of Data 

AGENCY: Food and Drug Administration, 

HHS. 

ACTION: Proposed rule. 

SUMMARY: The Food and Drug 

Administration (FDA) is proposing to 

amend its regulations to require 

sponsors to report information 

indicating that any person has, or may 

have, engaged in the falsification of data 

in the course of reporting study results, 

or in the course of proposing, designing, 

performing, recording, supervising, or 

reviewing studies that involve human 

subjects or animal subjects conducted 

by or on behalf of a sponsor or relied on 

by a sponsor. A sponsor would be 

required to report this information to 

the appropriate FDA center promptly, 

but no later than 45 calendar days after 

the sponsor becomes aware of the 

information. This proposal is necessary 

because ambiguity in the current 

reporting scheme has caused confusion 

among sponsors. The proposed rule is 

intended to help ensure the validity of 

data that the agency receives in support 

of applications and petitions for FDA 

product approvals and authorization of 

certain labeling claims and to protect 

research subjects. 

DATES: Submit written or electronic 

comments on this proposed rule by May 

20, 2010. See section V of this document 

for the proposed effective date of a final 

rule based on this document. Submit 

comments regarding the information 

collection by March 22, 2010 to OMB 

(see ADDRESSES). 


srobinson on DSKHWCL6B1PROD with PROPOSALS