Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 188 / Thursday, September 29, 2005 / Rules and Regulations 56823 

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 

■ Accordingly, under the authority 

delegated to me by the Administrator, 

the FAA amends 14 CFR part 39 as 

follows: 

PART 39—AIRWORTHINESS 

DIRECTIVES 

■ 1. The authority citation for part 39 

continues to read as follows: 

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

§ 39.13 [Amended] 

■ 2. The Federal Aviation 

Administration (FAA) amends § 39.13 

by adding the following new 

airworthiness directive (AD): 

2005–20–05 Boeing: Amendment 39–14298. 

Docket No. FAA–2005–21170; 

Directorate Identifier 2002–NM–124–AD. 

Effective Date 

(a) This AD becomes effective October 31, 

2005. 

Affected ADs 

(b) None. 

Applicability 

(c) This AD applies to Boeing Model 767–

200 and 767–300 series airplanes equipped 

with center overhead stowage bin modules, 

certificated in any category; as identified in 

Boeing Special Attention Service Bulletin 

767–25–0320, dated April 11, 2002. 

Unsafe Condition 

(d) This AD results from tests conducted by 

the airplane manufacturer. We are issuing 

this AD to prevent failure of the attachment 

of the 9.0g (gravitational acceleration) tie 

rods to the center overhead stowage bin 

modules. This failure could result in collapse 

of those stowage bin modules, and 

consequent injury to passengers and crew 

and interference with their ability to evacuate 

the airplane in an emergency. 

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. 

Inspection to Determine I-beam Part Number 

(P/N) 

(f) Within 36 months after the effective 

date of this AD: Perform a general visual 

inspection of the center overhead stowage 

bin modules to determine the P/N of each Ibeam and to determine the configuration of 

each center overhead stowage bin module. 

Do the inspection in accordance with the 

Accomplishment Instructions of Boeing 

Special Attention Service Bulletin 767–25–

0320, dated April 11, 2002. 

Note 1: For the purposes of this AD, a 

general visual inspection is: ‘‘A visual 

examination of an interior or exterior area, 

installation, or assembly to detect obvious 

damage, failure, or irregularity. This level of 

inspection is made from within touching 

distance unless otherwise specified. A mirror 

may be necessary to ensure visual access to 

all surfaces in the inspection area. This level 

of inspection is made under normally 

available lighting conditions such as 

daylight, hangar lighting, flashlight, or 

droplight and may require removal or 

opening of access panels or doors. Stands, 

ladders, or platforms may be required to gain 

proximity to the area being checked.’’

(g) For any I-beam found having P/N 

412T2040–29 during the inspection required 

by paragraph (f) of this AD: No further action 

is required by this AD for that I-beam only. 

Support Strap Installation 

(h) For any I-beam found having a P/N 

other than P/N 412T2040–29 during the 

inspection required by paragraph (f) of this 

AD: Before further flight, do the actions in 

paragraph (h)(1) or (h)(2) of this AD, as 

applicable, in accordance with the 

Accomplishment Instructions of Boeing 

Special Attention Service Bulletin 767–25–

0320, dated April 11, 2002. 

(1) If the forward-most stowage bin module 

was inspected: Before further flight, install 

support straps having P/N 412T2043–101 

and 412T2043–102 on the center overhead 

stowage bin module, in accordance with 

Figures 3, 4, and 5 of the Accomplishment 

Instructions of the service bulletin. 

(2) If the stowage bin module inspected 

was other than the forward-most stowage bin 

module: Before further flight, do the actions 

specified in paragraph (h)(2)(i) or (h)(2)(ii) of 

this AD, as applicable. 

(i) For center overhead stowage bin 

modules having ‘‘Configuration A,’’ as 

specified in the service bulletin: Before 

further flight, do the actions specified in 

paragraph (h)(1) of this AD. 

(ii) For center overhead stowage bin 

modules having a configuration other than 

‘‘Configuration A,’’ as specified in the service 

bulletin: Before further flight, install two 

support straps having P/N 412T2043–119 on 

the center overhead stowage bin module, in 

accordance with Figures 3, 4, and 6 of the 

Accomplishment Instructions of the service 

bulletin. 

Alternative Methods of Compliance 

(AMOCs) 

(i)(1) The Manager, Seattle Aircraft 

Certification Office (ACO), FAA, has the 

authority to approve AMOCs for this AD, if 

requested in accordance with the procedures 

found in 14 CFR 39.19. 

(2) Before using any AMOC approved in 

accordance with § 39.19 on any airplane to 

which the AMOC applies, notify the 

appropriate principal inspector in the FAA 

Flight Standards Certificate Holding District 

Office. 

Material Incorporated by Reference 

(j) You must use Boeing Special Attention 

Service Bulletin 767–25–0320, dated April 

11, 2002, 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 this document in accordance 

with 5 U.S.C. 552(a) and 1 CFR part 51. 

Contact Boeing Commercial Airplanes, P.O. 

Box 3707, Seattle, Washington 98124–2207, 

for a copy of this service information. You 

may review copies at the Docket Management 

Facility, U.S. Department of Transportation, 

400 Seventh Street SW., room PL–401, Nassif 

Building, Washington, DC; on the Internet at 

http://dms.dot.gov; or at the National 

Archives and Records Administration 

(NARA). For information on the availability 

of this material at the NARA, call (202) 741–

6030, or go to http://www.archives.gov/ 

federal_register/code_of_federal_regulations/ 

ibr_locations.html. 

Issued in Renton, Washington, on 

September 12, 2005. 

Kalene C. Yanamura, 

Acting Manager, Transport Airplane 

Directorate, Aircraft Certification Service. 

[FR Doc. 05–19227 Filed 9–28–05; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4910–13–P 

COMMODITY FUTURES TRADING 

COMMISSION 

17 CFR Part 1 

Fees for Reviews of the Rule 

Enforcement Programs of Contract 

Markets and Registered Futures 

Association 

AGENCY: Commodity Futures Trading 

Commission. 

ACTION: Establish the FY 2005 schedule 

of fees. 

56824 Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 188 / Thursday, September 29, 2005 / Rules and Regulations 

1See Section 237 of the Futures Trading Act of 

1982, 7 USC 16a and 31 USC 9701. For a broader 

discussion of the history of Commission Fees, see 

52 FR 46070 (Dec. 4, 1987). 

SUMMARY: The Commission charges fees 

to designated contract markets and the 

National Futures Association (NFA) to 

recover the costs incurred by the 

Commission in the operation of a 

program which provides a service to 

these entities. The fees are charged for 

the Commission’s conduct of its 

program of oversight of self-regulatory 

rule enforcement programs (NFA and 

the contract markets are referred to as 

SROs). 

The calculation of the fee amounts to 

be charged for FY 2005 is based on an 

average of actual program costs incurred 

during FY 2002, 2003, and 2004, as 

explained below. The FY 2005 fee 

schedule is set forth in the 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION. Electronic 

payment of fees is required. 

EFFECTIVE DATES: The FY 2005 fees for 

Commission oversight of each SRO rule 

enforcement program must be paid by 

each of the named SROs in the amount 

specified by no later than November 28, 

2005. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Stacy Dean Yochum, Counsel to the 

Executive Director, Commodity Futures 

Trading Commission, (202) 418–5160, 

Three Lafayette Center, 1155 21st Street, 

NW., Washington, DC 20581. For 

information on electronic payment, 

contact Stella Lewis, Three Lafayette 

Centre, 1155 21st Street NW., 

Washington, DC 20581, (202) 418–5186. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

I. General 

This notice relates to fees for the 

Commission’s review of the rule 

enforcement programs at the registered 

futures associations and contract 

markets regulated by the Commission. 

II. Schedule of Fees 

Fees for the Commission’s review of 

the rule enforcement programs at the 

registered futures associations and 

contract markets regulated by the 

Commission: 

Entity Fee amount 

Chicago Board of Trade ....... $5,127 

Chicago Mercantile Exchange .............................. 256,683 

Kansas City Board of Trade 13,859 

New York Mercantile Exchange .............................. 125,378 

Minneapolis Grain Exchange 12,691 

Entity Fee amount 

National Futures Association 33,692 

New York Board of Trade .... 36,245 

OneChicago .......................... 3,207 

Total ............................... 486,882 

III. Background Information 

A. General 

The Commission recalculates the fees 

charged each year with the intention of 

recovering the costs of operating this 

Commission program.1 All costs are 

accounted for by the Commission’s 

Management Accounting Structure 

Codes (MASC) system, which records 

each employee’s time for each pay 

period. The fees are set each year based 

on direct program costs, plus an 

overhead factor. 

B. Overhead Rate 

The fees charged by the Commission 

to the SROs are designed to recover 

program costs, including direct labor 

costs and overhead. The overhead rate 

is calculated by dividing total 

Commission-wide overhead direct 

program labor costs into the total 

amount of the Commission-wide 

overhead pool. For this purpose, direct 

program labor costs are the salary costs 

of personnel working in all Commission 

programs. Overhead costs consist 

generally of the following Commissionwide costs; indirect personnel costs 

(leave and benefits), rent, 

communications, contract services, 

utilities, equipment, and supplies. This 

formula has resulted in the following 

overhead rates for the most recent three 

years (rounded to the nearest whole 

percent): 129 percent for fiscal year 

2002, 113 percent for fiscal year 2003, 

and 109 percent for fiscal year 2004. 

These overhead rates are applied to the 

direct labor costs to calculate the costs 

of oversight of SRO rule enforcement 

programs. 

C. Conduct of SRO Rule Enforcement 

Reviews 

Under the formula adopted in 1993 

(58 FR 42463, Aug. 11, 1993), which 

appears at 17 CFR part 1 appendix B, 

the Commission calculates the fee to 

recover the costs of its review of rule 

enforcement programs, based on the 

three-year average of the actual cost of 

performing reviews at each SRO. The 

cost of operation of the Commission’s 

program of SRO oversight varies from 

SRO to SRO, according to the size and 

complexity of each SRO’s program. The 

three-year averaging is intended to 

smooth out year-to-year variations in 

cost. Timing of review may affect 

costs—a review may span two fiscal 

years and fiscal years and reviews are 

not conducted at each SRO each year. 

Adjustments to actual costs may be 

made to relieve the burden on an SRO 

with a disproportionately large share of 

program costs. 

The Commission’s formula provides 

for a reduction in the assessed fee if an 

SRO has a smaller percentage of United 

States industry contract volume than its 

percentage of overall Commission 

oversight program costs. This 

adjustment reduces the costs so that as 

a percentage of total Commission SRO 

oversight program costs, they are in line 

with the pro rata percentage for that 

SRO of United States industry-wide 

contract volume. 

The calculation made is as follows: 

The fee required to be paid to the 

Commission by each contract market is 

equal to the lesser of actual costs based 

on the three-year historical average of 

costs for that contract market or one-half 

of average costs incurred by the 

Commission for each contract market for 

the most recent three years, plus a pro 

rata share (based on average trading 

volume for the most recent three years) 

of the aggregate of average annual costs 

of all contract markets for the most 

recent three years. The formula for 

calculating the second factor is: 0.5a + 

0.5vt = current fee. In this formula, ‘‘a’’

equals the average annual costs, ‘‘v’’

equals the percentage of total volume 

across exchanges over the last three 

years, and ‘‘t’’ equals the average annual 

costs for all exchanges. NFA, the only 

registered futures association regulated 

by the Commission, has no contracts 

traded; hence its fee is based simply on 

costs for the most recent three fiscal 

years. 

This table summarizes the data used 

in the calculations and the resulting fee 

for each entity: 

Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 188 / Thursday, September 29, 2005 / Rules and Regulations 56825 

Three-year average actual 

costs 

Three-year 

percentage of 

volume 

Average year 

2005 fee 

Chicago Board of Trade .............................................................................................................. $5,127 33.4148 $5,127 

Chicago Mercantile Exchange ..................................................................................................... 256,683 51.6763 256,683 

New York Mercantile Exchange .................................................................................................. 186,234 11.4811 125,378 

New York Board of Trade ............................................................................................................ 61,296 1.9919 36,245 

Kansas City Board of Trade ........................................................................................................ 22,034 1.0113 13,859 

Minneapolis Grain Exchange ....................................................................................................... 24,591 0.1409 12,691 

OneChicago ................................................................................................................................. 6,011 0.0718 3,207 

Subtotal ................................................................................................................................. 561,977 99.7881 453,190 

National Futures Association ....................................................................................................... 33,692 N/A 33,692 

Total ............................................................................................................................... 589,657 99.7881 486,882 

An example of how the fee is 

calculated for one exchange, the 

Minneapolis Grain Exchange, is set forth 

here: 

a. Actual three-year average costs 

equal $24,591 

b. The alternative computation is: 

(.5) ($24,591) +(.5)(.001409)($561,977) = 

$12,691. 

c. The fee is the less of a or b; in this 

case $12,691. 

As noted above, the alternative 

calculation based on contracts traded is 

not applicable to the NFA because it is 

not a contract market and has no 

contracts traded. The Commission’s 

average annual cost for conducting 

oversight review of the NFA rule 

enforcement program during fiscal year 

2002 through 2004 was $33,692 (onethird of $101,076). The fee to be paid by 

the NFA for the current fiscal year is 

$33,692. 

Payment Method 

The Debt Collection Improvement Act 

(DCIA) requires deposits of fees owed to 

the government by electronic transfer of 

funds (See 31 U.S.C. 3720). For 

information about electronic payments, 

please contract Stella Lewis at (202) 

418–5186 or slewis@cftc.gov, or see the 

CFTC Web site at http://www.cftc.gov, 

specifically http://www.cftc.gov/cftc/ 

cftcelectronicpayments.htm. 

Regulatory Flexibility Act 

The Regulatory Flexibility Act, 5 

U.S.C. 601, et seq., requires agencies to 

consider the impact of the rules on 

small business. The fees implemented 

in this release affect contract markets 

(also referred to as exchanges) and 

registered futures associations. The 

Commission has previously determined 

that contract markets and registered 

futures associations are not ‘‘small 

entities’’ for purposes of the Regulatory 

Flexibility Act. Accordingly, the 

Chairman, on behalf of the Commission, 

certifies pursuant to 5 USC 605(b) that 

the fees implemented here will not have 

a significant economic impact on a 

substantial number of small entities. 

Issued in Washington, DC on September 

23, 2005, by the Commission. 

Edward W. Colbert, 

Deputy Secretary of the Commission. 

[FR Doc. 05–19461 Filed 9–28–05; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6351–01–M 

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE 

COMMISSION 

17 CFR Parts 210, 228, 229, 240 and 

249 

[Release Nos. 33–8618; 34–52492; File Nos. 

S7–40–02; S7–06–03] 

RIN 3235–AI66 and 3235–AI79 

Management’s Report on Internal 

Control Over Financial Reporting and 

Certification of Disclosure in Exchange 

Act Periodic Reports of Companies 

That Are Not Accelerated Filers 

AGENCY: Securities and Exchange 

Commission. 

ACTION: Final rule; extension of 

compliance dates; request for comment. 

SUMMARY: We are extending the 

compliance dates that were published 

on March 8, 2005, in Release No. 33–

8545 [70 FR 11528], for companies that 

are not accelerated filers, for certain 

amendments to Rules 13a–15 and 15d–

15 under the Securities Exchange Act of 

1934, Items 308(a) and (b) of 

Regulations S–K and S–B, Item 15 of 

Form 20–F and General Instruction B of 

Form 40–F. These amendments require 

companies, other than registered 

investment companies, to include in 

their annual reports a report of 

management and accompanying 

auditor’s report on the company’s 

internal control over financial reporting. 

The amendments also require 

management to evaluate, as of the end 

of each fiscal period, any change in the 

company’s internal control over 

financial reporting that occurred during 

the period that has materially affected, 

or is reasonably likely to materially 

affect, the company’s internal control 

over financial reporting. We are also 

extending the compliance dates 

applicable to companies that are not 

accelerated filers for amendments to 

certain representations that must be 

included in the certifications required 

by Exchange Act Rules 13a–14 and 15d–

14 regarding a company’s internal 

control over financial reporting. Finally, 

we are soliciting comment about the 

implementation of these rules. 

DATES: Effective Date: The effective date 

published on June 18, 2003, in Release 

No. 33–8238 [68 FR 36636] remains 

August 14, 2003. The effective date of 

this document is September 29, 2005. 

Comment Date: Comments should be 

received on or before October 31, 2005. 

Compliance Dates: The compliance 

dates are extended as follows: A 

company that is not an accelerated filer 

must begin to comply with these 

requirements for its first fiscal year 

ending on or after July 15, 2007. 

Companies must begin to comply with 

the provisions of Exchange Act Rule 

13a–(d) or 15d–(d), whichever applies, 

requiring an evaluation of changes to 

internal control over financial reporting 

requirements with respect to the 

company’s first periodic report due after 

the first annual report that must include 

management’s report on internal control 

over financial reporting. 

In addition, during the extended 

compliance period, a company that is 

not an accelerated filer may continue to 

omit the amended portion of the 

introductory language in paragraph 4 of 

the certification required by Exchange 

Act Rules 13a–14(a) and 15d–14(a) that 

refers to the certifying officers’

responsibility for establishing and 

maintaining internal control over 

financial reporting for the company, as 

well as paragraph 4(b). This language, 

however, must be provided in the first 

annual report required to contain