[Federal Register Volume 76, Number 180 (Friday, September 16, 2011)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 57646-57653]
[FR Doc No: 2011-23817]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 132

 [EPA-HQ-OW-2010-0492; FRL-9466-3]
RIN 2040-AF23

Final Withdrawal of Certain Federal Aquatic Life Water Quality
Criteria Applicable to Wisconsin

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: The EPA is withdrawing the federal aquatic life water quality
criteria for chronic and acute copper and nickel, and chronic endrin
and selenium applicable to certain waters of the Great Lakes System in
Wisconsin. Wisconsin's revised and EPA-approved criteria adequately
protect all waters of the State designated for aquatic life use at a
level consistent with the federal requirements. As a result of this
withdrawal, Wisconsin will continue to implement its EPA-approved
aquatic life criteria.

DATES: This final rule is effective on October 17, 2011.

ADDRESSES: The EPA established a docket for this action under Docket ID
No. EPA-HQ-OW-2010-0492. All documents in the docket are listed on the
http://www.regulations.gov Web site. Although listed in the index, some
information is not publically available, e.g., confidential business
information (CBI) or other information whose disclosure is restricted
by statute. Certain other material, such as copyrighted material, is
not placed on the Internet and will be publically available only in
hard copy form. Publicly available docket materials are available
either electronically through http://www.regulations.gov or in hard
copy at the Office of Water (OW) Docket Center. This Docket Facility is
open from 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., Monday through Friday, excluding
legal holidays. The Docket telephone number is<PHONE_NUMBER>, and the
Docket address is OW Docket, EPA West, Room 3334, 1301 Constitution
Ave., NW., Washington, DC 20004. The 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 Public Reading Room is (202)
566-1744.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Francine Norling, U.S. EPA, Region 5,
77 W. Jackson Blvd., Chicago, IL 60604 (telephone:<PHONE_NUMBER> or e-
mail<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or Sara Hilbrich, U.S. EPA
Headquarters, Office of Science and Technology, 1200 Pennsylvania
Avenue, NW., Mail Code 4305T, Washington, DC 20460 (telephone: (202)
564-0441 or e-mail: hilbrich.sara@epa.gov).

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Potentially Affected Entities
II. Background
    A. Applicable Federal Statutory and Regulatory Requirements
    B. Why is the EPA withdrawing certain federal aquatic life water
quality criteria applicable to Wisconsin?
    C. Why is the EPA not withdrawing Wisconsin's chronic endrin
aquatic life use criterion for waters designated as Warm Water
Sportfish and Warm Water Forage Fish use, and chronic selenium
aquatic life use criterion for waters designated as limited Forage
Fish use?
    D. What are the applicable federal aquatic life water quality
criteria that the EPA is withdrawing?
III. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
    A. Executive Order 12866 (Regulatory Planning and Review)
    B. Paperwork Reduction Act
    C. Regulatory Flexibility Act
    D. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act
    E. Executive Order 13132 (Federalism)
    F. Executive Order 13175 (Consultation and Coordination With
Indian Tribal Governments)
    G. Executive Order 13045 (Protection of Children From
Environmental Health and Safety Risks)
    H. Executive Order 13211 (Actions That Significantly Affect
Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use)
    I. National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act
    J. Executive Order 12898 (Federal Actions To Address
Environmental Justice in Minority Populations and Low-Income
Populations)
    K. Congressional Review Act

I. Potentially Affected Entities

    This rule withdraws federal water quality standards, specifically
aquatic life criteria for chronic and acute copper and nickel and
chronic endrin and selenium for Wisconsin surface waters designated for
certain aquatic life uses in the Great Lakes System (described in 40
CFR part 132). As a result of this rule, Wisconsin will implement the
following State-revised and EPA-approved aquatic life criteria: chronic
and acute copper and nickel for all Wisconsin surface waters designated
for aquatic life use; chronic endrin for Wisconsin surface waters
designated for aquatic life use except waters designated as Warm Water
Forage Fish and Warm Water Sportfish use; chronic selenium for
Wisconsin surface waters designated for aquatic life use except waters
designated as Limited Forage Fish use. Entities discharging copper,
nickel, endrin or selenium to surface waters of Wisconsin could be
affected by this rulemaking given that water quality standards are used
to determine water quality based effluent limits in National Pollutant
Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permits, and may affect Clean
Water Act (CWA) Section 404 dredge and fill permits, and other federal
licenses and permits requiring CWA 401 certification. Table 1, below,
provides examples of the types of NPDES-regulated entities that may
ultimately be affected by the federal rule withdrawal.

 Table 1--Examples of Entities Potentially Affected by the Federal Rule
                               Withdrawal
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                      Examples of potentially affected
             Category                             entities
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Industry..........................  Industries discharging to surface
                                     waters in Wisconsin designated by
                                     the State for aquatic life use.

Municipalities....................  Publicly-owned treatment works
                                     discharging to surface waters in
                                     Wisconsin designated by the State
                                     for aquatic life use.
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    If you have any questions regarding the applicability of this
action to a particular entity, consult the person identified in the
preceding section entitled FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT.

II. Background

A. Applicable Federal Statutory and Regulatory Requirements

    In 1995, the EPA published the final Water Quality Guidance for the
Great Lakes System (Guidance), required by CWA Section 118(c)(2) (33
U.S.C. 1268). Among other provisions, the Guidance identified minimum
water quality standards to protect aquatic life as part of a
comprehensive plan to restore the health of the Great Lakes System (40
CFR 132.3). Under CWA Section 118(c)(2), within two years of publishing
the Guidance, Great Lakes States, including Wisconsin, were required to
adopt provisions consistent with the Guidance into their water quality
standards and NPDES permit programs. The regulation at 40 CFR 132.5(f)
provides that, after review of a State's water quality standards
submission, the EPA must either publish a notice of approval of the
State's submission in the Federal Register or notify the State that the
EPA has determined that all or part of its submission is inconsistent
with the CWA and/or the Guidance, and identify any changes needed to
obtain EPA approval. If the EPA notified the State of inconsistencies,
then the State had 90 days to make the necessary changes. If the State
failed to make the necessary changes, the EPA was required to publish a
document in the Federal Register identifying the approved and
disapproved elements of the submission and a final rule identifying the
provisions of the Guidance that apply to the State.

B. Why is the EPA withdrawing certain federal aquatic life water
quality criteria applicable to Wisconsin?

    In 1997, Wisconsin adopted revised water quality standards to
comply with the Guidance requirements at 40 CFR part 132. In October
2000, the EPA disapproved six of Wisconsin's revised aquatic life
criteria including chronic and acute copper and nickel, and chronic
endrin and selenium. Subsequently the EPA published a final rule
effective February 5, 2001, making the following aquatic life criteria,
published at 40 CFR 132.6, effective for waters of the Great Lakes
System in the State of Wisconsin: (1) Chronic and acute copper and
nickel in Tables 1 and 2 of 40 CFR 132.6(f); (2) chronic endrin in
Table 2 of 40 CFR 132.6(f); and (3) chronic selenium in Table 2 of 40
CFR 132.6(g).
    In January 2008, Wisconsin began rulemaking to revise its water
quality standards to address the EPA's disapproval of these aquatic
life criteria. The Wisconsin Natural Resources Board adopted the
State's revised criteria on June 24, 2008 and the Wisconsin Attorney
General certified these rules on December 22, 2008. On May 4, 2009, EPA
Region 5 received a letter from the Wisconsin Department of Natural
Resources requesting approval of final revisions to Chapter NR 105
(Surface Water Quality Criteria and Secondary Values for Toxic
Substances) of the Wisconsin Administrative Code (WAC).
    Pursuant to CWA section 303(c)(3), the EPA is required to review
and approve new and revised State water quality standards before such
standards become effective for CWA purposes. The EPA found that
Wisconsin's revised criteria, with the exception of chronic selenium
for waters designated by Wisconsin as Limited Forage Fish use, satisfy
the federal requirements for submittal of new or revised water quality
standards to the EPA and are consistent with the CWA and the Guidance
requirements. Therefore, the EPA approved Wisconsin's revised aquatic
life criteria on July 1, 2009, with the exception of the chronic
aquatic life criterion for selenium in waters designated by Wisconsin
as Limited Forage Fish use.
    The EPA's approval of Wisconsin's aquatic life criteria makes the
federal criteria no longer necessary for compliance with the CWA and
the Guidance. Therefore, the EPA determined that the following federal
aquatic life criteria for waters of the Great Lakes System in Wisconsin
may be withdrawn: chronic and acute copper and nickel for all aquatic
life uses; chronic endrin for all aquatic life uses with the exception
of waters designated by Wisconsin as Warm Water Forage Fish and Warm
Water Sportfish use; and chronic selenium for all aquatic life uses
with the exception of waters designated by Wisconsin as Limited Forage
Fish use.

C. Why is the EPA not withdrawing Wisconsin's chronic endrin aquatic
life use criterion for waters designated as Warm Water Sportfish and
Warm Water Forage Fish use, and chronic selenium aquatic life use
criterion for waters designated as limited Forage Fish use?

    The EPA is not withdrawing the federal chronic endrin aquatic life
use criterion for waters of the Great Lakes System in Wisconsin
designated as Warm Water Sportfish and Warm Water Forage Fish use, due
to a State transcription error. While the EPA approved Wisconsin's
revised chronic endrin aquatic life use criteria for all waters in the
State of Wisconsin on July 1, 2009, the chronic aquatic life use
criterion for endrin for waters designated as Warm Water Forage Fish
and Warm Water Sportfish use published in Wisconsin's regulations at NR
105.06 (0.05 [mu]g/L) is not identical to the criterion that Wisconsin
submitted and that the EPA had approved (0.036 [mu]g/L). The EPA is not
withdrawing the federal chronic endrin criterion for these aquatic life
uses until after Wisconsin concludes rulemaking to correct the
criterion in the State's regulations.
    The EPA is not withdrawing the federal chronic selenium aquatic
life use criterion for waters of the Great Lakes System in Wisconsin
designated for Limited Forage Fish use because the EPA took no action
on Wisconsin's revised chronic selenium criterion for this aquatic life
use in its July 1, 2009 action approving the other aquatic life
criteria. Therefore, the federal aquatic life use criterion for chronic
selenium will continue to apply to waters within the Great Lakes System
of Wisconsin, designated as Limited Forage Fish use. Wisconsin
calculated the chronic selenium criterion based on water column
toxicity studies, rather than through dietary exposure, which currently
available data indicates is the appropriate methodology to use. Because
Wisconsin does not have an EPA-approved chronic aquatic life selenium
criterion for Limited Forage Fish Waters, the EPA is not withdrawing
the federal chronic aquatic

life selenium criterion for Wisconsin's Limited Forage Fish waters in
this rule. Wisconsin may revise their chronic selenium criterion and
submit it to the EPA for review and approval at a future date.

D. What are the applicable federal aquatic life water quality criteria
that the EPA is withdrawing?

    The EPA is withdrawing certain federal aquatic life criteria for
Wisconsin included in the Guidance at 40 CFR 132.6. Specifically, the
EPA is withdrawing the federal aquatic life use criteria for chronic
and acute copper and nickel (40 CFR 132.6(f)) applicable to all waters
of the Great Lakes System in Wisconsin designated for aquatic life
uses. The EPA is also amending the federal chronic aquatic life
criterion for endrin (40 CFR 132.6(f)) to apply exclusively to waters
designated by Wisconsin as Warm Water Sportfish and Warm Water Forage
Fish use, and amending the federal chronic aquatic life criterion for
selenium (40 CFR 132.6(g)) to apply exclusively to waters designated by
Wisconsin as Limited Forage Fish use. As a result of this final rule
withdrawal, Wisconsin will implement the EPA-approved aquatic life
criteria under State law.
    Wisconsin has tiered aquatic life uses and the State's EPA-approved
aquatic life criteria revisions do not affect Wisconsin's designated
uses included in Chapter NR 105 of the WAC. Based on the designated
uses defined in NR 102.04(3) of the WAC, Wisconsin's aquatic life
designated uses of Cold Water, Warm Water Sportfish, and Warm Water
Forage Fish are consistent with the requirements of CWA Section
101(a)(2) for the protection and propagation of fish, shellfish, and
wildlife. The Limited Forage Fish aquatic life use does not meet this
requirement because these surface waters are capable of supporting only
a ``limited community of forage fish and other aquatic life,'' based on
``limited capacity and naturally poor water quality or habitat'' (WAC,
Chapter 102.04(3)(d)). The following section discusses and compares the
calculations and criteria included in the EPA's federal regulations and
those included in Wisconsin's revised criteria.
1. Acute Copper Aquatic Life Criteria Applicable to Cold Water, Warm
Water Sportfish, Warm Water Forage Fish, Limited Forage Fish, and
Limited Aquatic Life Designated Uses
    Wisconsin adopted and the EPA reviewed and approved an acute copper
aquatic life criteria equation applicable to all surface waters in
Wisconsin designated for aquatic life use. The equation used by
Wisconsin to calculate the acute copper aquatic life criteria results
in a slightly higher value than the EPA equation at a given hardness
(see Table 2).

                 Table 2--Acute Copper Criteria Equation
                   [All aquatic life designated uses]
------------------------------------------------------------------------
 EPA criteria maximum concentration   Wisconsin acute toxicity criteria
             ([mu]g/L)                            ([mu]g/L)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                               CMC = exp(0.9422*ln(hardness)) -   ATC =
                           1.700                              1.6036
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The difference between the EPA's and Wisconsin's intercept in the
acute copper equation is due to the elimination of one of the most
sensitive species from the criteria calculation (northern pikeminnow,
genus Ptychocheilus) and inclusion of additional data for three
species. Eliminating the Ptychocheilus data from the equation is
scientifically defensible because Ptychocheilus is not native to
Wisconsin and is not a surrogate for other Wisconsin taxa unrepresented
in the data set. The northern pikeminnow is a type of minnow, and other
minnows (fathead and bluntnose) found in Wisconsin are well-represented
in the copper data set. Wisconsin's slope of 0.9436 is slightly
different from the EPA's 0.9422 slope due to Wisconsin's inclusion of
additional data on three species (Daphnia magna, rainbow trout, and
bluegill) that were not included in the EPA's 1985 slope calculation
used in the Guidance. The EPA included these data in the 1995 criteria
update, but did not recalculate the slope used in the 1985 EPA copper
criteria document.
    Wisconsin's method for deriving the acute copper criteria equation
is an acceptable State-specific modification of the EPA's criteria,
consistent with Wisconsin's methods for deriving criteria (WAC Chapter
NR 105). The equation is scientifically sound and results in criteria
that are protective of the use; therefore this equation is consistent
with CWA Sections 101(a)(2) and 303(c)(2), and 40 CFR Parts 131 and
132.
2. Chronic Copper Aquatic Life Criteria Applicable to Cold Water, Warm
Water Sportfish, Warm Water Forage Fish, Limited Forage Fish, and
Limited Aquatic Life Designated Uses
    Wisconsin adopted and the EPA reviewed and approved a chronic
copper aquatic life criteria equation applicable to all surface waters
in Wisconsin designated for aquatic life use. The equation used by
Wisconsin for calculating chronic aquatic life criteria for copper
produces a slightly higher value than the EPA equation at a given
hardness (see Table 3).

                Table 3--Chronic Copper Criteria Equation
                   [All aquatic life designated uses]
------------------------------------------------------------------------
      EPA criterion continuous       Wisconsin chronic toxicity criteria
    concentration  ([micro]g/L)                  ([micro]g/L)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                               CCC = exp(0.8545*ln(hardness))-      CTC
                           1.702                              1.6036
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The difference between the EPA's and Wisconsin's chronic copper
equation intercept is primarily due to the elimination of one of the
most sensitive species from the federal criteria calculation (northern
pikeminnow, genus Ptychocheilus), which is not native to Wisconsin.
Wisconsin's elimination of data for a non-native species that is not a
surrogate for taxa that are unrepresented in the data set, is
scientifically defensible. The northern

pikeminnow is a type of minnow, and other minnows (fathead and
bluntnose) found in Wisconsin, are well-represented in the copper data
set. Wisconsin's slope of 0.8557 is slightly different from the EPA's
0.8545 slope due to Wisconsin's inclusion of additional data on three
species (Daphnia magna, rainbow trout, and bluegill) that were not
included in the EPA's 1985 slope calculation used in the Guidance. The
EPA included these data in the 1995 criteria update, but did not
recalculate the slope used in the 1985 copper criteria document.
    Wisconsin's method for deriving the chronic copper criteria
equation is an acceptable State-specific modification of the EPA's
criteria, consistent with Wisconsin's methods for deriving criteria
(WAC Chapter NR 105). The equation is scientifically sound and results
in criteria that are protective of the use, therefore this equation is
consistent with CWA Sections 101(a)(2) and 303(c)(2), and 40 CFR parts
131 and 132.
3. Acute Nickel Aquatic Life Criteria Applicable to Cold Water, Warm
Water Sportfish, Warm Water Forage Fish, Limited Forage Fish, and
Limited Aquatic Life Designated Uses
    Wisconsin adopted and the EPA reviewed and approved an acute nickel
aquatic life criteria equation applicable to all surface waters in
Wisconsin designated for aquatic life use. The equation used by
Wisconsin to calculate acute aquatic life criteria for nickel is
identical to the equation contained in the Great Lakes Water Quality
Guidance, 40 CFR part 132 as well as the EPA's CWA Section 304(a)
criteria (see Table 4). The equation is scientifically sound and
results in criteria that are protective of the use, therefore this
equation is consistent with CWA Sections 101(a)(2) and 303(c)(2), and
40 CFR parts 131 and 132.

                 Table 4--Acute Nickel Criteria Equation
                   [All aquatic life designated uses]
------------------------------------------------------------------------
 EPA criteria maximum concentration   Wisconsin acute toxicity criteria
            ([micro]g/L)                         ([micro]g/L)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                               CMC = exp(0.846*ln(hardness)) +    ATC =
                           2.255                               2.255
------------------------------------------------------------------------

4. Chronic Nickel Aquatic Life Criteria Applicable to Cold Water, Warm
Water Sportfish, Warm Water Forage Fish, Limited Forage Fish, and
Limited Aquatic Life Designated Uses
    Wisconsin adopted and the EPA reviewed and approved, two criteria
equations for chronic nickel for differing aquatic life uses (see Table
5).

                                   Table 5--Chronic Nickel Criteria Equations
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                       Wisconsin chronic toxicity criteria
      EPA criterion continuous        ([micro]g/L): Cold water, warm water   Wisconsin chronic toxicity criteria
     concentration  ([micro]g/L)       sportfish, warm water  forage fish,   ([micro]g/L):  Limited aquatic life
                                             and limited forage fish
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                CCC = exp(0.846*ln(hardness)) +       CTC = exp(0.846*ln(hardness)) +       CTC
                           0.0584                                .0591                                 .4004
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The equation used by Wisconsin for calculating the chronic nickel
criteria for Cold Water, Warm Water Sportfish, Warm Water Forage Fish,
and Limited Forage Fish designated uses results in a value that is
slightly higher than the resulting criterion from the EPA's equation at
a given hardness. This difference is due to Wisconsin's use of a
slightly different intercept and acute-chronic ratio for the Cladoceran
test data. The equation for the Limited Aquatic Life classification has
a different value for the intercept because data for the fathead
minnow, which are not expected to have a fish community in Limited
Aquatic Life use waters, were not included in the calculation.
    For the Cold Water, Warm Water Sportfish, Warm Water Forage Fish,
and Limited Forage Fish water classifications, Wisconsin's chronic
nickel criteria equation is scientifically defensible and results in
criteria protective of the use and therefore is consistent with CWA
Sections 101(a)(2) and 303(c)(2), and 40 CFR parts 131 and 132. For
Wisconsin's equation for Limited Aquatic Life water classification, the
elimination of data for a non-resident species is an appropriate State-
specific modification of the EPA's equation. Wisconsin's equation is
scientifically sound and results in criteria that are protective of the
use, and is therefore consistent with CWA Sections 101(a)(2) and
303(c)(2), and 40 CFR parts 131 and 132.
5. Chronic Endrin Aquatic Life Criteria Applicable to Cold Water, Warm
Water Sportfish, Warm Water Forage Fish, Limited Forage Fish, and
Limited Aquatic Life Designated Uses
    Wisconsin adopted and the EPA reviewed and approved a chronic
endrin criterion for Cold Water, Warm Water Forage Fish, and Warm Water
Sportfish classifications that is identical to the EPA's criterion in
the Guidance (40 CFR part 132). The criterion is scientifically sound
and protective of the use, therefore this criterion is consistent with
CWA Sections 101(a)(2) and 303(c)(2), and 40 CFR parts 131 and 132 (see
Table 6). However, due to a transcription error, the chronic endrin
aquatic life use criterion for waters designated as Warm Water Forage
Fish and Warm Water Sportfish use published in Wisconsin's regulations
NR 105.06 (0.05 [micro]g/L) is not identical to the criterion that
Wisconsin submitted to the EPA and which the EPA approved (0.036
[micro]g/L). Therefore, the EPA is not withdrawing the federal chronic
endrin criterion for these uses until after Wisconsin concludes
rulemaking to correct the criterion in the State's regulations.

                                  Table 6--Chronic Endrin Aquatic Life Criteria
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                       Wisconsin chronic toxicity criteria
      EPA criterion continuous        ([micro]g/L): Cold water, warm water   Wisconsin chronic toxicity criteria
     concentration  ([micro]g/L)           forage fish, and warm water       ([micro]g/L):  Limited forage fish
                                                    sportfish                     and limited aquatic life
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                           0.036                                 0.036                                 0.050
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Wisconsin's criterion for Limited Forage Fish and Limited Aquatic
Life waters is higher than the EPA's criterion because three of the
four most sensitive genera used to calculate the EPA's criterion do not
exist in these waters in Wisconsin, and were therefore excluded from
the State's calculation. These species are Perca (yellow perch),
Lepomis (bluegill), and micropterus (largemouth bass). Instead,
Wisconsin used data for the following genera for the endrin criterion
calculation for Limited Forage Fish Waters: Pteronarcys (stonefly),
which was also used by the EPA; Cyprinus (carp); Piemphales (fathead
minnow); and Pteronarcella (stonefly). When the fathead minnow data set
was removed from the Limited Aquatic Life calculation, the calculated
criterion was lower than the calculated criterion for Limited Forage
Fish waters. Under Wisconsin's rules NR 105.05(1)(a)(9), when this
occurs, the Limited Aquatic Life criterion can be set equal to the
Limited Forage Fish criterion if the species used to calculate the
Limited Aquatic Life criterion are already included in the database
used to calculate the Limited Forage Fish criterion. Therefore,
Wisconsin established the Limited Aquatic Life criterion for endrin at
a level that provides protection equal to the level for the Limited
Forage Fish criterion.
    Wisconsin's method for deriving the chronic endrin criterion for
Limited Aquatic Life and Limited Forage Fish waters is an acceptable
State-specific modification of the EPA's criterion, consistent with
Wisconsin's methods for deriving criteria (Chapter NR 105 of the WAC).
The criterion is scientifically sound and protective of the use,
therefore this criterion is consistent with CWA Sections 101(a)(2) and
303(c)(2), and 40 CFR parts 131 and 132.
6. Chronic Selenium Aquatic Life Criteria Applicable to Cold Water,
Warm Water Sportfish, Warm Water Forage Fish, Limited Forage Fish, and
Limited Aquatic Life Designated Uses
    The EPA reviewed and approved Wisconsin's revised chronic selenium
criterion for Cold Water, Warm Water Sportfish, and Warm Water Forage
Fish classifications, which are identical to the EPA's chronic selenium
criterion in 40 CFR part 132 (see Table 7). The criterion is
scientifically sound and protective of the uses, and is therefore
consistent with CWA Section 101(a)(2) and 303(c)(2), and 40 CFR parts
131 and 132.

                                 Table 7--Chronic Selenium Aquatic Life Criteria
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                       Wisconsin chronic toxicity criteria   Wisconsin chronic toxicity criteria
      EPA Criterion continuous          ([mu]g/L): Cold water, warm water     ([mu]g/L):  Limited forage fish,
     concentration  ([micro]g/L)       sportfish, warm water  forage fish           limited aquatic life
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                             5.0                                   5.0                                  46.5
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Wisconsin did not adopt the EPA's chronic aquatic life criterion
for selenium, found in 40 CFR Part 132, for Limited Aquatic Life
waters. Wisconsin's basis for this decision is that Limited Aquatic
Life waters only support an invertebrate community, and the EPA's
criterion was based on observed effects of selenium on sportfish
(bluegills) in field studies (Belews Lake, North Carolina, and others).
Instead, Wisconsin calculated a criterion for Limited Aquatic Life
waters based on toxicity studies listed in the EPA's 1987 selenium
aquatic life criteria document (selenite, +4). Wisconsin's value of
46.5 [micro]g/L is slightly different than the EPA's calculated
criterion of 44.72 [micro]g/L, because Wisconsin removed the data for
two saltwater species used in the EPA's calculation.
    Wisconsin's chronic aquatic life selenium criterion of 46.5
[micro]g/L for Limited Aquatic Life waters is consistent with the
protection provided for aquatic life in Limited Aquatic Life waters,
for several reasons. First, two of the three freshwater studies used to
calculate the criterion, in accord with the 1985 Guidelines, were
conducted on invertebrates (Daphnia magna and Daphnia pulex). Wisconsin
followed their State procedures for deriving aquatic life criteria,
using these toxicity studies (Chapter NR 105 of the WAC). Second,
current literature on selenium states: ``The most important aspect of
selenium residues in aquatic food chains is not direct toxicity to the
organisms themselves, but rather the dietary source of selenium they
provide to fish and wildlife species that feed on them''.\1\ In the
case of Limited Aquatic Life waters, there are no fish that feed on the
invertebrates, and there is currently no information available to
determine effects on wildlife from eating these organisms. No new
studies have been conducted with invertebrates that would provide a
scientific basis to refute the 1987 invertebrate toxicity studies
reported in the EPA's 1987 selenium criteria document.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ Lemly, A Dennis. 2002. Selenium Assessment in Aquatic
Ecosystems: A Guide for Hazard Evaluation. Springer Series on
Environmental Management. Page 23.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    For the above reasons, the EPA approved Wisconsin's chronic
selenium criterion for Limited Aquatic Life waters as an acceptable
State-specific modification of the EPA's criterion, consistent with
Wisconsin's methods for deriving criteria. The criterion is
scientifically sound and protective of the use, therefore this
criterion is consistent with CWA Sections 101(a)(2) and 303(c)(2), and
40 CFR Parts 131 and 132.
    Wisconsin did not adopt the EPA's chronic aquatic life selenium
criterion of 5 [micro]g/L, found in 40 CFR Part 132, for Limited Forage
Fish waters. Wisconsin's basis for not adopting the EPA's criterion is
that Limited Forage Fish waters only support forage fish and
invertebrates, and the EPA's criterion was based on observed effects of
selenium on sportfish (bluegill) in field studies. Instead, Wisconsin
calculated a chronic selenium criterion for Limited Forage Fish waters
based on toxicity studies listed in the EPA's 1987

selenium aquatic life criteria document (selenite, +4). The EPA did not
use these laboratory toxicity studies as the final basis for the
recommended national selenium criterion of 5 [micro]g/L because these
studies were based on water column-only exposure to selenium. Given the
available data showing the importance of dietary exposure, the EPA's
criteria recommendations are based on field studies that account for
bioaccumulation through the food chain as the main route of the
exposure. The available data indicate that the primary route of
exposure to all fish species is dietary. Consequently, a water column
exposure-based criterion, such as the criterion adopted by Wisconsin
for Limited Forage Fish waters, may not protect aquatic life in these
waters. Therefore, the EPA did not act on Wisconsin's revised chronic
selenium criterion for Limited Forage Fish waters in its July 1, 2009
action approving the other aquatic life criteria. Because Wisconsin
does not have an EPA-approved chronic aquatic life selenium criterion
for Limited Forage Fish Waters, the EPA is not withdrawing the federal
chronic aquatic life selenium criterion for these waters. Therefore,
the federal criteria for chronic selenium will continue to apply to
Wisconsin's Limited Forage Fish waters.

III. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

A. Executive Order 12866 (Regulatory Planning and Review)

    This action withdraws federal requirements applicable to Wisconsin
and imposes no regulatory requirements or costs on any person or
entity, does not interfere with the action or planned action of another
agency, and does not have any budgetary impacts or raise novel legal or
policy issues. Thus, it has been determined that this rule is not a
``significant regulatory action'' under the terms of Executive Order
12866 (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993) and is therefore not subject to
Office of Management and Budget (OMB) review.

B. Paperwork Reduction Act

    This action does not impose any new information collection burden
because it is administratively withdrawing Federal requirements that
are no longer needed in Wisconsin. It does not include any information
collection, reporting or recordkeeping requirements. However, the OMB
has previously approved the information collection requirements
contained in the existing regulations 40 CFR Part 131 under the
provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act, 44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq. and
has assigned OMB control number 2040-0049. The OMB control numbers for
the EPA's regulations are listed in 40 CFR part 9.

C. Regulatory Flexibility Act

    The Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA) generally requires an agency
to prepare a regulatory flexibility analysis of any rule subject to
notice and comment rulemaking requirements under the Administrative
Procedure Act or any other statute unless the agency certifies that the
rule will not have significant economic impact on a substantial number
of small entities. Small entities include small businesses, small
organizations, and small governmental jurisdictions.
    For purposes of assessing the impacts of this action on small
entities, small entity is defined as: (1) A small business as defined
by the Small Business Administration's (SBA) regulations at 13 CFR
121.201; (2) a small governmental jurisdiction that is a government of
a city, county, town, school district or special district with a
population of less than 50,000; and (3) a small organization that is
any not-for-profit enterprise which is independently owned and operated
and is not dominant in its field.
    This rule imposes no regulatory requirements or costs on any small
entity. Therefore, I certify that this action will not have a
significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities.

D. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act

    Title II of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (UMRA), Public
Law 104-4, establishes requirements for Federal agencies to assess the
effects of their regulatory actions on State, local, and tribal
governments and the private sector. Under UMRA Section 202, the EPA
generally must prepare a written statement, including a cost-benefit
analysis, for proposed and final rules with ``Federal mandates'' that
may result in expenditures to State, local, and tribal governments, in
the aggregate, or to the private sector, of $100 million or more in any
one year. Before promulgating an EPA rule for which a written statement
is needed, UMRA Section 205 generally requires the EPA to identify and
consider a reasonable number of regulatory alternatives and adopt the
least costly, most cost-effective or least burdensome alternative that
achieves the objectives of the rule. The provisions of UMRA Section 205
do not apply when they are inconsistent with applicable law. Moreover,
UMRA Section 205 allows the EPA to adopt an alternative other than the
least costly, most cost-effective or least burdensome alternative if
the Administrator publishes with the final rule an explanation of why
that alternative was not adopted. Before the EPA establishes any
regulatory requirements that may significantly or uniquely affect small
governments, including tribal governments, it must have developed under
UMRA Section 203 a small government agency plan. The plan must provide
for notifying potentially affected small governments, enabling
officials of affected small governments to have meaningful and timely
input in the development of the EPA regulatory proposals with
significant Federal intergovernmental mandates, and informing,
educating, and advising small governments on compliance with the
regulatory requirements.
    This rule contains no Federal mandates (under the regulatory
provisions of Title II of the UMRA) for State, Tribal, or local
governments or the private sector because it imposes no enforceable
duty on any of these entities. Thus, this rule is not subject to the
requirements of UMRA Sections 202 and 205 for a written statement and
small government agency plan. Similarly, the EPA has determined that
this rule contains no regulatory requirements that might significantly
or uniquely affect small governments and is therefore not subject to
UMRA Section 203.

E. Executive Order 13132 (Federalism)

    Executive Order 13132, entitled ``Federalism'' (64 FR 43255, August
10, 1999), requires the EPA to develop an accountable process to ensure
``meaningful and timely input by State and local officials in the
development of regulatory policies that have federalism implications.''
``Policies that have federalism implications'' is defined in the
Executive Order to include regulations that 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.''
    This rule imposes no regulatory requirements or costs on any State
or local governments; therefore, it does not have federalism
implications under Executive Order 13132.

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

    Subject to the Executive Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, November 9,
2000) the EPA may not issue a regulation that has tribal implications,
that imposes substantial direct compliance costs, and that is not
required by statute, unless

the Federal Government provides the funds necessary to pay the direct
compliance costs incurred by tribal governments, or the EPA consults
with tribal officials early in the process of developing the proposed
regulation and develops a tribal summary impact statement.
    The EPA has concluded that this action may have tribal
implications. However, it will neither impose substantial direct
compliance costs on tribal governments, nor preempt Tribal law.
Wisconsin's revised and EPA-approved aquatic life criteria are
identical to, or only slightly less stringent than, the federal
criteria being withdrawn in this rule. In 2009 the EPA determined that
Wisconsin's revised criteria, with the exception of the chronic aquatic
life criterion for selenium in waters designated as Limited Forage Fish
use, adequately protect all waters of the State designated for aquatic
life use at a level consistent with the Guidance and CWA requirements.
Therefore, tribal consultation on this rule is unnecessary.

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

    Executive Order 13045: ``Protection of Children from Environmental
Health Risks and Safety Risks'' (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997) applies
to any rule that: (1) is determined to be ``economically significant''
as defined under Executive Order 12866, and (2) concerns an
environmental health or safety risk that the EPA has reason to believe
may have a disproportionate effect on children. If the regulatory
action meets both criteria, the Agency must evaluate the environmental
health or safety effects of the planned rule on children, and explain
why the planned regulation is preferable to other potentially effective
and reasonably feasible alternatives considered by the Agency.
    This rule is not subject to Executive Order 13045 because it is not
economically significant and the EPA has no reason to believe the
environmental health or safety risks addressed by this action present a
disproportionate risk to children.

H. Executive Order 13211 (Actions That Significantly Affect Energy
Supply, Distribution, or Use)

    This rule is not subject to Executive Order 13211, ``Actions
Concerning Regulations That Significantly Affect Energy Supply,
Distribution, or Use'' (66 FR 28355, May 22, 2001), because it is not a
significant regulatory action under Executive Order 12866.

I. National Technology Transfer Advancement Act

    Section 12(d) of the National Technology Transfer and Advancement
Act of 1995 (NTTAA), Public Law 104-113, 12(d)(15 U.S.C. 272 note)
directs the EPA to use voluntary consensus standards in its regulatory
activities unless to do so would be inconsistent with applicable law or
otherwise impractical. Voluntary consensus standards are technical
standards (e.g., materials specifications, test methods, sampling
procedures, and business practices) that are developed or adopted by
voluntary consensus standards bodies. The NTTAA directs the EPA to
provide Congress, through OMB, explanations when the Agency decides not
to use available and applicable voluntary consensus standards.
    This rulemaking does not involve technical standards. Therefore,
the EPA is not considering the use of any voluntary consensus
standards.

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

    Executive Order 12898 (59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994) establishes
federal executive policy on environmental justice. Its main provision
directs federal agencies, to the greatest extent practicable and
permitted by law, to make environmental justice part of their mission
by identifying and addressing, as appropriate, disproportionately high
and adverse human health or environmental effects of their programs,
policies, and activities on minority populations and low-income
populations in the United States.
    The EPA has determined that this rule will not have
disproportionately high and adverse human health or environmental
effects on minority or low-income populations for several reasons.
First, this rule pertains to aquatic life use criteria only which,
based on current science and the EPA's CWA Section 304(a) recommended
criteria, the EPA has previously determined are protective of the
applicable aquatic life designated uses. Second, Wisconsin's revised
and EPA-approved aquatic life criteria apply to all waters in the State
designated for certain aquatic life uses. For these reasons, the EPA
believes that this action will not disproportionately affect any one
group over another in the State of Wisconsin.

K. Congressional Review Act

    The Congressional Review Act, 5 U.S.C. 801 et seq., as added by the
Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996, generally
provides that before a rule may take effect, the agency promulgating
the rule must submit a rule report, which includes a copy of the rule,
to each House of the Congress and to the Comptroller General of the
United States. The EPA will submit a report containing this rule and
other required information to the U.S. Senate, the U.S. House of
Representatives, and the Comptroller General of the United States prior
to publication of the rule in the Federal Register. A ``major rule''
cannot take effect until 60 days after it is published in the Federal
Register, however this action is not a ``major rule'' as defined by 5
U.S.C. 804(2). This rule will become effective 30 days after
publication in the Federal Register as provided under the
Administrative Procedure Act.

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 132

    Environmental protection, Administrative practice and procedure,
Great Lakes, Indian lands, Intergovernmental relations, Reporting and
recordkeeping requirements, Water pollution control.

    Dated: September 8, 2011.
Lisa P. Jackson,
Administrator.
    For the reasons set out in the preamble, 40 CFR part 132 is amended
as follows:

PART 132--WATER QUALITY GUIDANCE FOR THE GREAT LAKES SYSTEM

0
1. The authority citation for 40 CFR part 132 continues to read as
follows:

    Authority:  33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.

0
2. In Sec.  132.6 paragraphs (f) and (g) are revised to read as
follows:

Sec.  132.6  Application of part 132 requirements in Great Lakes States
and Tribes.

* * * * *
    (f) Effective December 6, 2000, the chronic aquatic life criterion
for endrin in Table 2 of this part shall apply to the waters of the
Great Lakes System in the State of Wisconsin designated by Wisconsin as
Warm Water Sportfish and Warm Water Forage Fish aquatic life use.
    (g) Effective February 5, 2001, the chronic aquatic life criterion
for selenium in Table 2 of this part shall apply to the waters of the
Great Lakes System in the State of Wisconsin

designated by Wisconsin as Limited Forage Fish aquatic life use.
* * * * *
[FR Doc. 2011-23817 Filed 9-15-11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


[Federal Register Volume 81, Number 160 (Thursday, August 18, 2016)]
[Notices]
[Pages 55185-55186]
[FR Doc No: 2016-19752]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Docket No. CP16-488-000]

Natural Gas Pipeline Company of America, LLC; Notice of
Application

    Take notice that on August 1, 2016, Natural Gas Pipeline Company of
America, LLC (Natural), 3250 Lacey Road, Suite 700, Downers Grove, IL
60515, filed an application under sections 7(b) and 7(c) of the Natural
Gas

Act (NGA), and Part 157 of the Commission's regulations, requesting
authorization to construct and operate a new compressor station and
associated pipeline lateral located in Cass County, Texas (Gulf Coast
Expansion Project). Natural is also requesting authorization to abandon
two compressor units at its Compressor Station 301 in Wharton County,
Texas, all as more fully set forth in the application which is on file
with the Commission and open for public inspection.
    Natural proposes to provide long-term firm transportation service
to two shippers that have subscribed to the capacity created by the
Project. The Project capacity is developed through the integration of
existing capacity and expansion capacity of 240,000 Dth/day which will
enable Natural to transport 460,000 Dth per day of natural gas supplies
to an existing delivery point and a new delivery point in the South
Texas Gulf Coast area. The project shippers have elected negotiated
rates. Natural proposes to construct a new 15,900 horsepower compressor
station on its Gulf Coast Line, and a new 4,000-foot, 30-inch lateral
to connect the proposed compressor to Natural's existing A/G Line.
Natural also proposes to abandon 5,600 hp of existing compression on
its system. Total cost of the project is $69,399,000.
    The filing may also be viewed on the Web at 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. For
assistance, please contact FERC at<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or toll
free at<PHONE_NUMBER>, or TTY,<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    Any questions regarding the proposed project should be directed to
Bruce H. Newsome, Vice President, Natural Gas Pipeline Company of
America, LLC, 3250 Lacey Road, Suite 700, Downers Grove, IL 60515, or
by calling<PHONE_NUMBER> (telephone) or email at
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>    Pursuant to Section 157.9 of the Commission's rules, 18 CFR 157.9,
within 90 days of this Notice the Commission staff will either:
Complete its environmental assessment (EA) and place it into the
Commission's public record (eLibrary) for this proceeding; or issue a
Notice of Schedule for Environmental Review. If a Notice of Schedule
for Environmental Review is issued, it will indicate, among other
milestones, the anticipated date for the Commission staff's issuance of
the final environmental impact statement (FEIS) or EA for this
proposal. The filing of the EA in the Commission's public record for
this proceeding or the issuance of a Notice of Schedule for
Environmental Review will serve to notify federal and state agencies of
the timing for the completion of all necessary reviews, and the
subsequent need to complete all federal authorizations within 90 days
of the date of issuance of the Commission staff's FEIS or EA.
    There are two ways to become involved in the Commission's review of
this project. First, any person wishing to obtain legal status by
becoming a party to the proceedings for this project should, on or
before the comment date stated below, file with the Federal Energy
Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street NE., Washington, DC 20426, a
motion to intervene in accordance with the requirements of the
Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedure (18 CFR 385.214 or
385.211) and the Regulations under the NGA (18 CFR 157.10). A person
obtaining party status will be placed on the service list maintained by
the Secretary of the Commission and will receive copies of all
documents filed by the applicant and by all other parties. A party must
submit 7 copies of filings made with the Commission and must mail a
copy to the applicant and to every other party in the proceeding. Only
parties to the proceeding can ask for court review of Commission orders
in the proceeding.
    However, a person does not have to intervene in order to have
comments considered. The second way to participate is by filing with
the Secretary of the Commission, as soon as possible, an original and
two copies of comments in support of or in opposition to this project.
The Commission will consider these comments in determining the
appropriate action to be taken, but the filing of a comment alone will
not serve to make the filer a party to the proceeding. The Commission's
rules require that persons filing comments in opposition to the project
provide copies of their protests only to the party or parties directly
involved in the protest.
    Persons who wish to comment only on the environmental review of
this project should submit an original and two copies of their comments
to the Secretary of the Commission. Environmental commenters will be
placed on the Commission's environmental mailing list, will receive
copies of the environmental documents, and will be notified of meetings
associated with the Commission's environmental review process.
Environmental commenters will not be required to serve copies of filed
documents on all other parties. However, the non-party commenters will
not receive copies of all documents filed by other parties or issued by
the Commission (except for the mailing of environmental documents
issued by the Commission) and will not have the right to seek court
review of the Commission's final order.
    The Commission strongly encourages electronic filings of comments,
protests and interventions in lieu of paper using the ``eFiling'' link
at http://www.ferc.gov. Persons unable to file electronically should
submit an original and 5 copies of the protest or intervention to the
Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street NE., Washington,
DC 20426.
    Comment Date: September 2, 2016.

    Dated: August 12, 2016.
Kimberly D. Bose,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2016-19752 Filed 8-17-16; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 85, Number 57 (Tuesday, March 24, 2020)]
[Notices]
[Pages 16621-16622]
[FR Doc No: 2020-06138]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Docket No. RM19-12-000]

Revisions to the Filing Process for Commission Forms;
Supplemental Notice of Technical Conference

    This Supplemental Notice establishes the agenda for the technical
conference to be held March 24 through March 26, 2020, beginning each
day at 9:00 a.m. Eastern Time, related to the use of XBRL for form
submissions. This conference will be held electronically via webcast.
The details for participating are detailed below. The agenda outlines
the topics and specific forms to be discussed on each day.
    On January 13, 2020, a notice was issued in the above-captioned
proceeding announcing that a technical conference would be rescheduled
and held on March 24 through March 26, 2020. On March 13, 2020, a
notice was issued announcing that the technical conference will no
longer be an in-person conference. All interested

persons are invited to participate and access the conference via
webcast using the instructions outlined below.
    During the conference, Commission staff will discuss the draft FERC
XBRL Taxonomy and related documents, which are available on the eForms
Refresh website at https://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/forms/forms-refresh.asp, as well as issues related to the transition to XBRL,
including the implementation schedule. In addition, a revised FERC XBRL
Taxonomy, with revisions based on the comments received through the
Yeti review tool, will be released on the FERC XBRL Forms Refresh
website prior to the commencement of the technical conference and will
be discussed at the conference. Commission staff requests that
suggestions for other discussion topics be emailed to
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>    All people interested in participating in the conference must
register at the following link: https://www.ferc.gov/whats-new/registration/03-24-20-form.asp by no later than noon on March 23, 2020.
There is no registration fee. This registration will help facilitate
hosting the conference via webcast. Anyone with internet access can
join the meeting by navigating to the Calendar of Events on
www.ferc.gov, locating the Revisions to the Filing Process for
Commission Forms Technical Conference on the Calendar, and clicking on
the link to the webcast. The webcast will allow persons to view the
technical conference presentations; however, attendees will need to
dial in by phone to access a conference line for the audio. Please
follow the instructions that will be available by using the link to the
technical conference when it is published on www.ferc.gov, or by using
the eForms Refresh website at https://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/forms/forms-refresh.asp. Also, to enable the presentations to be heard
clearly by all participants, please place your individual phone on mute
immediately upon dialing in to the conference call number. All
interested parties can email questions during the conference to
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Commission staff will address questions to
the extent possible during the presentations or respond to the
questions after the conference via email.
    Following this online technical conference, if the Commission
considers it necessary to schedule an additional conference, another
notice will be issued to announce such a conference. Participants will
be able to file comments in the above-captioned docket following the
technical conference.
    The conference will be transcribed. Transcripts will be available
immediately for a fee from Ace Reporting<PHONE_NUMBER>).
    Commission conferences are accessible under section 508 of the
Rehabilitation Act of 1973. For accessibility accommodations, please
send an email to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or call toll free 1-866-208-
3372 (voice) or<PHONE_NUMBER> (TTY), or send a fax to<PHONE_NUMBER> with
the requirement accommodations.
    For more information about this technical conference, please
contact Robert Hudson at<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or<PHONE_NUMBER>, or
email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>For information related to logistics,
please contact Sarah McKinley at<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or (202) 502-
8368.

    Dated: March 18, 2020.
Kimberly D. Bose,
Secretary.

Revisions to the Filing Process for Commission Forms

Technical Conference

Commission Meeting Room

Tuesday, March 24, 2020, 9:00 a.m.-5:00 p.m.

Agenda
9:00 a.m.-5:00 p.m.
    Introduction and General Demonstration
    eForms System and Common Items Between eForms
    Form Nos. 1, 1-F, 3-Q (Electric)
     Format Enhancements
     Implementation Timeline
     Comments and Inquiries Received through Yeti
     Questions Emailed to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
Wednesday, March 25, 2020, 9:00 a.m.-5:00 p.m.

Agenda
9:00 a.m.-5:00 p.m.
    Introduction
    Continuation of Form Nos. 1, 1-F, 3-Q (Electric) Discussion (if
needed)
    Form No. 60
     Company Registration and Company Identifiers
     Format Enhancements
     Implementation Timeline
     Comments and Inquiries Received through Yeti
     Questions Emailed to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>    Form No. 714
     Company Registration and Company Identifiers
     Format Enhancements
     Implementation Timeline
     Questions Emailed to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
Thursday, March 26, 2020, 9:00 a.m.-5:00 p.m.

Agenda
9:00 a.m.-5:00 p.m.
    Introduction
    Form Nos. 2, 2-A, 3-Q (Natural Gas)
     Format Enhancements
     Implementation Timeline
     Comments and Inquiries Received through Yeti
     Questions Emailed to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>    Form Nos. 6, 6-Q
     Format Enhancements
     Implementation Timeline
     Comments and Inquiries Received through Yeti
     Questions Emailed to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
[FR Doc. 2020-06138 Filed 3-23-20; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 80, Number 157 (Friday, August 14, 2015)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Page 48689]
[FR Doc No: 2015-20117]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Coast Guard

33 CFR Part 117

[Docket No. USCG-2015-0710]

Drawbridge Operation Regulation; Narrow Bay, Suffolk County, NY

AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS.

ACTION: Notice of deviation from drawbridge regulation.

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

SUMMARY: The Coast Guard has issued a temporary deviation from the
operating schedule that governs the operation of the Smith Point Bridge
across Narrow Bay, mile 6.1, at Suffolk County, New York. This
deviation is necessary to accommodate the 5K Run for Literacy. This
deviation allows the bridge to remain in the closed position for one
hour.

DATES: This deviation is effective from 9 a.m. through 10 a.m. on
September 12, 2015.

ADDRESSES: The docket for this deviation, [USCG-2015-0710] is available
at http://www.regulations.gov. Type the docket number in the ``SEARCH''
box and click ``SEARCH.'' Click on Open Docket Folder on the line
associated with this deviation. You may also visit the Docket
Management Facility in Room W12-140, on the ground floor of the
Department of Transportation West Building, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE.,
Washington, DC 20590, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday,
except Federal holidays.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: If you have questions on this
temporary deviation, call or email Ms. Judy K. Leung-Yee, Project
Officer, First Coast Guard District, telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>,
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>If you have questions on viewing the docket,
call Ms. Cheryl Collins, Program Manager, Docket Operations, telephone
(202) 366-9826.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The Smith Point Bridge, mile 6.1, across
Narrow Bay, has a vertical clearance in the closed position of 18 feet
at mean high water and 19 feet at mean low water. The existing bridge
operating regulations are found at 33 CFR 117.799(d).
    The waterway is transited by seasonal recreational vessels of
various sizes.
    The Community Family Literacy Project, Inc. requested a temporary
deviation from the normal operating schedule to facilitate the 5K Run
for Literacy.
    Under this temporary deviation the Smith Point Bridge may remain in
the closed position for one hour between 9 a.m. and 10 a.m. on Saturday
September 12, 2015.
    There are no alternate routes for vessel traffic; however, vessels
that can pass under the closed draws during this closure may do so at
all times. The bridge may be opened in the event of an emergency.
    The Coast Guard will inform the users of the waterways through our
Local and Broadcast Notice to Mariners of the change in operating
schedule for the bridge so that vessels can arrange their transits to
minimize any impact caused by the temporary deviation.
    In accordance with 33 CFR 117.35(e), the drawbridge must return to
its regular operating schedule immediately at the end of the effective
period of this temporary deviation. This deviation from the operating
regulations is authorized under 33 CFR 117.35.

    Dated: August 5, 2015.
C.J. Bisignano,
Supervisory Bridge Management Specialist, First Coast Guard District.
[FR Doc. 2015-20117 Filed 8-13-15; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 9110-04-P


[Federal Register Volume 85, Number 103 (Thursday, May 28, 2020)]
[Notices]
[Pages 32040-32041]
[FR Doc No: 2020-11455]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES

Food and Drug Administration

[Docket No. FDA-2018-D-1398]

Mitigation Strategies to Protect Food Against Intentional
Adulteration; Draft Guidance for Industry; Extension of the Comment
Period

AGENCY: Food and Drug Administration, HHS.

ACTION: Notice of availability; extension of comment period

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

SUMMARY: The Food and Drug Administration (FDA, we, or the Agency) is
extending the comment period for the notice of availability that
appeared in the Federal Register of February 14, 2020, entitled
``Mitigation Strategies to Protect Food Against Intentional
Adulteration; Draft Guidance for Industry.'' This supplemental draft
guidance document, when finalized, will help food facilities that
manufacture, process, pack, or hold food, and that are required to
register under the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act comply with the
requirements of our regulation entitled ``Mitigation Strategies to
Protect Food Against Intentional Adulteration.'' FDA is taking this
action in response to a request for an extension to allow interested
persons additional time to submit comments.

DATES: FDA is extending the comment period on the notice of
availability published February 14, 2020 (85 FR 8599). Submit either
electronic or written comments on the supplemental draft guidance by
August 14, 2020.

ADDRESSES: You may submit comments on any guidance at any time as
follows:

Electronic Submissions

    Submit electronic comments in the following way:
     Federal eRulemaking Portal: https://www.regulations.gov.
Follow the instructions for submitting comments. Comments submitted
electronically, including attachments, to https://www.regulations.gov
will be posted to the docket unchanged. Because your comment will be
made public, you are solely responsible for ensuring that your comment
does not include any confidential information that you or a third party
may not wish to be posted, such as medical information, your or anyone
else's Social Security number, or confidential business information,
such as a manufacturing process. Please note that if you include your
name, contact information, or other information that identifies you in
the body of your comments, that information will be posted on https://www.regulations.gov.
     If you want to submit a comment with confidential
information that you do not wish to be made available to the public,
submit the comment as a written/paper submission and in the manner
detailed (see ``Written/Paper Submissions'' and ``Instructions'').

Written/Paper Submissions

    Submit written/paper submissions as follows:
     Mail/Hand Delivery/Courier (for written/paper
submissions): Dockets Management Staff (HFA-305), Food and Drug
Administration, 5630 Fishers Lane, Rm. 1061, Rockville, MD 20852.
     For written/paper comments submitted to the Dockets
Management Staff, FDA will post your comment, as well as any
attachments, except for information submitted, marked and identified,
as confidential, if submitted as detailed in ``Instructions.''
    Instructions: All submissions received must include the Docket No.
FDA-2018-D-1398 for ``Mitigation Strategies to Protect Food Against
Intentional Adulteration: Supplemental Draft Guidance for Industry.''
Received comments will be placed in the docket and, except for those
submitted as ``Confidential Submissions,'' publicly viewable at https://www.regulations.gov or at the Dockets Management Staff between 9 a.m.
and 4 p.m., Monday through Friday.
     Confidential Submissions--To submit a comment with
confidential information that you do not wish to be made publicly
available, submit your comments only as a written/paper submission. You
should submit two copies total. One copy will include the information
you claim to be confidential with a heading or cover note that states
``THIS DOCUMENT CONTAINS CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION.'' The Agency will
review this copy, including the claimed confidential information, in
its consideration of comments. The second copy, which will have the
claimed confidential information redacted/blacked out, will be
available for public viewing and posted on https://www.regulations.gov.
Submit both copies to the Dockets Management Staff. If you do not wish
your name and contact information to be made publicly available, you
can provide this information on the cover sheet and not in the body of
your comments and you must identify this information as
``confidential.'' Any information marked as ``confidential'' will not
be disclosed except in accordance with 21 CFR 10.20 and other
applicable disclosure law. For more information about FDA's posting of
comments to public dockets, see 80 FR 56469, September 18, 2015, or
access the information at: https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/FR-2015-09-18/pdf/2015-23389.pdf.
    Docket: For access to the docket to read background documents or
the electronic and written/paper comments received, go to https://www.regulations.gov and insert the docket number, found in brackets in
the heading of this document, into the ``Search'' box and follow the
prompts and/or go to the Dockets Management Staff, 5630 Fishers Lane,
Rm. 1061, Rockville, MD 20852,<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    You may submit comments on any guidance at any time (see 21 CFR
10.115(g)(5)).
    Submit written requests for single copies of the guidance to the
Center for Food Safety and Applied Nutrition, Food and Drug
Administration, 5001 Campus Dr., College Park, MD 20740. Send two self-
addressed adhesive labels to assist that office in processing your
requests. See the SUPPLEMENTARY

INFORMATION section for electronic access to the draft guidance
document.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ryan Newkirk, Center for Food Safety
and Applied Nutrition (HFS-005), Food and Drug Administration, 5001
Campus Dr., College Park, MD 20740,<PHONE_NUMBER>,
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: In the Federal Register of February 14, 2020
(85 FR 8599), we published a notice announcing the availability of a
supplemental draft guidance for industry entitled ``Mitigation
Strategies to Protect Food Against Intentional Adulteration: Draft
Guidance for Industry.'' This multichapter supplemental draft guidance
for industry is intended to help food facilities required to comply,
develop, and implement some of the components of a food defense plan,
and meet other requirements under 21 CFR part 121.
    The Agency has received a request for an extension of the comment
period for 120 days. The request conveyed concern that the current
comment period does not allow sufficient time to develop a
comprehensive response.
    FDA has considered the request and is extending the comment period
for the notice of availability for 60 days, until August 14, 2020. The
Agency believes that a 60-day extension allows adequate time for
interested persons to submit comments.

    Dated: May 21, 2020.
Lowell J. Schiller,
Principal Associate Commissioner for Policy.
[FR Doc. 2020-11455 Filed 5-27-20; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4164-01-P


? Need to return call by / at/ between and . Signature: Project No.: 0<IP_ADDRESS>   DISTRIBUTION Page ___ of _

Project Name: 304( m)

TELEPHONE CALL RECORD Outgoing Call Date: 2/ 15/ 05 Time: 10: 15 am Company Name: Vonroll VTI East Liverpool, OH Contact Name: Becky Dalrymple Phone No.: ( 330) 386 2182 Name: TJ Finseth Eastern Research Group GENERAL SUBJECT : Vonroll East Liverpool Benzidine discharges in TRI 2002.

TOPICS DISCUSSED AND ACTION TAKEN On Monday January 24, 2005 at 2: 45 pm I left a message with Raymond Wayne requesting him to call me back.

On Monday January 24, 2005 at 4: 30 pm I was contacted by Ms. Becky Dalrymple. I asked Ms. Dalrymple about the benzidine releases and she said that she would have to get back to me. I asked her why the benzidine was reported as 100% stormwater and she told me that the only water discharged from the facility is stormwater.

On Monday February 7, 2005 at 2: 45 pm I contacted Ms. Dalrymple, and reminded her that I was still waiting for the information about the benzidine releases.

On Monday February 14, 2005 at 3: 10 pm I left a message on Ms. Dalrymple's machine reminding her that I was still waiting for the information about the benzidine releases.

On Tuesday February 15, 2005 at 10: 00 am, Ms. Dalrymple left a message on my machine telling me that she had the information that I was looking for.

On Tuesday February 15, 2005 at 10: 15 am, I contacted Ms. Dalrymple. Ms. Dalrymple told me that the benzidine release was reported as release code ` B', ( 11 499), which results in a value of 250. Ms. Dalrymple told me that the actual value was 16.68 lbs. She also told me that benzidine was never detected and that the 16.68 value was based on the detection limit ( 50 µ g/ L) and the stormwater flow.


[Federal Register Volume 76, Number 55 (Tuesday, March 22, 2011)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 15823-15825]
[FR Doc No: 2011-5771]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. FAA-2010-0703; Directorate Identifier 2010-NM-040-AD;
Amendment 39-16633; AD 2011-06-08]
RIN 2120-AA64

Airworthiness Directives; Bombardier, Inc. Model CL-600-2B19
(Regional Jet Series 100 & 440) Airplanes, CL-600-2C10 (Regional Jet
Series 700, 701, & 702) Airplanes, CL-600-2D15 (Regional Jet Series
705) Airplanes, and CL-600-2D24 (Regional Jet Series 900) Airplanes

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

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: We are adopting a new airworthiness directive (AD) for the
products listed above. This AD results from mandatory continuing
airworthiness information (MCAI) originated by an aviation authority of
another country to identify and correct an unsafe condition on an
aviation product. The MCAI describes the unsafe condition as:

    There have been failures of the harness assembly (power feeder
wires) connecting the Air-Driven Generator (ADG) to the aeroplane
electrical system, in the area close to the ADG cannon plug. Several
electrical wires were found cut as a combined result of corrosion
and bending stress from the harness mounting to the ADG.
    The ADG electrical wires are insulated with a silver-plating for
corrosion protection. It has been determined that the silver-plating
of wire strands in the area of tight bend is highly susceptible to
breakdown. The plating layer may crack as a result of mechanical
stress, and consequently lead to the onset of corrosion on all, or a
majority, of the wire strands.
    In the event of a damaged harness assembly, the ADG may not be
able to provide emergency electrical power to the aeroplane. * * *

We are issuing this AD to require actions to correct the unsafe
condition on these products.

DATES: This AD becomes effective April 26, 2011.
    The Director of the Federal Register approved the incorporation by
reference of certain publications listed in this AD as of April 26,
2011.

ADDRESSES: You may examine the AD docket on the Internet at http://www.regulations.gov or in person at the U.S. Department of
Transportation, Docket Operations, M-30, West Building Ground Floor,
Room W12-140, 1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE., Washington, DC.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Assata Dessaline, Aerospace Engineer,
Avionics and Flight Test Branch, ANE-172, FAA, New York Aircraft
Certification Office, 1600 Stewart Avenue, Suite 410, Westbury, New
York 11590; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Discussion

    We issued a notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) to amend 14 CFR
part 39 to include an AD that would apply to the specified products.
That NPRM was published in the Federal Register on August 5, 2010 (75
FR 47249). That NPRM proposed to correct an unsafe condition for the
specified products. The MCAI states:

    There have been failures of the harness assembly (power feeder
wires) connecting the Air-Driven Generator (ADG) to the aeroplane
electrical system, in the area close to the ADG cannon plug. Several
electrical wires were found cut as a combined result of corrosion
and bending stress from the harness mounting to the ADG.
    The ADG electrical wires are insulated with a silver-plating for
corrosion protection. It has been determined that the silver-plating
of wire strands in the area of tight bend is highly susceptible to
breakdown. The plating layer may crack as a result of mechanical
stress, and consequently lead to the onset of corrosion on all, or a
majority, of the wire strands.
    In the event of a damaged harness assembly, the ADG may not be
able to provide emergency electrical power to the aeroplane. This
directive is issued to correct the identified unsafe condition by
requiring [the modification of the ADG, which includes] the
replacement of the harness assembly with tin-plated electrical
wires, [the replacement of the backshell,] and the re-orientation of
the ADG cannon plug to reduce bending stress.

You may obtain further information by examining the MCAI in the AD
docket.

Updated Relevant Service Information

    We have received Bombardier Service Bulletin 601R-24-128, Revision
C, dated May 14, 2010. In the NPRM we referred to Bombardier Service
Bulletin 601R-24-128, Revision A, dated November 27, 2009, as the
source of service information for doing the required actions on certain
models affected by this AD. Revision C of that service bulletin makes
certain editorial changes. We have revised paragraph (g)(1) of this AD
to specify Revision C of that service bulletin, and revised paragraph
(h) of this AD to give credit for having done Bombardier Service
Bulletin 601R-24-128, Revision A, dated November 27, 2009, and Revision
B, dated April 16, 2010, prior to the effective date of this AD.

Comments

    We gave the public the opportunity to participate in developing
this AD. We considered the comment received.

Request To Shorten Compliance Time

    Air Line Pilots Association, International (ALPA) requested that
the compliance time of 72 months be reduced to 36 months, because the
corrective action only requires 8 work-hours to complete and ALPA
believes that 72 months is too long to comply with the AD based on the
importance of this modification.
    We do not agree with the request for a shorter compliance time. In
developing the compliance time, we determined that the compliance time
of 72 months or 6,000 flight hours, whichever occurs first, is
appropriate in consideration of the safety implications, the average
utilization rate of the affected fleet, the practical aspects of an
orderly inspection of the fleet during regular maintenance periods, and
the availability of required modification parts. In addition, our
compliance time corresponds with the 72-month compliance time of the
parallel AD issued by Transport Canada Civil Aviation (TCCA). We have
not changed the AD in this regard.

Change to Applicability in This Final Rule

    We received notice from Bombardier, Inc. and TCCA that certain
airplanes identified in the NPRM have had the actions specified by this
AD already incorporated in production, and therefore are not affected
by the identified unsafe condition. Specifically, Model CL-600-2B19
(Regional Jet Series 100 & 440) airplanes, serial numbers 8108 through
8111 have had the actions incorporated. We have reduced the
applicability in paragraph (c)(1) of this AD accordingly.

Conclusion

    We reviewed the available data, including the comment received, and
determined that air safety and the public interest require adopting the
AD with the changes described previously. We determined that these
changes will not increase the economic burden on any operator or
increase the scope of the AD.

Differences Between This AD and the MCAI or Service Information

    We have reviewed the MCAI and related service information and, in
general, agree with their substance. But we might have found it
necessary to use different words from those in the MCAI to ensure the
AD is clear for U.S. operators and is enforceable. In making these
changes, we do not intend to differ substantively from the information
provided in the MCAI and related service information.
    We might also have required different actions in this AD from those
in the MCAI in order to follow our FAA policies. Any such differences
are highlighted in a NOTE within the AD.

Costs of Compliance

    We estimate that this AD will affect 920 products of U.S. registry.
We also estimate that it will take 8 work-hours per product to comply
with the basic requirements of this AD. The average labor rate is $85
per work-hour. Required parts will cost about $1,881 per product. Where
the service information lists required parts costs that are covered
under warranty, we have assumed that there will be no charge for these
parts. As we do not control warranty coverage for affected parties,
some parties may incur costs higher than estimated here. Based on these
figures, we estimate the cost of this AD to the U.S. operators to be
$2,356,120, or $2,561 per product.

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

Examining the AD Docket

    You may examine the AD docket on the Internet at http://www.regulations.gov; or in person at the Docket Operations office
between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal
holidays. The AD docket contains the NPRM, the regulatory evaluation,
any comments received, and other information. The street address for
the Docket Operations office (telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>) is in the
ADDRESSES section. Comments will be available in the AD docket shortly
after receipt.

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

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 FAA amends Sec.  39.13 by adding the following new AD:

2011-06-08 Bombardier, Inc.: Amendment 39-16633. Docket No. FAA-
2010-0703; Directorate Identifier 2010-NM-040-AD.

Effective Date

    (a) This airworthiness directive (AD) becomes effective April
26, 2011.

Affected ADs

    (b) None.

Applicability

    (c) This AD applies to the airplanes identified in paragraphs
(c)(1), (c)(2), and (c)(3) of this AD, certificated in any category.
    (1) Bombardier, Inc. Model CL-600-2B19 (Regional Jet Series 100
& 440) airplanes, serial numbers 7305 through 7990 inclusive, and
8000 through 8107 inclusive.
    (2) Bombardier, Inc. Model CL-600-2C10 (Regional Jet Series 700,
701, & 702) airplanes, serial numbers 10003 through 10302 inclusive.
    (3) Bombardier, Inc. Model CL-600-2D15 (Regional Jet Series 705)
and CL-600-2D24 (Regional Jet Series 900) airplanes, serial numbers
15001 through 15259 inclusive.

Subject

    (d) Air Transport Association (ATA) of America Code 24:
Electrical power.

Reason

    (e) The mandatory continuing airworthiness information (MCAI)
states:

    There have been failures of the harness assembly (power feeder
wires) connecting the Air-Driven Generator (ADG) to the aeroplane
electrical system, in the area close to the ADG cannon plug. Several
electrical wires were found cut as a combined result of corrosion
and bending stress from the harness mounting to the ADG.
    The ADG electrical wires are insulated with a silver-plating for
corrosion protection. It has been determined that the silver-plating
of wire strands in the area of tight bend is highly susceptible to
breakdown. The plating layer may crack as a result of mechanical
stress, and consequently lead to the onset of corrosion on all, or a
majority, of the wire strands.
    In the event of a damaged harness assembly, the ADG may not be
able to provide emergency electrical power to the aeroplane. * * *

Compliance

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

Actions

    (g) Within 6,000 flight hours or 72 months after the effective
date of this AD, whichever occurs first, do the applicable actions
specified in paragraph (g)(1) or (g)(2) of this AD.
    (1) For Model CL-600-2B19 (Regional Jet Series 100 & 440)
airplanes: Modify the air-driven generator (ADG) in accordance with
the Accomplishment Instructions of Bombardier Service Bulletin 601R-
24-128, Revision C, dated May 14, 2010.
    (2) For Model CL-600-2C10 (Regional Jet Series 700, 701, & 702),
CL-600-2D15 (Regional Jet Series 705), and CL-600-2D24 (Regional Jet
Series 900) airplanes: Modify the ADG in accordance with the
Accomplishment Instructions of Bombardier Service Bulletin 670BA-24-
027, dated September 17, 2009.

Credit for Actions Accomplished in Accordance With Previous Service
Information

    (h) Actions accomplished before the effective date of this AD in
accordance with the Bombardier service bulletins identified in Table
1 of this AD are considered acceptable for compliance with the
corresponding action specified in this AD.

                                        Table 1--Credit Service Bulletins
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
     Bombardier Service Bulletin--                   Revision--                            Dated--
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
601R-24-128...........................  Original...........................  September 17, 2009.
601R-24-128...........................  A..................................  November 27, 2009.
601R-24-128...........................  B..................................  April 16, 2010.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

FAA AD Differences

    Note 1: This AD differs from the MCAI and/or service information
as follows: The Canadian airworthiness directive includes Model CL-
600-2B19 airplanes having serial numbers 8108 through 8111 in the
applicability. This AD does not apply to those airplanes.

Other FAA AD Provisions

    (i) The following provisions also apply to this AD:
    (1) Alternative Methods of Compliance (AMOCs): The Manager, New
York Aircraft Certification Office (ACO), ANE-170, FAA, has the
authority to approve AMOCs for this AD, if requested using the
procedures found in 14 CFR 39.19. Send information to ATTN: Program
Manager, Continuing Operational Safety, FAA, New York ACO, 1600
Stewart Avenue, Suite 410, Westbury, New York, 11590; telephone 516-
228-7300; fax<PHONE_NUMBER>. Before using any approved AMOC, notify
your appropriate principal inspector, or lacking a principal
inspector, the manager of the local flight standards district
office/certificate holding district office. The AMOC approval letter
must specifically reference this AD.
    (2) Airworthy Product: For any requirement in this AD to obtain
corrective actions from a manufacturer or other source, use these
actions if they are FAA-approved. Corrective actions are considered
FAA-approved if they are approved by the State of Design Authority
(or their delegated agent). You are required to assure the product
is airworthy before it is returned to service.

Related Information

    (j) Refer to MCAI Canadian Airworthiness Directive CF-2009-47,
dated December 14, 2009; Bombardier Service Bulletin 601R-24-128,
Revision C, dated May 14, 2010; and Bombardier Service Bulletin
670BA-24-027, dated September 17, 2009; for related information.

Material Incorporated by Reference

    (k) You must use Bombardier Service Bulletin 601R-24-128,
Revision C, dated May 14, 2010; or Bombardier Service Bulletin
670BA-24-027, dated September 17, 2009; as applicable; to do the
actions required by this AD, unless the AD specifies otherwise.
    (1) The Director of the Federal Register approved the
incorporation by reference of this service information under 5
U.S.C. 552(a) and 1 CFR part 51.
    (2) For service information identified in this AD, contact
Bombardier, Inc., 400 C[ocirc]te-Vertu Road West, Dorval,
Qu[eacute]bec H4S 1Y9, Canada; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax 514-855-
7401; e-mail<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Internet http://www.bombardier.com.
    (3) You may review copies of the service information at the FAA,
Transport Airplane Directorate, 1601 Lind Avenue, SW., Renton,
Washington. For information on the availability of this material at
the FAA, call<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    (4) You may also review copies of the service information that
is incorporated by reference 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/code_of_federal_regulations/ibr_locations.html.

    Issued in Renton, Washington, on March 4, 2011.
Kalene C. Yanamura,
Acting Manager, Transport Airplane Directorate, Aircraft Certification
Service.
[FR Doc. 2011-5771 Filed 3-21-11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


[Federal Register Volume 77, Number 196 (Wednesday, October 10, 2012)]
[Notices]
[Page 61595]
[FR Doc No: 2012-24824]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Docket No. EL13-5-000]

Northern Illinois Municipal Power; Notice of Filing

October 2, 2012.
    Take notice that on October 1, 2012, Northern Illinois Municipal
Power filed its Revised and Superseding Proposed Revenue Requirement
for reactive supply service under Midwest Independent Transmission
System Operator, Inc. Tariff Schedule 2.
    Any person desiring to intervene or to protest this filing must
file in accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of the Commission's Rules of
Practice and Procedure (18 CFR 385.211, 385.214). Protests will be
considered by the Commission in determining the appropriate action to
be taken, but will not serve to make protestants parties to the
proceeding. Any person wishing to become a party must file a notice of
intervention or motion to intervene, as appropriate. Such notices,
motions, or protests must be filed on or before the comment date. On or
before the comment date, it is not necessary to serve motions to
intervene or protests on persons other than the Applicant.
    The Commission encourages electronic submission of protests and
interventions in lieu of paper using the ``eFiling'' link at http://www.ferc.gov. Persons unable to file electronically should submit an
original and 14 copies of the protest or intervention to the Federal
Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street NE., Washington, DC
20426.
    This filing is accessible on-line at http://www.ferc.gov, using the
``eLibrary'' link and is available for review in the Commission's
Public Reference Room in Washington, DC. There is an ``eSubscription''
link on the web site that enables subscribers to receive email
notification when a document is added to a subscribed docket(s). For
assistance with any FERC Online service, please email
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or call<PHONE_NUMBER> (toll free). For
TTY, call<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on October 22, 2012.

    Dated: October 2, 2012.
Kimberly D. Bose,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2012-24824 Filed 10-9-12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register: May 21, 2010 (Volume 75, Number 98)]
[Notices]
[Page 28596-28597]
[DOCID:fr21my10-61]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Project No. 13680-000]

Bryant Mountain LLC; Notice of Preliminary Permit Application
Accepted for Filing and Soliciting Comments, Motions To Intervene, and
Competing Applications

May 17, 2010.
    On March 1, 2010, Bryant Mountain LLC filed an application for a
preliminary permit, pursuant to section 4(f) of the Federal Power Act,
proposing to study the feasibility of the Bryant Mountain Hydroelectric
Pumped Storage Project. The sole purpose of a preliminary permit, if
issued, is to grant the permit holder priority to file a license
application during the permit term. A preliminary permit does not
authorize the permit holder to perform any land-disturbing activities
or otherwise enter upon lands or waters owned by others without the
owners' express permission.
    The proposed project would consist of the following developments:

Upper Reservoir

    (1) An enlargement of the existing Pope Reservoir having a surface
area of 550 acres and a storage capacity of 60,00075 acre-feet and
normal water surface elevation of 5500 feet mean sea level; (2) an
earthen dam approximately 4,000 feet long and 310 feet high at its
maximum section; (3) an overflow spillway and outlet facility to
release water into the stream below the dam; and (4) intake facilities
for the power tunnel with facilities to store additional water to
provide black start capability.

Lower Reservoir

    (1) Will have a surface area of 1,480 acres and a storage capacity
of 110,000 acre-feet and normal water surface elevation of 4,220 feet
mean sea level; (2) an earthen dam approximately 21,500 feet long and
135 feet high at its maximum section.

Powerhouse

    (1) A partial or entirely subterranean structure adjacent to the
lower reservoir; and (2) will contain five 250 MW pump-turbine units.

Power Tunnels

    (1) A low pressure power tunnel; (2) a surge shaft; (3) a power
shaft; and (4) and a high pressure tunnel.

Transmission Lines

    (1) 230 kV or 550 kV transmission lines with interconnect with the
Pacific Northwest--California Intertie at the Main Substation.
    Applicant Contact: David W. O'Keefe, Project Manager, 1325 Gwinn
Street E., Monmouth, OR 97361-1575<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    FERC Contact: Kelly Wolcott,<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    Deadline for filing comments, motions to intervene, competing
applications (without notices of intent), or notices of intent to file
competing applications: 60 days from the issuance of this notice.
Competing applications and notices of intent must meet the requirements
of 18 CFR 4.36. Comments, motions to intervene, notices of intent, and
competing applications may be filed electronically via the Internet.
See 18 CFR 385.2001(a)(1)(iii) and the instructions on the Commission's
Web site (http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/ferconline.asp) under the
``eFiling'' link. For a simpler method of submitting text only
comments, click on ``Quick Comment.'' For assistance, please contact
FERC Online Support at<EMAIL_ADDRESS>call toll-free at
(866) 208-3676; or, for TTY, contact<PHONE_NUMBER>. Although the
Commission strongly encourages electronic filing, documents may also be
paper-filed. To paper-file, mail an original and eight copies to:
Kimberly D. Bose, Secretary, Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888
First Street, NE., Washington, DC 20426.
    More information about this project, including a copy of the
application, can be viewed or printed on the ``eLibrary'' link of
Commission's Web site at http:// www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/elibrary.asp.
Enter the docket number (P-13680) in the docket number field to access
the document. For assistance, contact FERC Online Support.

Kimberly D. Bose,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2010-12241 Filed 5-20-10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P