28434 Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 104 / Wednesday, May 31, 1995 / Notices

1Formally section 7005 of the Consolidated

Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act of 1985 (Pub.L.

99–272). The change in citation is the result of the

enactment, on July 5, 1994, of Pub. L. 103–272,

which codified various transportation laws.

A. Self-Regulatory Organization’s

Statement of the Purpose of, and

Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule

Change

1. Purpose

The Exchange is proposing to

establish an administrative charge

applicable to members and member

organizations that are substantially late

in making payments to the Exchange of

dues, fees, fines, or other charges. The

purpose of the rule change is to recover

the Exchange’s costs in seeking to

collect such payments when they are

past due and to encourage members and

member organizations to make such

payments in a timely manner.

Currently, the Exchange provides

invoices and related notices to members

as follows: An initial invoice is sent to

members approximately five days after

a given month in which dues, fees and

other charges are accrued (e.g., on

March 5, a member is billed for fees and

charges accrued in February). If no

payment is made on the invoice within

one month, the Exchange sends the

member a ‘‘late’’ notice on the tenth day

of the month following the month in

which the invoices was issued (e.g., on

April 10). Thereafter, if no payment is

made by the 20th of that same month

(i.e., April 20), the Exchange sends such

member a second ‘‘late’’ notice. Under

the proposal, the Exchange would apply

a late charge concurrently with the

issuance of the second ‘‘late’’ notice.

The amount of the late charge would

be as follows: $250.00 or 1.0 percent of

the invoice amount (whichever is

greater) upon the first occurrence of a

second ‘‘late’’ notice within a 12-month

period; and $500 or 1.5 percent of the

invoice amount (whichever is greater) if

the member receives two or more

second ‘‘late’’ notices within a 12-month

period. For purposes of this provision,

a member is ‘‘late’’ if the Exchange has

sent such member a ‘‘second late

notice’’ on a previous occasion.

Although Article XIV, Section 1(b) of

the PSE Constitution permits the

Exchange to suspend members and

member organizations for such nonpayment, the Exchange believes that the

proposed charge will help to encourage

members to pay their bills promptly,

before a suspension is necessary.

2. Statutory Basis

The Exchange believes that the

proposed rule change is consistent with

Section 6(b)(4) of the Act in that it

provides for the equitable allocation of

reasonable charges among its members.

B. Self-Regulatory Organization’s

Statement on Burden on Competition

The Exchange does not believe that

the proposed rule change will impose

any burden on competition that is not

necessary or appropriate in furtherance

of the purposes of the Act.

C. Self-Regulatory Organization’s

Statement on Comments on the

Proposed Rule Change Received from

Members, Participants or Others

Written comments on the proposed

rule change were neither solicited nor

received.

III. Date of Effectiveness of the

Proposed Rule Change and Timing for

Commission Action

The foregoing rule change establishes

or changes a due, fee, or other charge

imposed by the Exchange and therefore

has become effective pursuant to

Section 19(b)(3)(A) of the Act and

subparagraph (e) of Rule 19b–4

thereunder. At any time within 60 days

of the filing of such proposed rule

change, the Commission may summarily

abrogate 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.

IV. Solicitation of Comments

Intereste persons are invited to submit

written data, views and arguments

concerning the foregoing. Persons

making written submissions should file

six copies thereof with the Secretary,

Securities and Exchange Commission,

450 Fifth Street NW., Washington, DC

20549. 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 inspection and copying at

the Commission’s Public Reference

Section, 450 Fifth Street NW.,

Washington, DC 20549. Copies of such

filing will also be available for

inspection and copying at the principal

office of the PSE. All submissions

should refer to File No. SR–PSE–95–15

and should be submitted by June 21,

1995.

For the Commission, by the Division of

Market Regulation, pursuant to delegated

authority.

Margaret H. McFarland,

Deputy Secretary.

[FR Doc. 95–13218 Filed 5–30–95; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 8010–01–M

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Research and Special Programs

Administration

Pipeline Safety User Fees

AGENCY: Research and Special Programs

Administration, (RSPA), DOT.

ACTION: Notice.

SUMMARY: This notice announces that

the fiscal year 1995 user fee assessments

for pipeline facilities were mailed to

pipeline operators the week of April 3,

1995.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Lisa

Kokoszka, (202) 366–4554, U.S.

Department of Transportation, RSPA,

Office of Pipeline Safety, 400 Seventh

Street SW., Washington, DC, 20590,

regarding the subject matter of this

notice.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The fee to

be assessed for Natural Gas

Transmission, Hazardous Liquid and

Liquefied Natural Gas (LNG) are as

indicated below:

Natural gas transmission pipelines:

$95.57 per mile (based on 299,077 miles

of pipeline).

Hazardous liquid pipelines: $47.03

per mile (based on 154,233 miles of

pipeline).

LNG is based on the number of plants

and total storage capacity:

Total storage capacity BBLS Assessment/plant

<10,000 ..................................... = $1,250

10,000–100,000 ........................ = 2,500

100,000–250,000 ...................... = 3,750

250,000–500,000 ...................... = 5,000

>500,000 ................................... = 7,500

Section 60301 of Title 49, U.S.C.,1

authorizes the assessment and

collection of pipeline user fees to fund

the pipeline safety activities conducted

under 49 U.S.C. 60101 et seq. The

Research and Special Program

Administration (RSPA) assesses each

operator of regulated interstate and

intrastate natural gas transmission

pipelines (as defined in 49 CFR Part
Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 104 / Wednesday, May 31, 1995 / Notices 28435

192), and hazardous liquid pipelines

carrying petroleum, petroleum products,

anhydrous ammonia and carbon dioxide

(as defined in 49 CFR Part 195) a share

of the total Federal pipeline safety

program costs in proportion to the

number of miles of pipeline each

operator has in service. Operators of

LNG facilities are assessed based on

total storage capacity (as defined in 49

CFR Part 193).

A final rule on hazardous liquid

pipelines operating at 20 percent or less

of specified minimum yield strength

(low stress pipelines), was published in

the Federal Register on July 12, 1994

(58 FR 12213, July 12, 1994). This rule

became effective on August 11, 1994.

Because of this regulation, low stress

pipeline mileage must be included in

the fiscal year 1995 user fee

assessments. Low Stress Pipelines

include pipelines that carry highly

volatile liquids (HVL), pipelines or

pipeline segments in populated areas,

and pipelines or pipeline segments in

navigable waterways. Onshore rural

gathering pipelines, pipelines that

operate at less than 20% of SMYS (nonHVL located outside populated areas

and navigable waterways), and other

pipelines excluded from regulation by

49 CFR 195, should not be included.

In accordance with the provisions of

49 U.S.C. 60301, Departmental

resources were taken into consideration

for determining total program costs. The

apportionment ratio between gas and

liquid is shown below:

Year(s)

General program costs

(gas)

General program costs

(liquid)

1986–1990 .... 80% ............. 20%

1991–1992 .... 75% ............. 25%

1993 .............. 75% (3⁄4 yr.) .

60% (1⁄4 yr.).

25% (3⁄4 yr.)

40% (1⁄4 yr.)

1994 .............. 60% ............. 40%

1995 .............. 75% ............. 25%

Comments: On Friday, February 3,

1995, a notice of agency action and

request for comments was issued (60 FR

6767, Feb. 3, 1995), regarding proposed

changes in administering user fee

assessments. Seven pipeline operators,

one commenter acting as an agent for

several operators, and two major gas

pipeline trade organizations opposed

collecting the fee twice within calendar

year 1995. These commenters stated that

the budgets of most companies are

prepared by calendar year, and that

companies have planned for only one

assessment in 1995. The commenters

recommended moving the two

assessment dates to 1996, which would

give companies time to plan their

budgets.

Response: RSPA agrees that assessing

the user fee twice in calendar year 1995

may be burdensome for the pipeline

operators. Therefore, RSPA will assess

only once in 1995. In 1996, RSPA will

send out two assessments. The first

assessment in 1996 will be January 31,

1996, and the second will be in the

October-December 1996 timeframe. This

should provide ample budgetary

preparation time.

Additional comments received by

RSPA in response to the February 3,

1995, notice are currently being

reviewed and will be addressed in the

near future.

Collection Dates: In accordance with

the regulations of the Department of the

Treasury, user fees will be due 30 days

after the date of the assessment. Interest,

penalties, and administrative charges

will be assessed on delinquent debts in

accordance with 31 U.S.C. 3717.

Issued in Washington, DC on May 24,

1995.

Ana Sol Gutie ́rrez,

Deputy Administrator, Research and Special

Programs Administration.

[FR Doc. 95–13222 Filed 5–30–95; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4910–60–P

DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY

[Treasury Order Number 170–09]

Direction to the Director, United States

Secret Service, to Close Streets

Necessary To Make the White House

Perimeter Secure; Delegation of

Authority

May 19, 1995.

As Secretary of the Treasury, I am

authorized to direct the Secret Service

to take any and all appropriate action to

protect the President of the United

States and other protectees as described

in 18 U.S.C. 3056(a). In furtherance of

these responsibilities, Secretary Bentsen

commenced a review of the security

arrangments at the White House (the

Review). The Review is not able to

identify any alternative to prohibiting

vehicular traffic on Pennsylvania

Avenue that would ensure the

protection of the President and others in

the White House Complex from

explosive devices carried by vehicles

near the perimeter.

Therefore, I have determined based

upon the Review’s work and

conclusions that it is necessary to make

secure the perimeter of the White

House.

By virtue of the authority vested in

the Secretary of the Treasury, including,

but not limited to, the authority vested

by 31 U.S.C. 321, 18 U.S.C. 3056 and 3

U.S.C. 202, it is ordered that:

1. The Director, United States Secret

Service, is directed to close to vehicular

traffic the following streets in order to

secure the perimeter of the White

House: (i) The segment of Pennsylvania

Avenue, Northwest, in front of the

White House between Madison Place,

Northwest, and 17th Street, Northwest;

and (ii) State Place, Northwest, and the

segment of South Executive Avenue,

Northwest, that connects into State

Place, Northwest (see attached map).

2. I hereby delegate to the Director,

United States Secret Service, all

necessary authority to carry out such

street closings.

3. This Order shall take effect May 19,

1995.

Robert E. Rubin,

Secretary of the Treasury.

BILLING CODE 4810–25–P